Vol. 648 No. 2
16 Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if the Government tax reform priorities remain as cuts in the top rate and standard rate of income tax and the reduction in employee and self-employed rates of PRSI in view of the terms of reference set for the Commission on Taxation. [8063/08]
The terms of reference of the Commission on Taxation are entirely consistent with An Agreed Programme for Government. The terms of reference of the commission explicitly provide, among other things, that it should undertake its work "having regard to the commitments on economic competitiveness and on taxation contained in the Programme for Government". The Government programme is one for the full five years of the Government. As I have consistently said and as is reflected in the programme for Government, the personal taxation and PRSI commitments in the programme are to be implemented "subject to the controlling economic and fiscal framework".
As the Minister knows from the terms of reference, the Commission on Taxation has been asked to examine the balance achieved between taxes collected on income and other taxes. The Government has made clear its commitment in respect of taxes collected on income, that is, to reduce PRSI from 4% to 2%, to cut the standard rate from 20% to 18% and to cut the top rate from 41% to 40%. There is no reference or direction to the commission that it must honour these specific commitments. Those commitments are ignored in the terms of reference offered to the commission. Has the Government abandoned the commitments? Alternatively, is the Minister waiting to see if the Commission on Taxation approves of it? These were presented to the people as solemn commitments but now it seems the Government has no intention of implementing them and is looking for cover to quietly drop them.
The purpose of the Commission on Taxation is to examine the taxation code. As I stated during discussions on Committee Stage of the Finance Bill, it has broad terms of reference to enable it to examine the gamut of matters that it believes are germane to improving our tax system. It is set out in the programme for Government that, subject to the controlling economic and fiscal framework, the Government will implement a specific approach. Our first priority remains low and middle income earners. Our first task is to use tax credits and bands to keep low income earners out of the standard rate band and average income earners out of the higher band. We have made further commitments on the basis of having a controlled economic and fiscal framework. The assumptions we made are on the basis of achieving 4.5% annual economic growth. Since autumn we have seen turbulence in the financial markets and growth predictions worldwide have moderated. Over the programme for Government we continue to have these proposals at the forefront of our minds on the basis of what is responsible fiscal policy.
Am I correct in reading the Tánaiste's response as meaning that he has discovered he cannot implement the clear commitments made to the public? Under the guise of making a proper balance between income and other taxes, the Tánaiste is seeking a way to ignore commitments made solemnly to the Irish public. In May there was no problem in honouring these commitments. Fianna Fáil berated every other party and produced deliberate untruths about other parties. These are firm commitments on which the Tánaiste went to the public. He is now backing off them, saying he cannot afford them and failing to refer them to the commission. That is reneging on a solid commitment.
That is a partial and predictable interpretation of the commitments. The point I made during the campaign, in an argument I believe I won, was that Fine Gael had not costed its proposals properly.
That was not the point, and the Tánaiste may recall the advertising slogans that were produced.
There is a major problem in the Fine Gael Party in getting over this. The record will speak for itself and I do not wish to detain the House. We set out what we felt was possible based on the economic assumptions in our plan, which were 4.5% growth rates. Fine Gael proposed a slightly lower growth rate and a slightly higher inflation rate. The bottom line is that in terms of overall nominal——
The question the Minister was asked was if he will honour all the Government's commitments.
Sorry, Deputy, for the purposes of the House, I am giving information. The Deputy is shouting across trying to win an argument that his party lost.
Answer the question.
The fact, as the Deputy knows, although he is trying to stop me from saying it, is that the nominal growth rate assumptions in both sets of proposals were similar. My economic growth rate was slightly higher and my inflation rate was slightly lower, while the Deputy's proposals were based on a slightly lower nominal growth rate and higher inflation rate. It worked out at approximately 7.5%. They are the facts, so all of us are in that position in terms of how we would proceed with the implementation of our plans. We have always made it clear, and it is a requirement on us as members of the eurozone, that we would have a responsible fiscal policy. On that basis we will implement all of our commitments, not simply the tax commitments. All commitments are required to work in that context.
Will the Minister publish the cost of his commitments to show his good faith?
