Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 28 Mar 2007

Vol. 186 No. 17

Finance Bill 2007 [Certified Money Bill]: Second Stage.

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

The Finance Bill contains the legislative proposals to implement the tax changes which I announced in the budget last December. It also contains a range of other tax measures which will contribute significantly to underpinning growth in key sectors of the economy.

The measures in the Bill reflect the continued commitment of the Government to the effective and fair management of the taxation system to ensure that the benefits of our strong economic growth are enjoyed by all taxpayers, especially low and middle income earners. The Bill delivers significant improvements in the area of tax credits, allowances and bands and also cuts the top rate of income tax by 1%. We are now in the position where 846,000 people will be outside the tax net in 2007 compared with 677,000 in 2004 and just 380,000 in 1997. The tax burden for those on average incomes is less than half that of 1997 and we have one of the lowest tax takes in the world from those on low and middle incomes. It is important to appreciate these facts and to acknowledge this perspective when setting out the contents of the Bill, as I will now do.

This year's Finance Bill proposes to give effect to the announcements in the budget by increasing the personal and PAYE credits to ensure that those on the minimum wage will stay out of the tax net in 2007. It reduces the top rate of income tax to 41%. It increases the personal credits and bands to ensure that at least 80% of income earners will pay less than 20% of their income in income taxes in 2007. It doubles the ceiling on which first-time house buyers can claim mortgage interest relief. It introduces business-friendly measures aimed at small and medium-sized enterprises, including revised preliminary tax payment arrangements for corporation tax; increased VAT registration thresholds; enhancement of the tax credit scheme for research and development expenditure; and the renewal of the business expansion and seed capital schemes.

The Bill also proposes to give effect to the announcement in the budget abolishing VAT on conference related accommodation expenses to allow Irish hotels to compete more favourably on the global stage for conference business. It helps taxpayers claim certain key tax reliefs to which they are entitled by way of automatic repayments. It will also improve or extend various tax reliefs for farmers. In addition to the measures announced in budget 2007, this Bill proposes to introduce new tax arrangements for stallion stud fees with effect from 1 August 2008. It will establish a tax incentive scheme to develop tourism infrastructure in the mid-Shannon area, expand the patent income relief scheme, close a number of avoidance loopholes in different areas, abolish the minimum thresholds of €125 and €250 to allow tax relief to be claimed in respect of all qualifying health expenses, extend the scheme of capital allowances for the construction and refurbishment of qualifying residential units in registered nursing homes and exempt privately provided homecare services from VAT.

The Bill runs to 130 sections and four schedules. Today, I will outline some of the main provisions in the time available to me. I will listen carefully to the contributions of Senators and try to respond to the points they make when I come to reply to the debate.

The income tax measures and reliefs announced in the budget are dealt with in sections 2 to 4. These widen the tax bands and increase various credits, including the basic personal credit and employee tax credit, and reduce the top rate by 1%. When this Bill has been enacted, almost two out of every five income earners will have been removed from the tax net. The Bill delivers on our promise to middle income earners to ensure that 80% of all taxpayers in effect pay tax at no more than the standard rate.

Section 5 provides for a 9% increase in rent relief for individuals for rent paid for private rented accommodation which is their sole or main residence. Section 6 confirms the budget increases in the ceilings on mortgage interest relief. For first time buyers, the ceiling is doubled from €4,000 to €8,000 in the case of a single person and from €8,000 to €16,000 in the case of a married couple or a widowed person. Smaller increases for non-first time buyers are also provided for.

Section 9 will allow Revenue to credit and repay automatically reliefs to taxpayers such as age related tax credits, health expenses, tuition fees and trade union subscriptions. It also abolishes the existing minimum thresholds of €125 and €250 for claims in respect of health expenses.

Section 10 extends indefinitely the special tax exemption for unemployment benefit paid to systematic short-time workers. This previously had been renewed from year to year. Section 11 amends the provisions exempting from income tax income arising on the investment of certain compensation payments. This will exempt from tax returns from offshore funds in the same way as returns on domestic investments.

