Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 16 Dec 1987

Vol. 118 No. 1

Death of Former Members. - Valuation Bill, 1987: Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Mr. N. Treacy)

Tá áthas orm bheith ar ais arís roimh na Nollag.

As Senators are aware, property valuations as determined under the Valuation Acts provide the basis for rates revenue raised by local authorities. The revenue to be raised from rates in 1987 is estimated at £175 million, a major element in local budgets. Clearly it is important that the valuation system is operated on a cost effective basis and that we have flexible and efficient procedures for listing properties for valuation, determining valuations and the hearing of appeals. The bulk of the existing valuation code dates from the mid-19th century, the Act of 1986 being one of the few valuation statutes in this century.

During the passage of that Act, Members of both Houses expressed their disappointment that the Act did not go far enough in reforming and updating the valuation code. In responding to these views the then Minister for Finance explained that the Valuation Acts were being reviewed and that further legislation of a more wide-ranging nature would be introduced in due course. The proposals in this Bill must be seen as a stage in that process. The examination of other aspects is continuing and my objective is to bring the entire legislation into line with modern requirements and to have a single modern statute at the earliest possible date.

The main purpose of the Bill is: first, to establish a valuation tribunal to hear appeals against rateable valuations determined by the Commissioner of Valuation in the course of first appeals to him, to replace the present system of appeal to the Circuit Court; secondly, to introduce continuous revision of the valuation lists throughout the year in place of the existing single annual revision; thirdly, to provide for the valuation of public utility undertakings on a global basis and the apportionment of the valuation between the functional areas of local authorities, and fourthly, to provide for the delegation of functions by the Commissioner of Valuation.

Before dealing with the individual sections of the Bill, I would like to make some general points about the need for the measures proposed and their effects. First, I will deal with the valuation tribunal. Under the existing procedures for appeals in the valuation areas a first appeal can be made to the Commissioner of Valuation and a second appeal against his determination can be made to the Circuit Court. Valuation appeals raise specialised questions about technological progress, investment returns, property uses and commercial practices, issues which are best decided by a specialised tribunal. The interested parties in the valuation professions actively support the establishment of a specialised appeal authority.

It is, therefore, proposed to establish a valuation tribunal to determine all second appeals in the rating area. It will consist of a chairman, deputy chairmen, professional valuers and others with special competence in valuation and legal matters. Determinations of the tribunal may be appealed to the High Court on a point of law.

I turn now to the second measure proposed in the Bill, namely, the introduction of continuous revision of valuation. At present the valuations of properties listed for revision are notified to local authorities for publication on the statutory date of 1 November each year. The process of appeal against the valuations then begins together with the listing of properties, including any new property for first-time valuation, for the following year's revision. Such requests for revision, which must be submitted to the Valuation Office by 14 February, average 60,000 per annum and form the largest part of the workload of the Valuation Office.

Under present legislation all of these requests for revision have to be submitted during the same short period, forcing both local authorities and the Valuation Office to complete various tasks at particular times or within prescribed periods, irrespective of the workload. Under the proposed system of continuous revision, a ratepayer, a local authority or an officer of the Commissioner of Valuation may, at any time during the year, seek a revision of the rateable valuation of property entered in the valuation lists or the inclusion of new properties.

The commissioner will appoint persons from among his staff to investigate the requests for revision. Such requests will be dealt with within six months of receipt or as soon as possible thereafter. The results of the revision will be incorporated in a list of valuations which the commissioner will issue to the rating authorities at quarterly intervals throughout the year.

The commencement date of continuous revision will be fixed by ministerial order. The provision for continuous revision will promote greater efficiency in operating the valuation system and it will also ensure that revisions can be quickly and regularly entered in the rate books. It can be confidently expected that the chance will be welcomed by local authorities and the professional valuation bodies.

The Bill also includes provisions relating to the global valuation of public utility undertakings and to the apportionment of such valuation across local authority areas. The term refers to those public or private concerns, which supply services of the public on a national or regional basis in areas such as electricity (Electricity Supply Board), gas (Bord Gáis Éireann), telephones (Bord Telecom Éireann), piped TV networks or any other service. A distinctive feature of these undertakings is that they consist of one or a few main production units such as an electricity generating station but, in producing and distributing the service, they comprise a network of lines, pipes, cables or wires.