I call Question No. 17.
He will not.
17 Deputy Joan Burton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance his Department’s forecast for the expected level of economic growth for the full year of 2008; the way this compares to the forecast he gave in his budget speech in December 2007; the way this compares to the forecast given to the Dublin Chamber of Commerce recently; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7856/08]
My Department's economic forecasts have not changed from those published on budget day, when GDP growth of 3% was projected for this year with GNP growth of 2.8%. With regard to what the Taoiseach said in his recent speech to the Dublin Chamber of Commerce, there is no inconsistency. He was speaking in approximate terms. Furthermore, among economic commentators, the current range for forecasts is from 2% to 4%, with some taking a more pessimistic view and others an optimistic view of the various risks that the Department of Finance identified when it set out its forecasts at budget time.
The more important point that the Taoiseach was making is that the fundamentals of the Irish economy are strong. While we must not underestimate the issues that are facing us, once the current situation is managed correctly we should expect to see growth pick up towards 4% in the coming years. This is the view of most of those who have published forecasts for 2009 as things stand. We are laying the groundwork for future prosperity through the continued prudent management of the economy and public finances, while at the same time making significant additional capital investment under the continued roll-out of the national development plan.
Did I hear the Minister correctly when he said that the Taoiseach spoke at the Dublin Chamber of Commerce in approximate terms about growth? His growth indicator was half a point below what the Minister and his Department had previously indicated. Is this a new language? When there is a dramatic change in the growth forecast, the Taoiseach is speaking in approximate terms. Presumably, however, the Minister speaks in more definitive terms. Is the Minister aware that Davy Stockbrokers today downgraded the growth rate forecast to 2% for the rest of the year?
Is the Minister satisfied with the monuments and milestones he has created so far in this Government as Tánaiste and Minister for Finance? He is heading for the first budget deficit since the mid-1990s. Unemployment is anticipated to grow at the fastest rate since 1980. It is almost back to the days of Charles Haughey and the disasters of 1977. The number of unemployed is projected to grow by in excess of 26,000. We are anticipating, under the Minister's watch, losing 23,000 construction jobs, while tax receipts are falling at the steepest levels since the early 1990s. With regard to the difference in estimate between the Minister and the Taoiseach, what, if anything, have they agreed to do to address the very steep decline in our economic fortunes? The Minister mentioned the election earlier. He promised during the election campaign to keep the boom times going. The boom is obviously over so what alternatives does the Minister have?
It is a new line of attack from the Labour Party to suggest that I should have a tighter fiscal policy and no deficits. Perhaps the party would outline, in the course of the next weeks and months, what areas of current and capital expenditure it wishes to cut so we can accommodate its new fiscal stance. I will be glad to hear that. Comparing the challenges currently facing the economy as equivalent to those that faced the economy in 1980 is not only specious but absurd. The fundamentals of the Irish economy are far stronger now and we are in a far better position to withstand international pressures. When global conditions change and currency, financial and equity markets take the tumble they have taken since last autumn, which was after the election and was not predicted by the Deputy or anybody else, we must accommodate those changes as an open economy.
With regard to the growth rate, Davy Stockbrokers are in the lower band of predictions at 2.1% GNP. The predictions are: Central Bank — 3%, the ESRI — 2.3%, EU Commission — 3.5%, OECD — 2.9%, the IMF — 3%, AIB — 2.5%, Bank of Ireland — 4%, Friends First — 3%, Bloxham Stockbrokers — 3%, Goodbody Stockbrokers — 2.3%, National Irish Bank — 3.9% and Ulster Bank — 2.1%. Basically, these are predictions based on certain assumptions such as whether downside risks are realised, to what extent the current problem in the United States deteriorates, for how long that will happen and its impact. It is not correct to suggest that everybody is on the button in this matter. I predicted in my Budget Statement, despite setting out downside risks, a GDP growth rate of 3% for this year and GNP growth of 2.8%. Those predictions are broadly in line with the market consensus. They are not exactly what Davy Stockbrokers predict but there are other predictions that are even more optimistic. We took the median position, which was fair. Who will be right at the end of the day will depend on many things between now and next December.