Section 12 exempts from tax the travel and subsistence expenses paid to certain members of non-commercial bodies in both the public and private sectors in respect of the attendance at meetings of such bodies. Section 14 closes off an abuse of the rent-a-room exemption scheme so that the exemption will not apply where an adult child pays the rent to a parent for staying in the parental home. Section 15 increases the childminding tax exemption limit of €10,000 per annum set in last year's budget to a new level of €15,000 per annum in order to encourage a greater uptake.

Section 16 introduces an additional threshold of relief of €20,000 per annum for qualifying long-term leases of farmland exceeding ten years duration. Section 17 amends the tax treatment of various pension products and approved retirement funds in a number of respects. The main changes are that Revenue will in future be able to approve, subject to conditions, generic pension products such as those under which single member retirement benefits are marketed without the need for individual Revenue approval for each case. An amendment to the legislation is being made to clarify that the operation of the pension fund limits is not affected as a consequence of pension adjustment orders made by the courts in circumstances of judicial separation or divorce.

Section 18 amends the provisions introduced in Finance Act 2006 to limit the use of certain tax reliefs, including certain exemptions, by some high-income individuals to ensure the restriction operates as intended. Section 19 confirms changes to the business expansion and seed capital schemes. Both schemes are being extended for a further seven years until 31 December 2013. The company limit is being increased from €1 million to €2 million, subject to a maximum of €1.5 million to be raised in a 12-month period. The investor limit is being increased from €31,750 to €150,000 in the case of the business expansion scheme and to €100,000 in the case of the seed capital scheme. These changes are subject to a commencement order being made on foot of approval by the European Commission.

Section 20 proposes a number of changes to income tax appeal provisions to provide that where a determination of the Appeal Commissioners is to be reheard by a Circuit Court judge or a case is to be stated for the opinion of the High Court, the inspector will not be obliged to amend the assessment under appeal until the appeal process has been fully completed. In such a case, a refund of tax paid or the collection of tax levied will not proceed until final judgment.

Section 21 increases from €23,000 to €24,000 the value threshold for business cars. The new threshold will apply to capital allowances and leasing charges for new and second-hand cars used in the course of a trade, profession or employment.

Sections 22 to 25 amend the tax code in respect of farmers. Certain farmers who were in receipt of FEOGA and single farm payments in the calendar year 2005 can qualify under the income averaging scheme. It also introduces a scheme for the taxation of EU restructuring aid for sugar beet growers, which will allow those in receipt of the restructuring payments to average them over a period of six years for the purposes of calculating taxable income. The 25% stock relief for farmers and the special incentive stock relief of 100% for certain young trained farmers is extended for a further two years, subject to clearance with the European Commission under state aid rules. The educational qualifications for the special 100% relief are being aligned with the rules governing the stamp duty relief for young trained farmers. The scheme of capital allowances for milk quota is being amended to ensure this relief is available for quota purchased under the new milk quota trading system.

Section 26 sets out new tax arrangements for stallion stud fees which will come into effect on 1 August 2008, with the present regime ending from 31 July 2008. The key measure in this new arrangement is the provision of a deduction for the purchase cost of the stallion which will allow the cost to be written off over a useful economic life of four years — the same broad principles as applies for other businesses. These tax arrangements are subject to clearance by the European Commission.

Section 27 amends the tax relief for donations to approved bodies to remove a number of references to the requirement that various educational bodies must be established in the State. Section 28 extends to 2010, subject to certain additional conditions, the scheme of capital allowances for the construction and refurbishment of qualifying residential units associated with registered nursing homes, which was introduced in 2002 and is due to expire on 31 July 2008.

Section 29 introduces a pilot scheme aimed at encouraging the development of tourism infrastructure in the mid-Shannon area, that is, 12 km either side of the river stretching from roughly the bottom of Lough Derg to Lough Ree. The tax relief will consist of accelerated capital allowances over seven years for qualifying construction and refurbishment expenditure incurred in the qualifying three-year period.

Section 30 relates to tax avoidance as regards unallocated partnership profits and clarifies the position that the tax-adjusted profits of a partnership, for tax purposes, must be fully apportioned between the individual partners each year. This will close off a potentially large tax loss in some major partnership firms.

Section 31 makes various amendments to relevant contract tax which applies to payments made by principal contractors to subcontractors under relevant contracts in the construction, meat processing and forestry industries aimed at reinforcing tax compliance in these areas. Sections 32 and 33 amend the current tax laws in relation to special savings incentive accounts and the pensions incentive tax credits scheme to empower Revenue to seek various information returns from SSIA managers and to require SSIA moneys invested in pension funds under the pensions incentive tax credits scheme to be held for at least one year in order to avoid a clawback of credits given under the scheme.