These "appendages" are an integral part of the undertaking and must, therefore, be included in the valuation. Apart from the technical problem of valuing, the properties extend into many local authority areas and the apportionment of their valuation across such areas is complicated. A formal statutory basis for determining the global valuation of utilities, together with a means of apportioning such valuation across the local authority jurisdictions, is a prerequisite for progress in this area.

Finally, the Bill provides for delegation of functions by the Commissioner of Valuation. Under the present legislation the commissioner has virtually no discretion to delegate any of his functions. For instance, there are about 4,000 first appeals each year but all of these appeals must be personally determined by the commissioner. Many of these appeals could be dealt with by either the chief staff valuer or one of the staff valuers in the Valuation Office if the commissioner had authority to delegate appropriate authority to his officers. Delegation of functions where appropriate will improve the operational efficiency of the Valuation Office. It will give the commissioner more scope to concentrate on the complex valuation cases, the overall management of the valuation system and the examination of valuation legislation.

I now turn to the detailed provisions of the Bill. Section 1 defines the terms used. Section 2 provides for the establishment of a valuation tribunal to hear appeals against determinations of the Commissioner of Valuation on first appeals against rateable valuations. Details of the constitution and procedures of the tribunal are set out in the First Schedule to the Bill. The decision of the tribunal will be final subject to a right of appeal to the High Court on a question of law. Appeals already lodged and pending before the Circuit Court at the time of the establishment of the tribunal will not be affected.

Section 3 provides for continuous revision of the valuation lists throughout the year. The section provides that a ratepayer, a local authority or an officer of the Commissioner of Valuation can seek a revision of the rateable valuation of property at any time an that the Commissioner of Valuation will issue the results of the revision at quarterly intervals to local authorities. The owner or occupier of any property listed for revision will be so notified by the rating authority which will also notify him of the outcome of the revision and his right to appeal against it to the Commissioner of Valuation. The section also provides for appeals to the valuation tribunal against decisions of the Commissioner of Valuation on first appeal and sets out the procedures involved.

Section 4 provides for the valuation of public utility undertakings on a global basis by the Commissioner of Valuation. The global valuation will be based on an estimate of the effective capital value of the undertaking as a whole. The effective capital value is defined as the aggregate of: (i) the site value(s); (ii) the depreciated replacement cost of other property of the undertaking; (iii) the value of any rights or easements owned or occupied by such undertaking; and (iv) the value of any right of the undertaking to transmit radio, television or telecommunications signals. The section also provides that the global valuation may be apportioned by the Commissioner of Valuation across local authority areas. Any undertaking valued on a global basis will have the right of appeal to the commissioner and the valuation tribunal.

Section 5 sets out the procedures to be followed in the case of an appeal to the High Court in relation to points of law arising from decisions of the valuation tribunal. Section 6 provides that the Commissioner of Valuation may delegate any of his functions under the Valuation Acts to any officer of the commissioner.

Section 7 provides authority to set fees in respect of appeals to the Commissioner of Valuation or to the tribunal or in respect of an application to the commissioner. Section 8 provides that the form of various documents required for the purpose of the Valuation Acts can be prescribed by the Minister for Finance in consultation with the Commissioner of Valuation. Section 9 contains the usual provision for the payment of expenses incurred in the administration of the Act.

Section 10 provides appropriate authority to deal by regulation with unforeseen administrative difficulties which may arise in bringing the Act into operation. Any regulation made under this section must be laid before each House of the Oireachtas. Section 11 provides for the laying of certain orders and regulations by the Minister for Finance before the Houses of the Oireachtas. Section 12 gives the short title of the Act.

The First Schedule to the Bill provides for the constitution, membership, terms and conditions of office, staffing, powers and procedures of the valuation tribunal to be established under section 2. The Second Schedule relates to the property of public utility undertakings for the purposes of valuation under section 4. I believe that this is progressive legislation. I commend the Bill for the approval of the House.

Mrs. Bulbulia

I would like to thank the Minister of State for his comprehensive and very clear introduction to the Second Stage of this Bill. It certainly went into every detail. I look forward to Committee Stage when we can, perhaps, have some good dialogue on it. We in Fine Gael welcome this Bill. It is part of a process begun in 1986 in streamlining procedures and getting rid of what could be described as cumbersome procedures. For that reason it is to be welcomed. It is a further step along the line in a process initiated by the last Government to bring the Valuation Acts into line with modern requirements. I note that the next stage will be the introduction of a single modern statute covering all aspects of valuation for rating purposes.