I asked the Minister about the difference in forecast between the Minister and the Taoiseach. The Taoiseach's forecast was half a point below the Minister's when he spoke recently to the Dublin Chamber of Commerce. Bearing in mind the steepest declines in tax revenues since the early 1990s, the highest increases in unemployment since the 1980s and the fact that we are now facing a budget deficit, does the Minister have any proposals to address this, particularly the 26,000 additional people who will become unemployed? Most of them will be men losing jobs in the construction industry or from long-term employment in factories and traditional industries in areas throughout the country. There will be between 600 and 700 job losses in Arnotts in Dublin, for example. During the election campaign the Minister said he would keep the boom going, but the boom is gone. Does the Minister have any strategies for addressing the fall-out for people now facing unemployment?
I have just explained that I reject the Deputy's contention that we are working off the same base as 1980. We are in a far different position. There will be rising unemployment but there will also be rising unemployment in the European and global economies. There will be lower growth rates. We are transitioning to lower medium and long-term growth rates than was the case in the halcyon days of the Celtic tiger. Everybody knew and understood that before, during and after the election. The issue is who is most capable of managing the situation. The Deputy suggests that my fiscal stance is too expansionary. She does not agree with the impetus I have put into the economy of approximately——
The Minister should concentrate on his views, not mine.
I am giving the Deputy my views.
The Minister should concentrate on answering about what the Government proposes to do.
The Tánaiste without interruption.
The budgetary stance I took, taking into account all of the downside risks, was to provide an impetus into the economy of approximately 1.5% of GNP. I have increased the capital programme by 12% but the Deputy obviously believes that is too much. I await the list of the Deputy's proposals for cutting it and day to day spending. Otherwise, she does not have credibility.
18 Deputy Kieran O’Donnell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if he has set any target for the number of civil servants and State agency employees who will move to decentralised locations during 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8061/08]
A progress report by the decentralisation implementation group, DIG, was submitted to me and published on 8 October last. The group reported that implementation of the Civil Service element of the decentralisation programme is progressing. From the announcement of the programme in December 2003, the focus has been on detailed planning and organisation of the property, staffing and business aspects. The DIG has considered it essential that all organisations take the necessary time to prepare this groundwork well in order to ensure effective implementation of a programme of this scale and complexity. In short, its focus has not been on how speedily the programme can be achieved but how well. It is important to remember that the programme is not just about moving public services. It fundamentally impacts on the staff in those organisations, on their career choices and their expectations.
At the end of 2007, decentralising organisations had a presence in 33 towns. Approximately 4,000 staff had been assigned to decentralising posts and over 2,000 of these are currently in their new locations, while the remainder are being trained in advance of decentralisation to a new location, as soon as accommodation becomes available. Taking account of both posts moved and assignments, almost 50% of the Civil Service general service posts have already moved or have staff in place with a commitment to move. The comparable figure for the Civil Service professional and technical staff is 25% and current indications are that it is in the order of 20% for the State agency sector.
Property or sites have been acquired or are well advanced in a total of 38 locations. In addition, the OPW have been very efficient in securing suitable advance or temporary accommodation in over 20 locations to facilitate the early phasing of the transfer of business units. The October DIG report provides an update of the OPW timeframes for the expected completion of permanent accommodation. The OPW conducts a review of the property timeframes for permanent accommodation on an ongoing basis and is keeping these timeframes under review based on its experience to date in relation to property selection and acquisition, brief and design issues, tendering periods, planning issues and contractual arrangements.
I remain confident that the public service will deliver this programme in a considered, sensible and sensitive manner. The Government is anxious to ensure that the momentum of the programme is maintained and developed and in that context Secretaries General of decentralising Departments have been asked to review these timeframes in association with the OPW and the DIG to assess where earlier progress could be made either in relation to permanent accommodation or advance accommodation. The Government has asked the DIG to examine the position in relation to progressing the relocation of the State agencies, with a view to providing a report, including target timescales, by the end of July 2008.
