asked the Minister for the Environment if, in view of the inconsistent approach to the rating of GAA club premises, where some premises are subject to rates and other similar premises are not, he will clarify the instructions given to valuation officers, or if he will consider an amendment to the Local Government (Financial Provisions) Act, 1978; if he will amend the 1978 Act to ensure that where a bar is included in club facilities it can be treated as a mixed hereditament for rating purposes; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Rating of GAA Club Premises.
4.
The Local Government (Financial Provisions) Act, 1978 defines the types of property to which rates relief can be applied and I have no proposals for the amendment of the Act in this respect. It is a matter for the local authorities, and the District Court on appeal, to apply and interpret respectively the provisions of the law in individual cases. The valuation of property is, of course, a matter for the Commissioner of Valuation and I would have no role in the clarification of any instructions he may have issued to his staff.
I understand that there are anomalies or variations in interpretation from court to court. Is the Minister aware that in a case in one county, that in Clonmel and Cahir, with the same type of building involved, two different courts may reach different decisions in regard to a community hall where a bar extension is fitted? In the light of that can the Minister say if he will clarify the meaning or the intended purpose of the Act for courts and judges?
The question of interpretation of the law by judges is a matter for the Judiciary themselves and not for this House. We make the laws and they interpret them and make their decisions accordingly. It is not open to me to tell judges as to what and how they should interpret the law. That is their business.
To follow up the issue, the Minister has not indicated that he understands that there is a problem. If he did, I would be happier to accept what he says. Does he realise that the definition of a community hall is that no profit is made, it is used for recreational and social purposes etc? Will the Minister clarify, either by legislation or by whatever methods are available to him, that where a bar extension is in a community hall that should be regarded as a separate building for purposes of commercial rating instead of putting the commercial rate on the whole community hall, as some justices do, whereas others put it only on the position of the bar facility?
There is already a provision in section 7 of the 1978 Act whereby the valuation of property comprising of a community hall and other property can be apportioned. How do the Judiciary interpret that? It is quite clearly set out in the Act that this can be done.
Does the Minister realise that there is a real problem for many groups? I am speaking specifically of GAA clubs because I am aware that in Rush a club are to be billed with £3,500 rates. Does the Minister realise that there is a problem for clubs which could be avoided by correct interpretation of what the Minister means in regard to valuations and rating?
I have spelled it out whereby the valuation of property comprising of a community hall and other property can be apportioned.
But it is not in some cases.
It can be, but that is a matter in the first instance for the local authority who are the rating authority, and if there is an appeal to the courts they will make judgment. It is spelt out here quite clearly and I think there is no need to spell it out further than it is here. It is up to the courts to interpret this, and they can do it.
Perhaps the Minister can get the Minister for Justice to write to the judges on correct interpretation.
He can take it up, but from reading it, it is quite clear that they can do it.