I support the objectives of the Bill. It is good that we, as legislators, are introducing reforms and greater clarity into the valuation code. I understand that there is an ongoing review in relation to the valuation code. While I have been clear and explicit in my welcome for this measure, nevertheless I must express a certain disappointment that we have not yet had presented to us a consolidation of the 1852 and 1860 Acts into new legislation. It is a pity that while the change is welcome we are approaching it in something of a piecemeal fashion.

I look forward to comprehensive consolidated legislation because we are dealing with legislation which is more than 100 years old. The pace of change has been quite extraordinary in the past 25 years not to mention the past 100 years so that a lot of this legislation is beginning to appear anachronistic, which is the reason for the reforming measure we are speaking on today. It is also time to consolidate and bring forward one comprehensive statute covering all aspects of valuation.

There must be a complete codification of the existing legislation and also recognition of the interpretation of that legislation by our courts. Of course, much has happened in the area of valuation. In recent years the courts have commented on the constitutionality of certain aspects of valuation. The valuation base is the most significant source of locally raised revenue for our local authorities and, of course, it has been the focus of very much attention over the past weeks as local authorities throughout the country have got to grips with their estimates and have discovered that they are all, in the main, very strapped for the necessary revenue to run the essential services for the communities they serve.

There has been a massive shortfall in the rates support grant from central Government and local authorities are already working on very slimmed down projects indeed and on a greatly reduced base for rates since the abolition of rates on domestic property which occurred, as we all remember to our cost, in 1977. As a consequence of a relatively recent court decision we have the valuation on agricultural lands dropped, as such a rate was adjudged unconstitutional so we are left with an industrial and commercial rate.

The people involved in that sector bear the total burden of the rates. At a time of economic recession this tax is becoming more and more unpopular. No tax is popular. That is a sine qua non but this tax has become more and more vexatious because the local authorities increase it annually. In the case of my local authority, Waterford City Council, we gave a 4 per cent increase in our annual estimate this year. That is burdensome on people who are struggling to make do at a time of economic recession. It is all the more difficult for them because while we are delighted to have a designated area, and while there is a lot of development going on in Waterford, nevertheless these people who have now got to face the additional burden of a 4 per cent increase will have to watch their competitors in business operating under the disadvantaged area package which allows them a rates remission and attractive rent situations. The inequality and the lack of fairness in relation to the whole business of rates becomes even more highlighted by this.

The local authorities should have the power — and they have the responsibility — to raise revenue locally. My party were the first since the 1977 abolition to introduce the notion of local taxation, and we paid for that. It was intelligent and necessary but it was politically most unpopular. It is fascinating to see Fianna Fáil dominated local authorities having to eat their words in so many instances particularly in some of the urban councils. Waterford City Council saw a complete U-turn when charges were introduced, unwillingly but necessarily, and without my support for political reasons, which I do not apologise for in the slightest. It was necessary to introduce them on this occasion in Waterford City.

I hope that the current chaos in that area will be dealt with swiftly by the Government. We have been hearing for a long time about reform in the area of Local Government financing. There is talk about a property tax and there is talk about regionalising local authorities but it is getting to a stage where I do not think it is fair to let local authorities go into their 1988 estimates without having concrete legislation concerned with the financing of local authorities and the services they provide. The whole system of raising local finances is in urgent need of review because in many counties, as opposed to towns, the industrial and commercial valuation is so small that the yield from it is barely worth while and it makes only a very small contribution towards the cost of supplying essential services at local level.

The time has probably come to review the entire valuation system as an equitable means for raising revenue at local level. There are anomalies and they will surface. I know they say that hard cases make bad law but this is one that should be taken on board in the context of valuations and local authority finance. It is very hard to separate the two. If is impossible. I imagine many of the people who will contribute on the Second Stage of the Bill will stray into the area of local authority financing and then back again to the measures contained in the legislation before us. I am quite unapologetic about doing so because I think it is necessary.

One of the anomalies I would like to refer to is that of a business person or a small shopkeeper who find himself or herself very often doubly taxed because that person must pay a commercial rate on the business part of the premises. Then on the dwelling portion of the very same premises he or she is obliged to pay water rates and refuse charges. Those people quite rightly feel aggrieved by that sort of thing. It is not fair and it is not equitable. When things are like that they should be changed.