The Tánaiste has not answered the question of how many will be decentralised during 2008. This is yet another example of the Government making a political decision, like setting up the HSE. Decentralisation was nothing more than a political decision, made in December 2003 for budget 2004. The Government is now hiving responsibility over to an unaccountable body, the implementation group. Does the Tánaiste take responsibility for decentralisation? Does he agree that, as it currently stands, it is a shambles? More than 14 months after the deadline his Government set, of 31 December 2006, we find that less than 20% of civil servants have been decentralised, only 50% of whom were based in Dublin. Furthermore, we find that there are 26 locations to which the Government has yet to decentralise. I note from his comments that in many of those cases, the Government has yet to acquire sites or properties. Is decentralisation the Tánaiste's responsibility? What measures will he put in place to ensure that decentralisation takes place over a reasonable period? What targets has he set and, as the original question asked, how many will be decentralised in 2008?
I do not accept whatsoever the assertion the Deputy makes on the progress being made on this programme. He might, if he has not already done so, read the decentralisation implementation group reports which have been published since it was first set up, which contain a number of revised timescales as a result of the work it has been doing. All of those reports have been accepted by the Government. It is clear that initial ambitions regarding the substantive programme we hope to see in this area have been altered as a result of the decentralisation implementation group's assessments, based on working with unions and management.
We are committed to this programme. The Department of Finance has the job of co-ordinating the decentralisation programme and I take on that responsibility willingly. Good progress is being made. The continuous talking out of both sides of the mouth from the Opposition is I am sure noted in many localities. On the one hand, they are criticising the fact that we have a programme at all, while on the other there are parliamentary questions coming to my Department on a weekly basis from Fine Gael backbenchers asking when it is going down to their little area. It is back to the old story.
It was a stunt. A stunt in 2004.
In any event, the real position is that 2,000 people are already in position. Another 2,000 have committed to moving. The rate at which they will move during the course of this year will depend on the progress made in finalising the building programme and so forth. Considerable progress has been made and it is very early in the year yet to give a definitive answer as to where we will end up at the end of the year.
This was a political decision by the Government, back in December 2003, when it said it would decentralise 10,300 by the end of 2006.
That is right. I was here. I heard the Minister say that.
The Government made that commitment but is now blaming the implementation body. Is the Minister taking responsibility for the situation in which we find ourselves, where almost 80% of civil servants have yet to be decentralised and in more than 23 locations absolutely nothing has been done in terms of decentralisation? What is the Minister going to do about it?
To answer the Deputy's question——
What is the Minister going to do about it?
I was here and heard the commitment being made.
I was in the House at the time the commitment was made——
My party is very much in favour of decentralisation.
Is it? That is news to me.
The Government gave a commitment——
Deputy O'Donnell will yield to the Tánaiste, please.
Is the Government going to deliver on its promise?
What is the timescale?
The Tánaiste, without interruption please.
I hope the Deputy can speak with authority on the matter on behalf of his party because that is certainly not what his party spokesman has been indicating to me for the past several months.
The Tánaiste should answer the questions.
Absolutely. A voluntary programme was initiated in 2003. My predecessor indicated his hope that it would be substantially concluded by 2006. If the Deputy's criticism——
He said heads would roll if it did not happen.
The Tánaiste is rewriting history.
If the Deputy's criticism is that they should have been involuntarily moved by now——
The Tánaiste's head should roll.
That is not our position.
No, my criticism is that this was a political decision taken with no preparation——
I call Question No. 19, in the name of Deputy Richard Bruton.
It has not happened and the Tánaiste is not taking responsibility for it.
We will see at the local elections, when the Tánaiste will have his answer.
My party is absolutely for it.
You have opposed it, all along. All your lives.
If the Tánaiste needs our assistance——
I was here in the 1980s when Fine Gael postponed a programme.
We will help the Minister.
I was here in the 1980s.
I have called Question No. 19.
I was here in the 1980s when Fine Gael postponed one.
So the Minister has postponed it.
No, Fine Gael postponed it.
It was supposed to be finished by 2006.
Please, Deputy.
Tánaiste, I have called Question No. 19.