Section 34 provides for DIRT-free interest to be paid automatically by financial institutions to taxpayers of 65 years of age or over whose total income does not exceed the relevant income tax exemption limit. This will also apply to permanently incapacitated people in receipt of such interest in defined circumstances.

Section 35 changes the procedures that apply to give the force of Irish law to double taxation treaties. In future, such a treaty will have the force of law only after the Government has made an Order that has been approved by the Dáil and law has been enacted by the Oireachtas that inserts a reference to the Order into a new schedule that is being inserted into the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997. This section secures the position of existing double taxation agreements in Irish law by listing them in the new Schedule 24A.

In section 36, I am seeking to afford relief to persons who may suffer double taxation arising from capital gains in countries with which we have a double taxation treaty, but where the treaty itself predates the introduction of capital gains tax in Ireland. The section also removes an element of double taxation on the profits of a foreign branch or agency of an Irish company, where such a branch or agency is located in a country with which we do not have a double taxation treaty.

Section 37 removes an anomaly in the tax deductibility of share-based consideration given by a company to employees. Section 38 provides for a number of amendments to the scheme of dividend withholding tax, DWT, to deal with the introduction of electronic dividend vouchers, the

application of the general four-year time limit that applies to other tax repayments to refunds of DWT, and an extension of the existing exemption from DWT available to non-resident subsidiaries.

Section 39 amends the taxation rules on offshore funds that are created under the law of EU and EEA member states and certain OECD countries. These funds are covered by the gross roll-up taxation regime introduced in the Finance Act 2001.

Section 40 is an anti-avoidance provision which makes a number of changes to provide special rules for the taxation of personal portfolio investment undertakings concerning payments made to unit holders. This will prevent the exploitation by some wealthy individuals of the lower exit tax rate on certain investment funds.

Section 41 provides that the national pensions reserve fund and securitisation companies may receive payments from investment undertakings without the imposition of an exit tax under the gross roll-up regime. Sections 42 and 43 amend taxation procedures on life insurance policies so that the investment proceeds of all life insurance policies will become chargeable to income tax after an eight-year period.

Section 44 strengthens certain anti-avoidance provisions on the transfer of assets abroad. Section 45 amends the scheme of relief for patent income to provide an annual monetary cap of €5 million with effect from 1 January 2008. The restriction in the definition of "qualifying patent" relating to research and other activities only being carried out "in the State", is also being removed to allow for such qualifying activities to be carried out elsewhere in the European Economic Area.

Section 46 extends the application for a further three years, to 2009, of the base year 2003 expenditure on research and development against which incremental expenditure will be measured for the purpose of the R&D tax credit. In addition, expenditure by companies on sub-contracting R&D work to unconnected parties will qualify under the tax credit scheme up to a limit of 10% of qualifying R&D expenditure in any one year.

Section 47 confirms the budget day announcement that the preliminary corporation tax liability threshold for treatment as a small company is being increased from €50,000 to €150,000. New or start-up companies with a corporation tax liability of €150,000 or less for their first accounting period will not be required to pay preliminary tax in respect of that first accounting period. In addition, provisions are being introduced under which large companies in a group will be allowed to offset their preliminary tax payments between group members for the purpose of working out the adequacy of such payments for interest purposes. This will assist in minimising interest charges on the group.

Section 48 deals with group relief for companies, the provisions for which are being amended mainly to comply with a ruling of the European Court of Justice in the Marks & Spencer case on the use of foreign tax losses. Section 49 makes two technical amendments to a measure introduced in the Finance Act 2006 that allowed a company with a foreign currency asset to match that asset for tax purposes with redeemable share capital denominated in the same currency. These amendments will ensure that this legislation operates as intended.

Section 50 introduces a measure that provides an option to companies not to have interest payments made to associated companies, in countries with which we do not have a double taxation agreement, deemed as a distribution of their profits. This removes an element of double taxation in the tax code.

Section 51 extends the qualifying period for the scheme of tax relief for corporate investment in certain renewable energy projects from 31 December 2006 to 31 December 2011, subject to clearance by the European Commission from a State aid perspective.