It is important, in the context of this legislation before us, to compliment the staff in the Valuation Office. It is a little sung and a not too often praised office. When we have legislation before us, the second reforming measure in over 100 years, it is important to pay tribute to all of those who work in the Valuation Office and who have worked there down through the years. They have given quiet, unobtrusive, necessary and sterling service and have interpreted the Acts in a broad and in a reasonably fair manner I would like to acknowledge that and pay tribute to them.

Coming to the actual legislation before us I understand that it was drafted in consultation with the people on the ground who administer the Valuation Acts. That is good and it is the way it should be. I understand that it has won wide support from the people involved. I know the local authorities will be vastly relieved to know of this measure.

The main purpose of the Bill is the establishment of a valuation tribunal to hear appeals against rateable valuations determined by the Commissioner of Valuation in the course of first appeals to him replacing the present system of appeal to the Circuit Court. That is a welcome development. I will be interested to hear the Minister talk about the composition of the membership of this tribunal. In the past the whole situation has been dominated by legal expertise. I hope that on the tribunal it will be possible to have people with a sound knowledge of property and property values.

I would like to see a substantial number of women involved on the tribunal. I look to the Minister in a most hopeful fashion because there are women with knowledge in the areas of property and valuations and, indeed, in the legal area. I would like to think that he would redress an imbalance that exists in every sphere of activity in this country when he is deciding who will sit on that important valuation tribunal.

The second main purpose of the Bill is the introduction of continuous revision of the valuation lists throughout the year in place of the single existing annual revision. It seems incredible to think that there were something like end of term tests every year when the Valuation Office were absolutely swamped with this deluge of work. I can quite see how this second measure will be viewed as a major area of reform by anybody who was forced to confront this deluge that descended once a year and had to be dealt with in a given timespan. That is sensible and intelligent and I welcome it.

The third significant point is the adoption of special procedures for the valuation of public utility undertakings on a global basis and the apportionment of the valuation between the functional areas of local authorities. This is interesting and it gives some idea of the complexity and the extraordinary task people have to confront in valuing public utilities such as the ESB or Bord Telecom. The Minister in his Second Stage speech referred to the whole paraphernalia of cable, plant, machinery and an extraordinary list of things. I have one query and I expect public utilities are considering it too. It would be interesting to hear the Minister expand on how this will be done. It is a slightly controversial area. The big fear, of course, in any measure of change, is will it lead to higher charges at the end of the day. I hope the Minister can allay the fears and apprehensions of public utilities and that this will not necessarily be so. We can discuss that on Committee Stage.

The fourth measure is the delegation of functions by the Commissioner of Valuation. That is good and sensible and a welcome provision. The Minister said that the commissioner had to deal personally with something like 6,000 appeals. Even to read it, it sounds so crazy and so daunting that it is a very welcome reform to think that he can delegate functions. That is worthwhile. I wonder if the fourth report of the Commission on Taxation and the recommendations in relation to valuation and local government charges were looked at in the course of the preparation of this legislation. I do not necessarily feel that they were. The Minister might like to comment on that in the course of his reply.

The Commission on Taxation felt that the responsibility for administration of the valuation system, including audit of understated values, should be allocated to local authorities and that the most efficient method of doing this may be for them to employ private consultants to assist them. They went on to say that industrial and commercial property should be valued on a rental basis and capital and rental values should be related by formula. That is on page 45 of the fourth report of the Commission on Taxation. On page 44 one of the recommendations appears to have been taken into consideration because it talked about the necessity for frequent revision which ensures that valuations are kept up to date. That is obviously part and parcel of this legislation.

I welcome the Bill. I am very pleased to see this updating measure, the second in over 100 years. I look forward to a single modern statute covering all aspects of valuation for rating purposes. I hope the Minister can give some indication when that single modern statute might be forthcoming. It is important to press for it because all legislation must be relevant. We have enough difficulty in facing up to legislation and in complying with it. It makes the whole business of complying with legislation a lot easier if it is seen to be modern, up to date and relevant to the needs of the people it is designed to serve. I look forward to other contributions from Members of the House.

Mr. Fallon

Like the previous speaker I welcome the Minister to the House and thank him for bringing this legislation to the Seanad. We know it is part of the process of improving the Valuation Acts which, as the Minister said, date from the mid 19th century. Rates will forever, I presume, be part of local authority taxation. At the moment rates apply to commercial properties only and are regarded by traders, industrialists and manufacturers as a major expenditure each year. It is important from time to time that a critical look is taken at the various Valuation Acts and that somewhere along the way they are improved, which obviously this one will be, with a saving to the person paying rates.

