I move:—
That Dáil Eireann is of opinion that the imposition and revision of valuations should be suspended pending the introduction of proposals for legislation to put the system on a more equitable basis, and it further urges that such legislation should be enacted without delay.
Quite recently, this House considered at length a Bill dealing with valuations and I recognise that it must be rather tiresome to the members to hear many of the arguments which were made in the course of the discussion on that Bill repeated now.
It was evident, from that discussion that took place on that Bill, that practically every Deputy recognised that there is something very inequitable in the present system of valuations. I think it is right to say that when the Minister was dealing with that Bill he did not pretend to defend the system and, quite frankly, I do not think any sensible man in this country would defend the present system of valuations. That being so,we feel that the sensible and the just thing to do would be to suspend all further valuation until the system has been put on a more equitable basis.
When speaking on the Bill which was introduced by members of the Fine Gael Party, I indicated that I did not believe any real redress would result from that Bill so long as the system of valuation remains as it is at present. I readily admitted then, as I do now, that no blame attaches to anybody in this connection. I have not the slightest blame for the commissioners of valuation because, as the system stands, the valuation commissioners have no option but to operate the law as they find it. One of the valuation commissioners received a deputation of members of the Roscommon County Council. I recognise the validity of one of his arguments which was that his plain duty is to administer the law, and that members of the Oireachtas can change the law. I decided there and then that, in so far as we could, we would alter the present system of valuation and empower the valuation commissioners to act in a more equitable manner.
As Deputies are aware, valuations are at present based on the net letting value of the premises, and unless and until that is altered injustices will be done in the matter of valuation. I submit that the only sane approach to the valuation of a premises which has undergone alterations, or to a new premises, is to calculate the effect on the income of the owner. There was a point in the Bill brought in by the Fine Gael Party with which I differed and that was that no revision of valuation should take place where structural alterations were made. I did not accept that point in the Bill. Take, for instance, a premises in a certain district. The establishment of a factory in the area might increase the community life there and these premises could then be utilised to bring the owner an increased income if they were converted to some other use than the use to which they are put at present, even though no structural alteration had taken place. I freely admit that, in such circumstances, an increased valuation would be justified on these premises. In my view, any valuation legislationwhich this House may enact should be based on the income which could be expected to be derived from possession of the premises.
Consider the position of a farmer who is living in a small house in the country and who has a growing family. Sometimes, in the interests of decency and morality, such a farmer must provide proper sleeping accommodation for the adult members of his household by way of, perhaps, an additional bedroom. As the law now stands, when that additional room is built, the valuation of the premises is increased. In this age of civilisation, it is high time that we should stop penalising a man for providing suitable accommodation for his family.
Take, as another instance, a businessman who is sufficiently interested in his premises to put them into proper condition and a proper state of repair even though, by so doing, he will not increase his income by one penny. I believe that such a man should not be victimised by an increase in his valuation. Unfortunately, however, because of the improvements which he carried out, it is contended that his premises have achieved a higher letting value and the valuation commissioners immediately increase his valuation.
Let us take, as another instance, a farmer who erects a farm building—a place, say, to store his corn. Although the Land Commission expect him to pursue good methods of husbandry, when he takes steps which are essential to that end, he is immediately penalised. I am sure that, in speaking in this vein, I am pushing an open door so far as the deputy-Minister for Finance is concerned.
I regard him as a man with a common-sense approach to these things. The Minister for Finance did not give any clear indication that he was in favour of the system as it now operates. I am quite prepared to admit that more equitable systems than that which I am suggesting as a basis for valuation might be adopted but I do think that, whatever system be adopted, it is high time that the present one was abandoned.
I am not going to tell the Ministeror the Government what particular system they should adopt but I am telling them—and I am quite sure that many members of their own Party are telling them too—that throughout the length and breadth of this country in all walks of life, whether that of farmers, labourers, business people or professional people, the community are crying out against the injustices which are being inflicted on them at present. I know it may be argued that if the whole valuation of the country were increased there would be no injustices. I do not accept that as being a very fair attitude and I do not think it is one which the Government would adopt anyway. I should like to hear— and I think the Minister will have an opportunity of telling the House now since apparently it is intended to introduce legislation dealing with this matter—in what way it is intended to alter the system or if it is intended to alter it. If the future legislation is going to contain the condition that the basis of valuation must be the net letting value, that will not improve matters at all.
It has been said in this House, and said truly, that the operation of that system is retarding progress. I am a farmer myself; I have lived in rural Ireland all my life and I think I can claim to know what passes through the farmers' minds. I think it can be accepted as fairly definite that a farmer will not penalise himself if he can avoid it. We hear people, particularly visitors to this country, complain about the dilapidated condition of buildings in rural Ireland. I am not denying that there is just cause for that complaint. There may be some cases in which the question of valuation has not affected the situation but, in the vast majority of cases, buildings, particularly farm houses and farm buildings, would be in much better condition and a considerably greater number of new buildings would be erected if it were not for the fear of revaluations. That fear is growing every year in consequence of the ever-rising rates in the country. Rates at present are a nightmare to many people in the country. Is it any wonder, then, thata man should keep his money in his pocket rather than lay it out on improving his dwelling, his outoffices or his business premises, knowing that immediately he does so, his rates will be automatically increased? That is the greatest handicap to progress in this country that I know of and I am surprised that some Government has not dealt with it before now.
In that connection, I think it is only fair to say that during the régime of the inter-Party Government, as a member of the other House I discussed this question with the then Minister for Finance. He quite rightly accepted my arguments and said that it was his intention to introduce legislation to deal with the matter at the earliest opportunity. He did not have the opportunity but the present Minister has that opportunity now and I think, in so far as he can right the wrongs that exist, he can rely on the unanimous support of this House. There are other arguments that one might use in connection with this proposal particularly at the present time when there is such great need to relieve unemployment amongst people in rural Ireland. In many cases schemes to meet the housing requirements of local authorities in urban areas are nearing completion and, to provide alternative employment for people who will be disemployed on the completion of local authority housing schemes, the Minister and the Government should inform the people that from now on until a more sensible and equitable system of valuation is introduced no further valuations will be placed on any buildings.
If it is admitted, and I think it has not been denied, that the existing system is wrong, there can be no justification for continuing it in operation. I do not think that the Government could bring in legislation to put the matter right one minute too soon. I fail to see how any Government could hesitate in this matter nor can I understand the reluctance of any Government that has given the matter any consideration to deal with it because I do not think that they would stand to lose very considerably on it, if at all. Local authorities might, perhaps, lose a little; the Revenue Commissionerswould also perhaps lose a little in the case of licensed premises and the E.S.B. might lose a little, but I do not think the Government would be very seriously financially affected by suspending the operation of the present valuation laws.
I should like the House to approach this matter in a non-Party spirit. It should be left to a free vote of this House to direct the Government on this question. If it is left to a free vote, I have no doubt in my mind that there will be an overwhelming majority in favour of the motion. I should like to see the motion discussed in the spirit in which I moved it, in a recognition of the fact that it is an attempt to bring some belated redress to those who have been adversely affected by the present regulations. I think it will be admitted that it is an honest attempt to facilitate those who are anxious to improve their homes and to provide proper accommodation for their families. I ask that the matter should receive the most earnest and sympathetic consideration of the Government.
I see no reason why the motion cannot be adopted without inflicting any hardship on anybody.
