I am drawing it to the attention of the House because unlike Deputy Gregory other Members do not seem to have read the Bill with the same degree of attention to detail.
Deputy McCormack said that we will have a chance to tease out the exact implications of the powers. We will have to give considerable attention to that because Deputy Dukes's contribution was over the top and quite frankly what he deduced from his reading of the Bill was ill informed. Deputy McManus welcomed the Bill but questioned who would have responsibility for fixing the level of fees. A casual trader has to get a licence from the Department of Enterprise and Employment and then has to get a specific permit from the local authority which controls the areas in which he trades. The fees for such permit vary considerably. If Deputies want to standardise the fee that seems to be a negation of the principle of decentralisation. For example, Dublin Corporation provides a considerable cleansing service for street markets in certain areas, which is reasonable justification for the high level of fees, but a local authority somewhere else may charge a lower fee but may not provide such a service. If the fixing of fees was centralised, the fees would be increased in some areas and reduced elsewhere. That goes against the spirit of decentralisation.
Deputy McManus spoke about the colour and tourism attraction of country markets. In this Bill casual trading refers only to trading in areas to which the public has access as of right, in other words, if a country market is held in a church hall or a community hall, or in another place to which the public does not have access as of right, it is not governed by the provisions of this Bill. Even if it were and the country market was held in a traditional area of the town, and Deputy Mattie Brennan referred to the market in Tubbercurry, there is nothing to prevent a county council from exempting this area. This Bill gives to local authorities the power to make up its own mind.
Deputy Noel Ahern referred to the problems in existing designated casual trading areas and what their status will be in the context of the enactment of this Bill. We can more usefully deal with this on Committee Stage, but there will be transitional arrangements to deal with that matter.
Concern has been expressed about the application procedure for obtaining licences. These will be issued by the local authorities in accordance with the regulations. While we will deal with these in detail on Committee Stage many Deputies have expressed concern about the way in which applications will have to be made and about whether a distinction will be made between the seasonal casual trader who trades in one commodity, such as fish, and the professional casual trader who moves from one place to another. I will address these issues in considerable detail on Committee Stage.
Like previous administrations, the Government, because it wants to widen the tax base, in issuing licences to run a pub or to act as a book-keeper, adheres to the principle that those who wish to engage in economic activity from which they will derive their main source of income have to be in the tax net. Like everybody else in the tax net, they will benefit from the provisions in the tax code in terms of exemptions and if engaged in business activity they will be able to offset their running costs against profits.
At the request of my party colleague, Deputy Costello, I met the casual traders in Moore Street whose concerns were articulated eloquently by Deputy Gregory in this House. Given their socio-economic background they do not have the same resources as the professional casual trader operating in a modern business environment. I am not concerned only about those who trade in Moore Street but also about those who trade south of the River Liffey in Thomas Street, Camden Street and parts of Meath Street who hold their pitch because of tradition rather than because of a licence issued by the local authority or a decision to get involved in business.
For this category the application procedure will be the least of their problems. It is their perception that they will encounter difficulties in respect of the tax clearance certificate. I have noted the concerns expressed by members of my own party and others. Some people are worried about the requirements they will have to meet in terms of book-keeping to qualify for a tax clearance certificate and about who will mind them once they are told to wander through the corridors of Dublin Castle to seek out the sympathetic revenue commissioner to allay their concerns.
I do not intend to take Committee Stage in this House until I am satisfied that I will be in a position to answer these questions. An official of my Department met with a deputation from the Casual Traders Association yesterday, 28 March — I was not available to attend the meeting — at which they raised the following issues: the question of tax clearance, fee guidelines, the display of casual trading licences and, rather interestingly, the establishment of a tribunal at national level to resolve disputes between a casual trader and a local authority, particularly a casual trader who may be operating in a number of local authority areas and who believes he did not get a fair hearing from the local authority. I am not adverse to this concept but I would like to examine the implications. This could be administered in conjunction with the Association of Municipal Authorities, for example, as I want to retain the principle of decentralisation and local councillors being involved. If we can allay the concerns which have been expressed by casual traders and allow the local authorities to be involved I will be open to that suggestion.
The Casual Traders Association also suggested that the local authorities should be obliged to provide proper facilities for casual traders, for example, toilet and washing facilities. The response of local authority members will be to ask who will pay for these facilities? Local traders who pay insurance and rates to the local authority are obliged under commercial and labour law to maintain safety and hygiene standards for their employees and the public. Casual traders should be required to do likewise.
Given the number of court cases, that dissatisfaction has been expressed by the local authorities and concern has been expressed to me directly by casual traders about the way they are being treated by one local authority as against another, the system has not been operating satisfactorily. The purpose of this Bill is to amend the 1980 Act and to give local authorities the power to decide how this activity should be conducted at local level. I do not see central Government having an intrusive function in this matter; it will have a role to ensure fairness. I do not think the local authorities are so devoid of intelligence or creativity as not to be able to come up with imaginative ways to accommodate different kinds of traders.
We are talking here about the romantic side of casual trading — the Molly Malone syndrome — but there is a less romantic side as mentioned by Deputies McCormack, Bell and others. It would appear that there is a certain kind of casual trader who arrives on market day but does not sell products such as home made products or vegetables but rather electrical goods, clothing and other commodities in direct competition with established traders. It has been alleged and argued by established traders who have their rights that they compete on unfair terms. There is no evidence that they pay any tax to this State; in some cases vehicles are registered in another jurisdiction. We must strike a balance between the needs of the commercial retail community, who make the only direct contribution by way of commercial rates to the revenue of existing towns, and those of existing casual traders. We must also recognise those in traditional street markets in Dublin, Cork and other places who got much publicity because of points made by Deputies in this House.
I have listened to the contributions. I am open to considering amendments and clarifications of regulations that are part and parcel of the legislation. For that reason I suggest that we do not take Committe Stage for a number of weeks, with the agreement of the Whips. I will have further consultations with interested parties to consider what changes and amendments could be brought in by me on Committee Stage, and I will be open to suggestions that might arise from all sides of the House in that respect.
The 1980 Act was a considerable advance on earlier legislation. However, following representations from a number of quarters that Act was seen not to be working satisfactorily which led to the drafting of this Bill, also in consultation with interested parties. Nobody seriously questions the principles of devolution and decentralisation, but fears have been expressed about how it will work. Let us look at those fears about possible consequences.
For the first time the activities of casual traders are being brought into line with those of anybody else seeking a licence to carry on business here by requiring some form of tax clearance certificate appropriate to the trade in which they are engaged. Subject to that principle being accepted I am prepared to look at the detail of such clearance certificate and if necessary, in advance of the enactment of this legislation, have consultations with the Revenue Commissioners so that they understand what the parameters of a tax clearance certificate would be. I do not want to put anybody — certainly not a legitimate trader — out of business because of legislation but I make no apology to those forced out of business because they want to continue to trade but not to pay tax. I hold no brief for such people, nor do I think anybody in this House does. However, I invite the House to participate constructively in this debate and I will certainly not bring in legislation that will have an effect that I do not intend. I am, therefore, open to amendments and I commend the Bill to the House.