The Explanatory Memorandum, which I welcome and which I have found very helpful, explains the four main purposes of the Bill. The first is the establishment of a valuation tribunal to hear appeals against rateable valuations determined by the Commissioner of Valuation in the course of first appeals to him, replacing the present system of appeals to the Circuit Court. We would all agree that is the most important change in this Bill. Many people believe that the Circuit Court is not the most appropriate body for appeals in what we all rightly agree is a very specialised area. However, there are a few queries on that section on which the Minister might comment. The present system of appeals is to the Circuit Court which operates at different venues throughout the country. I wonder do the provisions of this Bill envisage the tribunal sitting in various provincial locations as this would avoid witnesses expenses, or whatever, and would make things easier for people who might have to travel long distances.

Section 1 (3) of the First Schedule states:

The terms of office of a member of the Tribunal shall be such period not exceeding 5 years as the Minister for Finance may determine when appointing him and, subject to the provisions of this Act, a member of the Tribunal shall be eligible for re-appointment as such member.

Whilst it is clear that a person appointed for the five year term is eligible for re-appointment after the five year period, the fact that the original appointment is for the limited period of five years may well take away from the independence of the members of the tribunal. It is a departure from appointments to the Judiciary, the Land Commission, etc. Generally these appointments are made on a permanent basis. The tribunal is a final arbiter of fact. This being the case, the threat to the independence of the tribunal by limiting the tenure of office to five years is all the more serious. It is important to establish the full independence of the tribunal, bearing in mind that its decisions will be final, subject to a right of appeal to the High Court on a matter of law only.

Section 3 provides for the continuous revision of the valuation lists throughout the year instead of the annual revision which now applies. I join with Senator Bulbulia in welcoming this aspect of the Bill. The requests for revision run at 60,000 per annum and it is obvious that we are heaping a huge workload on the staff of the Valuation Office at a particular time of the year. I imagine that in September and October the staff do overtime so that the local authorities receive their valuations in time for publication on 1 November. In addition there is provision for the ratepayer, the local authority or an officer of the Commissioner of Valuation to seek a revision of the rateable valuation at any time and the local authorities will be supplied with. the results of the revision at quarterly intervals. When will this take effect and when is it expected that the local authorities will receive the revised quarterly valuation? Perhaps the Minister would comment on that. At present, as we all know, 1 January is the effective date of the revised valuation. How will the local authority at an administrative level, cope with the continuous revision of valuation lists? I am sure some explanation will be given to the various local authorities. That would be welcome. I welcome the section very much. The change is long overdue and will be of huge benefit to the staff of the Valuation Office, to the local authority staff and to the rate-payers.

Section 4 introduces a global valuation of public utilities undertakings. I am convinced that whoever compiled the Second Schedule must have been an electrician or an electrical engineer on secondment to the Minister's Department from the ESB because everything seems to be covered — electric lines, cables, poles, pylons and brackets. Nothing seems to have been missed. I congratulate whoever is responsible for that.

I wonder if the global valuations of the various public utilities place the public sector at some disadvantage vis-a-vis large co-ops. Large co-ops have as much plant and as many buildings throughout the country. The global valuation is defined clearly within the Bill and will be based on an estimate of the effective capital value of the undertaking as a whole — as defined in the Explanatory Memorandum. I wonder whether the public sector might see themselves as disadvantaged in some way. The global basis of valuation is an improvement because heretofore every single item of property owned by a public utility such as the ESB was noted and listed by each rating authority. The global system which will examine all the property of the undertaking, taken together, will thus eliminate the previous tedious methods of valuations. The section provides that the global valuation may be apportioned by the Commissioner of Valuation across the local authority areas. I assume that the local authority may appeal to the tribunal against the apportionment of the global valuation. Perhaps the Minister might refer to this later.

Section 6 refers to the delegation of functions by the Commissioner of Valuation. I am amazed that we have to include that section. I would have assumed that the Commissioner of Valuation had the right to delegate responsibility to any officer as he saw fit. If that was not the case, this is what had to be done. It is a welcome improvement. As stated in the Explanatory Memorandum it will improve the operation and efficiency of the Valuation Office and will give the commissioner more flexibility to concentrate on overall management and the co-ordination of the whole operation. That should be welcomed.