Sections 52 to 56 amend the tax code on capital gains tax in a number of ways. Retirement relief is being amended, first, by increasing the consideration threshold from €500,000 to €750,000; second, by allowing the relief in certain circumstances where land is leased prior to disposal; third, by extending the limitless relief to a child of a deceased child of the disponer; and fourth, by extending the relief to certain intra-family transfers of farmland. The site to child relief is being amended to limit the size of the site to one acre, exclusive of the house. A technical change is being made to the exemption for sports bodies to ensure that the full value of the existing asset must be applied for approved purposes. There is a technical amendment in the offshore income gains provisions to update a reference to resident individuals. Finally, where a capital gains tax clearance is not produced on the closing of a sale, an amendment will ensure that any consideration withheld must be paid to the Revenue Commissioners within 30 days.

Parts 2 and 3 deal with indirect taxes, that is, excise and VAT. These include sections 57 to 74, inclusive, which set out a range of changes in regard to excise duties, including confirming the budget day reduction to zero of excise duty on kerosene and LPG used for heating, the increase in excise on tobacco, and the introduction of a VRT relief of 50% for electric cars. Mineral oil tax offences are being strengthened, for example, in respect of selling laundered diesel. Existing provisions on substitute fuels are being amended so that such fuels, including biofuels, will in future be taxed at the rate applicable to the fuel for which they can be substituted. The definition of "mechanically propelled vehicle" is amended to exclude vehicles that do not meet EU type approval standards for entry into service on the State's roads. Arising from the Criminal Justice Act 2006, excise duties are being adjusted or imposed concerning firearms.

In response to rulings by the European Court of Justice relating to other member states, the Bill provides that company cars driven by Irish residents on behalf of firms based outside Ireland, will be exempt from VRT subject to certain conditions. Provision is also being made for the late opening of betting shops on days on which an evening race meeting is taking place in Ireland, regardless of the time of year. Currently, late opening is allowable when daylight hours facilitate evening race meetings, that is, April through to August. This change is in response to the advent of floodlit night-time horse racing in Ireland from the latter half of the year.

Sections 75 to 98, inclusive, contain a number of important revisions to the VAT code. They confirm budget increases to the VAT registration thresholds for small businesses from €27,500 to €35,000 in the case of services and from €55,000 to €70,000 in the case of goods with effect from 1 March 2007; the increase in the threshold for the cash basis of accounting for VAT from €635,000 to €1,000,000 effective from 1 March 2007; the increase in the farmers' flat-rate VAT addition from 4.8% to 5.2% with effect from 1 January 2007; and the reduction of the VAT rate on child car-seats from 21% to 13.5% with effect from 1 May 2007.

Section 78 provides for the removal of the option for landlords to waive their right to exemption from VAT on short-term letting of residential property to remove an anomaly whereby the landlord can claim VAT on the assets of the property in year one, but the equivalent VAT on rents from the property will only be received by the Exchequer over a prolonged period. This currently acts as an unintended Exchequer subsidy to private letting.

Sections 83 and 89 provide for the deducibility of VAT on conference-related accommodation expenses from 1 July 2007 to help Irish hotels to compete more favourably for international conference business. Section 93 provides for the exemption of privately provided homecare services from VAT. Other VAT changes relate to hire purchase transactions in cases where the customer defaults on repayments and where finance houses are involved in the transactions, the taxation of certain services received by public bodies — for example, consultancy services from abroad — and the application of the open market value to certain transactions between connected parties in determining the amount on which VAT is chargeable.

Sections 99 to 111 introduce changes to the stamp duty code in order to abolish the head of charge for mortgages and other minor heads of charge, thereby simplifying the stamp duty code; amend and update the educational criteria and repayment procedure of the young trained farmer relief; and introduce a new relief for farm consolidation which allows a farmer to claim relief from stamp duty where the farmer sells and purchases farmland within 18 months of each other, in order to consolidate his or her holding. The introduction of this relief is dependent of State aid approval.