19 Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance his views on the need to change policy in the face of vulnerabilities exposed in EU and IMF assessments of the Irish economy. [8062/08]
In my budget last December I indicated that the outlook was for a moderation in the rate of economic expansion this year. These forecasts took into account the transition to a more sustainable level of output in the new housing sector while more modest growth in some of our major trading partners was also built into the projections. In addition, I identified that there are risks to this outlook, including a less benign international economic climate and a possible continuation of financial market difficulties. As provision for a downturn was already built into my Department's economic forecasts, these have not changed from those published on budget day, when GDP growth of 3% was projected for this year, with GNP growth of 2.8%.
The European Commission recently published its annual assessment of the Irish stability programme update. The assessment highlighted the overall strong position of the public finances and pointed out that the fundamentals of the Irish economy remain sound. It referred to challenges in the transition to lower growth, mainly linked to a return to more sustainable output in the housing sector. This assessment is consistent with the view outlined in my recent budget.
The latest IMF forecast for Ireland was published in September last year, when it forecast GDP growth of 3% for 2008. Recently, the IMF published a paper entitled Spillovers to Ireland, which referred to Ireland's exposure to developments in the US economy. In this working paper, the IMF postulated that a 1% decline in US GDP growth would negatively impact by 1.75% on Irish growth. This analysis, which others dispute, does not take into account other factors such as lower import growth and, as such, I do not share its view of the severity of the impact on Ireland of any downturn in the US economy. However, as a small trading nation we are vulnerable to downturns elsewhere and as I have already outlined, slower growth in our trading partners has been factored into the budget day economic projections.
Ireland is meeting these challenges from a position of strength. The fundamentals of the Irish economy remain sound.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
Moreover, fiscal policy is playing a key role in terms of providing support for the economy as we enter this period of lower growth. Current spending is projected to rise by about 8% this year while tax revenues are expected to grow by around 3.5%.
Capital spending is expected to grow by around 12% this year as full implementation of the national development plan continues apace. Even allowing for all this, only a modest budgetary deficit is in prospect for 2008.
Does the Tánaiste agree that he was seriously wrong in 2005 and 2006, when he said the building boom was based on sound economic fundamentals? Does he agree that he was also wrong to introduce expansionary measures in every one of his four budgets? Does he agree that the boom he cheered on has resulted in the loss of competitiveness that he rightly says is damaging our exports? Does he accept that the situation which we now have, whereby outstanding debt in the property area is 30 times the outstanding debt in manufacturing, is not the basis for sustainable progress in this economy? Against that background, does the Tánaiste accept the EU's assertion that it is now time to change policy?
The European Commission gave a very balanced view of where the Irish economy is going and the downside risks mentioned in my budget were replicated in its assessment. Regarding the building industry, it is clear we are adjusting to a more sustainable rate of growth having sought to meet an economic demand that exceeded supply. In the adjustment process, we have been able to put in place plans for a significant capital investment programme, which will assist our competitiveness greatly, and to ensure a competitive workforce through capital programmes and investments envisaged for science, technology, innovation, reskilling and upskilling. If we manage our position in the coming years, we can come out the other side with renewed growth in the economy. For these reasons, the European Commission's assessment is not one with which I am in fundamental disagreement.
In terms of trying to maintain an overall fiscally responsible budgetary policy, our commitment to implement the capital investment programme will require of us a budgetary balance.
Does the Tánaiste not agree that those who examine the public spending patterns of the Government and who see waste, complacency and self-indulgence are not the ones who are blind? The Government, which seems to surround itself in the belief that everything is all right in the garden and that it is correct, is deceiving itself. Does the Tánaiste not accept that we must confront Government waste, which is notably widespread in health and other areas, and reform a range of uncompetitive markets, which the Government has manifestly failed to do, and that we need effective preparation for major strategic challenges such as climate change? Yesterday, the Minister for Transport, Deputy Dempsey, had the grace to admit that the Government's climate change strategy was hopelessly wrong. Does the Tánaiste not agree that a little more honesty from himself concerning preparedness to deal with tougher times would serve the economy better than the stuff he keeps churning out?