While this Bill introduces badly needed changes in a number of important aspects of valuation, I understand that a further Bill will follow at some stage in the future. Further updating of the Valuation Acts is at all times necessary and should he welcomed. I would welcome future changes which would recognise an obvious reduction in trading profits. The ability to pay is clearly dependent on the trading performance of any venture. If trading is not as good as it was over the past number of years and this can be proved conclusively to the local authority, there is a case to be made for a revaluation. I wonder whether that can be done at some future date. However, that is for another day. I would like to congratulate and thank the staff of the Valuation Office for their work over the years. As Senator Bulbulia said, the quiet people behind the scenes are often criticised for doing what is basically their job of work. I congratulate the Minister on bringing this legislation to this House.

As I said earlier I welcome the Bill and all that it contains. I wish it every success in the future.

Mr. Farrell

Ba mhaith liom fáilte a chur roimh an Aire Stáit agus roimh an mBille seo. There is no doubt that the Bill is very welcome. Although the poor law valuation system operated very successfully for a number of years, unfortunately time has caught up with it. The last straw came in the High Court where it was deemed to be an unfair way of taxing the farming community. Quite honestly I always believed rates were fair although at the time there were commotion and marches against them. When all is said and done rates were a very simple and fair way of collecting tax. There was a great deal of personality attached to them because the rate collector — and I am an ex-rate collector — had a personal relationship with everybody. He knew the time of year to call on people as he knew what suited them. It was a specialised type of work. In addition under the rate collection system, there were very few sheriffs compared with the number we have now. There was no need for them because the rate collector was able to get in the money.

Mr. Fallon

He had local knowledge.

Mr. Farrell

He had local knowledge. Very few people had not got a vote on election day because the rate collector also compiled the register. They did so ably and capably and very few were left off the list. When the personal element went out of it——

Mrs. Bulbulia

That is disingenuous of the Senator.

Mr. Farrell

We have moved on from those days. On the old demand note there were only two headings, land and buildings. Today there are many other ways of running commercial businesses. We have the airwaves, water power, wind power and underground cables. All of these businesses are making quite a considerable profit and we have to find a way of getting rates from them. This Bill certainly sets out to do that in a very efficient and effective manner. Senator Fallon referred to service charges. Indeed, I always thought service charges were not such a bad idea. In Sligo we do not levy a service charge on the rate payers because we must have regard to people who are paying rates — a small minority of business people. They are finding it hard to exist and the only thing they get for their rates are the services the local authority provide. People get a water service for 75p or so a week. You would not get a child to go to the well with a sweet can for that. Rubbish is collected for less than £1 a week. Where would you get anybody to collect and dispose of it for such a sum?

Mrs. Bulbulia

Tell that to your colleagues on Dublin Corporation.

Mr. Farrell

Service charges are not the worst thing in the world. Local authorities have been starved of cash and this Valuation Bill will help to provide them with finance, particularly the global valuations. We have wires, cables and services throughout our county, and the county gets nothing as only the buildings are valued. Buildings are only a small portion of the whole business operation. It is a very good idea that we are introducing a system whereby we will look at the services supplied by anybody now that we are moving towards the privatisation of so many things.

A great deal of State property was exempt from rates and valuations and it is a good thing that they will be included. A classic example is that with all the buses in Dublin and throughout the country CIE pay no tax. If they were privatised, they would have to pay their tax. The private operators are paying their tax and making money which goes to prove that if you do not pay anything it does not necessarily mean that you will make money. If that were the case, CIE should be rotten with riches but unfortunately they do not seem to be. I welcome this Bill for all those reasons. It would certainly bring the ESB, Bord Telecom, An Post and radio etc. into the net. We will have a great many new radio stations whose programmes will be rebroadcast. The cable companies in particular are making quite a handsome profit. Up to now all those services, which are really commercial services, were making quite a lot of money, and it is only right that we should have a system for putting a valuation on them.

I welcome the tribunal although as an auctioneer I had no fault to find with the Circuit Court system because we got a decision there and then. I hope the tribunal will not be like An Bord Pleanála, you can make a case listing all your salient points; everyone is very nice to you and they walk away after shaking hands; but unfortunately the result can be very discouraging and disheartening when you get it a fortnight, a month or three months later. I would like to see the tribunal giving a decision on the day. I do not agree with tribunals sitting and making a decision later. They cannot write down everything. They may make a decision only on what they have written down and many things they heard may not have been recorded. I would be very happy to see some time limit on the tribunal. It is not true to say that under the old system all the valuations went in at the end of the year and had to be dealt with in a rush. The local authority spent another year doing the valuations which meant that the rate collector together with the local authority listed the properties for valuation. Two years would elapse before the rates were collected. The property would be listed one year and for the whole of the following year the valuation officers were out before the rates were struck.

Under this system the local authorities should be able to bring in the rates within a year, which would be reasonable enough, and it would be very helpful to the local authorities. I would like the Minister to indicate how quickly the tribunal will work. I would not like to think they would sit and spend quite a considerable length of time deciding on the valuation. If you do not agree with what you get in writing from the tribunal you are faced with a problem. There is a safety valve in that you can go to court afterwards, but this would prove to be a very expensive way of dealing with it. We hope the tribunal will act speedily and given us a quick decision. I welcome the Bill. I believe it will be of benefit to all of us.

Mr. Robb

First, on reading through the Bill it strikes me that it is a very well constructed piece of legislation. There seems to be a great emphasis throughout on the fairness of the procedure so that people at the conclusion of the valuation will feel they have been fairly dealt with and that the various aspects of our valuation have been taken into account. In that respect, and as far as it is possible for someone who is not involved in business to give an opinion, I welcome it. Listening to the contributions made, particularly the last one by Senator Farrell, it appears to me that those who pay rates on the valuation of a business are responsible for much of the revenue that comes to the local council. I would like to ask the Minister — because I speak from a position of ignorance on this subject — how public is the valuation throughout the Republic? When a valuation is being made locally, is this posted publicly so that people know who is paying what by way of rates into the kitty?

There should be some means of expanding and sharing the load of financial responsibility for effective decision making at local level. I just throw out again, as I have done twice before in the Seanad, the idea that at some point in the future, if we are serious about the decentralisation of power in Ireland, attention will have to be paid to gathering a proportion of the citizen's overall tax at local level. He will know where his tax has gone and will wish those who are making decisions on spending his money to be alert and accountable. He will feel more responsible in relation to the spending of that proportion in his own local community. We might see a much greater generation of vigour, enthusiasm and enterprise locally which I think most people now feel is essential to the development of Ireland both North and South. In summary, it seems from the provisions which have been promulgated in this Valuation Bill, the access to the commissioner, the way in which the commissioner can delegate his authority, the way in which the workload is to be distributed throughout the year, the way in which people have access to appeal at any time throughout the year, the further possibility of an appeal to the valuation tribunal and finally the possibility of the High Court being involved, that the emphasis is to be on fair play. I welcome that. The only thing I come back to is the possibility of expanding responsibility at local level and questioning whether, beyond this Valuation Bill, we need as a society to look very seriously at the centralisation of tax collection as undertaken at present.

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Mr. N. Treacy)

I thank Senators for their very many excellent and varied contributions. Senator Bulbulia opened the debate with a very constructive contribution. She said that this Bill may be piecemeal legislation. I suppose one could say that about any legislation. There are pros and cons taking any legislation in its entirety. We would prefer a complete consolidation of the whole valuation process and the effects of valuation on properties, on funding and on financing in our country. However, if we want to make practical progress with urgent issues in order to alleviate the very tedious and cumbersome difficulties which have been foisted by the evolution of time and the technological and other changes on the staff of the Valuation Office we must change. This is why we brought forward this legislation at this time. However, we are actively pursuing bringing about a totally revamped and consolidated Valuation Bill to cover many other matters. Timing is a matter which has to be taken into account within the Government's programme of legislation, but we would see it as an important matter. We must keep making progress and hope we will be in a position to bring forward further legislation in this area in the not too distant future.

Senator Bulbulia also referred to local government financing and organisation. I want to reassure the House again — I think some of my colleagues did so over the past year and perhaps I referred to it also — that the Minister for the Environment is engaged in a fundamental review of all the functions and financing of local authorities. I am sure this House and the other House of the Oireachtas, as well as all local authority members and the public at large, await the completion of this review with interest and will welcome it.