I do not know how this could be "churning out" stuff. I seek to defend myself and the Government's position from what I regard in some cases as the talking down of the economy. Notwithstanding that my Budget Statement mentioned the serious challenges facing the economy, anyone who knows anything about the economy knows this to be the case.
The Tánaiste is not doing anything about them.
The fiscal and budgetary stance I adopted relates to trying to manage our way through the issue. We are putting in place a capital programme and decelerating the increase of current expenditure this year, which will be a progressive measure.
Each of the Tánaiste's measures is expansionist. He should not need to——
The criticism I am receiving from the left and the Deputy is that the budget is too expansionist.
That is not what I stated.
In every constituency, all of the Deputy's colleagues decry the fact we are not expanding services fast enough.
The services should have expanded in 2004, 2005 and 2006.
The Tánaiste without interruption.
These are the realities. While the Deputy states that it is all about waste, Members ask why there are not more nurses or why the health service is not getting more money. The Deputy is playing the double game as usual. The policy bankruptcy is on the Deputy's side of the House. Until he gets agreement——
Why is the Government not delivering accountable health services on the ground instead of leaving hundreds of people waiting in accident and emergency units?
The Tánaiste without interruption.
I listened to you and, when I respond, you want to shout me down. It is the same old game. Does Mr. Flannery have Fine Gael on this sort of message?
The Tánaiste should address his remarks through the Chair.
I will do so if people are prepared to listen.
I will ensure that.
I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, as I know his is not an easy job.
I am about to call the next question. It might ease matters along.
I will be succinct. Until the Deputy has buy-in from his backbenchers on Fine Gael's fiscal and economic policy and until we see it resonating in the local newspapers——
The Tánaiste is in government.
Compared to statements made in the House, Deputies have different positions at local level. This is the truth of it.
If the Tánaiste would read the next reply, it would be helpful.
The people are looking for these services.
Deputies are giving out every day of the week down there.
I remind the House that we are addressing Priority Questions and only the Deputies in whose names the questions are tabled may participate. We will shortly move on to general questions when everyone can be called.
20 Deputy Kieran O’Donnell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance if the Revenue Commissioners have an estimate of the amount of unclaimed taxes; and if he has satisfied himself that the Revenue Commissioners’ statement of strategy sets no specific targets in this area. [8064/08]
I have made the point a number of times that Revenue can only allow tax credits and reliefs on the basis of the information known to it. There is no accurate method to estimate the amount of unclaimed taxes. The Revenue Commissioners have been making every effort to ensure that all taxpayers are fully aware of their entitlements. The self-employed must fill in an annual return form on which there are prompts to claim all available reliefs. In recent years, Revenue has taken several initiatives to inform PAYE taxpayers of their entitlements and to encourage them to claim.
The Revenue Commissioners are satisfied that their ongoing efforts to inform taxpayers of their entitlements are having the desired effect, as demonstrated in the substantial increase in the number of PAYE taxpayers seeking reviews of their tax liabilities in the context of claiming additional tax credits and reliefs. The number of PAYE reviews processed in 2006 was 1.14 million compared to 552,000 in 2005. The figure for 2007 reviews is comparable to the 2006 figure and will be published in the Revenue annual report due out in April.
Revenue's new statement of strategy, which I recently approved, sets out the directions and priorities for the next three years. One of its strategies for the achievement of this goal is to help customers pay the right amount and to get their entitlements. The inclusion of this additional goal underlines Revenue's commitment and determination to help its customers, both individuals and businesses, to receive their due entitlements and to pay only the right amount of tax.
Once again the Tánaiste has not answered my question. I asked for an estimate of the amount of unclaimed taxes. When the Tánaiste's Department rang me in this regard, I told it which specifics I was looking for.