The report of the Commission on Taxation has no direct relevance to this Bill. However, the recommendation contained in the report would certainly be considered as part of the review of the organisation of the Valuation Office. The membership of the tribunal to which I referred in my speech will include a chairman, deputy chairman, professional valuers and others with special competence in valuation and legal matters. We expect to be able to appoint persons with expertise in property valuation. The intention is that a person with legal training will be the chairman or chairperson of the tribunal. Of course women will be considered for appointment to the tribunal. As a member of the Valuers Institute I have noted over the past number of years the excellent strides being made by women in the field of property and valuation and I look forward to their contribution in this area too.

Senator Fallon made an excellent contribution also and he discussed the period of office of the tribunal which will be not more than five years. I think he was referring to the fact that sometimes people are appointed to positions for their lifetime. Like everything else, there is for and against that too. There is nothing sacred or sacrosanct about the five years appointment. One has to be appointed for a reasonable period to ensure that there is consistency in the execution of one's duties and a fair and equitable balance in the valuations being decided.

We feel that, if we went over the five years, it might deter people who have a contribution to make in this field from accepting an appointment to the tribunal. Of course a person may be reappointed, which will get over that difficulty. At the end of five years the Minister for Finance will have the right to reappoint the tribunal in its entirety. Members of the tribunal or any individual member will have the right to indicate that they do not wish to be reappointed. On balance you would get the best out of people if they knew they were there for five years. They could serve for five years and, if they felt they had made their contribution and were not able to work any longer, they could indicate that to the Minister. They could be replaced on the tribunal or, indeed, the entire tribunal could be replaced.

The operative date for valuations will be based on the revision lists which will issue quarterly. For rates purposes the relevant valuations will be the latest ones available when the rate is struck in the relevant local authority area.

Reference was made by Senators Bulbulia and Fallon to the fact that the global valuation to be placed on public utilities could lead to higher valuations and to higher charges by them in the provision of their services to the people. We do not anticipate this happening. The intention is to have an equitable and practical system and the principle of comparability will continue to apply. The valuations will have to be related to other similar properties and for similar reasons, as values on other properties will be based throughout the country.

Reference was also made by Senator Fallon to property revaluation as distinct from the revision of existing valuations. This will be considered when a further consolidating Bill is being drafted but, as of now, the present Bill will not create such a situation.

Senator Farrell made many excellent points, some of which are now in an historical context due to the events to which he alluded. He talked about the reports of the tribunal and the difficulty which could arise in that people could go before a tribunal in a nice atmosphere but have to wait for a long time before they got their report. The difference between what is proposed in this Bill and the existing situation in the courts is that a person now gets a sudden death decision — an oral immediate decision — but the tribunal will be giving a formal written report on their decision and this will be to the advantage of people affected by that decision.

There is no time limit, but the tribunal will have to draw up rules which must be approved by the Minister for Finance. The Minister will examine these draft rules to ensure that the production of reports, and their proceedings, will generally produce results within a reasonable time. When those draft rules are put before the Minister for Finance I am confident that he will ensure that a reasonable time limit is put on the tribunal to ensure that people will not be left waiting for a long period wondering whether they have to adhere to the existing valuation or otherwise.

I listened to Senator Robb for many years long before I came into this House. He always makes excellent contributions. He asked if the annual revision lists are displayed in public places. The annual revision lists are displayed in local council and local authority offices throughout the country. There is no general access to valuation data as such. There is another Bill which will be, introduced later on pertaining to the protection of data information and data systems. Whether it will have any effect on this situation I am not sure, but there is no general access to valuation data at present. However, anybody who has difficulties pertaining to ratings or valuations will find both the Valuation Office and the local authorities very co-operative in providing personal information to the people affected.

As I have said, the question of local taxation has been examined by the Minister for the Environment. A major question was asked by a number of Senators, particularly Senator Bulbulia and Senator Fallon, pertaining to the global valuation to be placed on utilities. This will be based on the capital valuation of the assets of the company. The precise formula has to be worked out before the parameters are given in section 4 (4). It will be based on the capital value of the assets, the use to which those assets will be put and the consumer service which they are giving in any particular area. Basically, they are the criteria which will be laid down. The exact criteria and data will be put together by the Valuation Office after this Bill has been passed.

I sincerely thank everybody for their contributions. I am confident that this will lead to more equitable and fairer values, both from the point of view of the private sector and from the point of view of the public sector, being placed on properties throughout the country. The fact that there is constant revision will be of major benefit to the public funding area for local authorities and in the private effect it will have in ensuring that an equitable contribution is made based on the resources and the assets of the people at any time to the Exchequer and in particular to local funding.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take remaining Stages today.