The point I am making is straightforward. In 2007, there were refunds in the order of €530 million. I have with me the strategy to help customers in paying the correct amount and getting their entitlements, but I cannot see a specific strategy to enable people to claim their correct credit entitlements or to collect the correct refunds. Is the Tánaiste responsible for the Department of Finance and the Revenue Commissioners? Will he instruct the latter to put the same effort into informing people of their entitlements so that they can claim their credits? Many credits — medical expenses, college fees, bin charges, trade union memberships, medical insurance at source, the old age tax credit, rent relief, rent-a-room relief, the dependant relative allowance and DIRT exemptions in the case of over 65 year olds — can be claimed if people are aware of them. However, many people are unaware of them.
Now that the tax credit certificates have issued, will the Tánaiste instruct the Revenue Commissioners to engage in a high-profile media campaign, by way of television, the Tánaiste himself or otherwise, to inform people of the situation and allow them to claim their correct refunds from the preceding four years and their correct credits for this year?
Revenue is proactive in this matter. On Committee Stage of the Finance Bill, we outlined the extent to which the ongoing campaign has been improved and enhanced. In the House, credit was given to Revenue for its work in this regard. It may even have been mentioned in a constructive manner on Committee Stage.
This is a simple measure.
It is not.
Revenue could conduct a high-profile——
I will call the Deputy, but he should allow the Tánaiste to give a reply until then.
Revenue has undertaken several major initiatives, including an intensive high-profile campaign during August, September and October of 2006 involving advertisements on radio and in bus shelters, the DART and Luas encouraging taxpayers to claim their tax credits and reliefs. During the summer and early autumn, a leaflet giving details of how to access and use Revenue's self-service Internet facility for PAYE taxpayers was sent to each taxpayer. The facility allows each PAYE customer to claim the most commonly used tax credits, apply for a tax refund, claim medical expenses, request a tax review, reallocate tax credits between spouses and update personal information. It is a totally secure on-line service and each taxpayer has his or her own unique PIN to log in. Revenue has just completed the posting of this year's tax credit certificates to 2.2 million PAYE taxpayers. Accompanying each certificate was a creatively designed leaflet that focused on informing people of their entitlements to tax credits and reliefs and gave them details of the various contact channels to make claims. A further publicity campaign is planned.
There is a great deal of proactivity in this matter, which has been raised a number of times in the House. When I took it up with Revenue, it responded. The take-up of some reliefs has increased. It remains the ultimate responsibility of the taxpayer to claim reliefs, but we can try to ensure they are aware of the reliefs.
It is a question of the level of refunds involved. We have devised estimates based on spending patterns identified by the Central Statistics Office, CSO, and the figure relating to unclaimed medical expenses in 2007 was in the region of €500 million, €250 million was unclaimed in rent payments and €300 million in bin charges. Many people, including the elderly, may be uncomfortable with the form involved in making claims. Many credits do not require a return to be filed and can easily be brought up on the system but people may not know how to do this.
Revenue runs very high profile campaigns on television every year relating to P35 forms and Form 11, which relates to income tax returns. There is not a similar campaign when tax credit certificates issue and I ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance, Deputy Brian Cowen, to instruct the Revenue Commissioners to run such a campaign through television and radio media now as tax certificates are issuing.
As I said in my earlier reply, a further publicity campaign is planned.
When?
Now that they are being issued further publicity is planned.
Now is the time it should happen as the tax certificates are issuing.
The Deputy is free to ask questions and it is fine if he does not like the answers but progress is being made, activities are going on and people are not unmindful of the efforts that must be made in this area.
People are entitled to refunds.
People claim their entitlements. There are also arrangements on tax relief at source where mortgage relief and medical insurance relief are provided at source through the taxpayer obtaining a reduction in repayments or premiums equivalent to the tax relief. Recurring reliefs, such as those for trade union subscriptions or bin charges, once claimed are allowed on an ongoing basis and reappear each year in the taxpayer's certificate of tax credits.
Why do we have €530 million of refunds?
That is the Deputy's estimate.
There is €530 million of refunds and that is a matter of record with the Revenue.
Revenue is engaged in an ongoing programme to secure information from third parties that will enable it to grant certain credits and reliefs automatically and, in certain situations, make refunds. The computer system now contains date of birth details and, as a result, age-related credits are now granted automatically. Much is being done regarding area credits.