These changes to the stamp duty code will also introduce a new exemption from stamp duty for sporting bodies, which are already entitled to relief from income tax and capital gains tax, where they purchase land for the purposes of promoting games or sports; limit the transfer of a site from a parent to a child to build a house to one acre, exclusive of the house; provide for an exemption from stamp duty on certain intra-family transfers of farmland; update and facilitate the provision whereby persons who have undergone a judicial separation/divorce/nullity can claim first-time buyer relief; introduce a new relief for stock market intermediaries to better reflect modern share dealing practices; and introduce a new provision whereby certain transactions involving land would become subject to stamp duty outside of conveyance. This amendment is the subject of a commencement order.

Regarding capital acquisitions tax, sections 113 and 114 are technical amendments which arise as a result of a High Court case decided last year relating to when a discretionary trust created will come into existence. The tax will now apply from the date of appointment to the trust instead of the date of death as before.

Section 115 alters the date from which interest becomes payable in the context of a clawback of agricultural or business relief where the assets are sold within the specified period. The interest will now apply from the date the clawback arises.

Section 116 amends the dwelling house relief to provide that any period during which a beneficiary of a gift occupied a house that was during that period the disponer's only or main residence will not be treated as a period of occupation prior to the date of the gift unless the disponer is compelled, by reason of old age or infirmity, to depend on the services of the beneficiary for that period. It also ensures that the house, or any house which has replaced that house, must be owned by the disponer for the relevant three year period prior to the date of the gift. Section 117 deals with CAT agricultural relief and amends existing provisions so that an individual may off-set borrowings on an off-farm principal private residence against the property's value, for the purpose of the 80% farmer test. Section 118 provides that a clearance certificate will no longer be required for contracts dated on or after 1 February 2007 or for contracts dated before 1 February 2007 where the sale is to be completed on or after 1 February 2007.

Regarding tax administration, section 121 provides for a reduction from 6 months or 183 days to 93 days in the period which must elapse, after the receipt of a valid claim, before Revenue is required to pay interest on overpayments. Section 122 provides for a once-off increase in 2007 in the ceiling for donations to the Irish Heritage Trust from €6 million to €10 million to allow for the donation of a collection of fine Irish paintings and furniture for display in Fota House.

Section 123 amends the existing return requirements for Departments, the Health Service Executive, local authorities and similar statutory bodies regarding rent or rent subsidy so that these bodies are required to obtain the personal public service number, PPSN, of the landlord concerned. Section 124 amends the tax law to clarify and confirm the search powers of Revenue to assist in investigations with a view to prosecutions. Section 125 provides for the Crawford Art Gallery Cork Limited to be included in the list of approved bodies eligible to receive donations and Section 126 creates a new offence of impersonating a Revenue officer.

This Finance Bill, in conjunction with changes announced in the budget, demonstrates the continued commitment of the Government to pursue modern tax policies in a way that promotes economic growth, rewards work and alleviates the burden on taxpayers, especially those on lower pay. The reform of the tax structure over the last ten years has been a major driver of our economic success. The approach of keeping personal and business taxes low has served to strengthen and maintain the competitive position of the Irish economy.

The Central Statistics Office is publishing the fourth quarter and full year national accounts for 2006. These are preliminary figures but today's data shows that gross domestic product rose by 6% last year with a corresponding increase of 7.4% in gross national product. This is the strongest rate of growth since 2000, before the information technology related slowdown. These figures confirm that the economy is continuing to perform well and they exceed those expected by most commentators, including the Department of Finance.

There was an improvement in our export performance last year, mainly due to higher services exports. The performance of manufacturing exports remains more modest and highlights the need for ongoing improvements in our cost competitiveness. In terms of this year, my Department is forecasting a continuation of strong economic growth, with GDP and GNP both expected to rise by 5.3%. While the outlook is favourable we must, as a small, open economy, be cognisant of the risks to the global economic environment, such as the potential for sharp movements in the euro-dollar exchange rate. These risks highlight the need to remain competitive as well as the need for prudent management of public finances to provide room for manoeuvre in the event of difficulties arising.

Ireland's overall economic and budgetary position is now the envy of Europe. Our national debt is among the lowest in Europe, we are running a healthy budget surplus which we intend to continue if re-elected, our economy is strong and unemployment is low. Everything must be predicated on keeping our economy strong. As Minister for Finance, I have a responsibility to secure and build on the progress which has been made.

This Bill is solidly grounded on the financial and economic policies which have delivered unprecedented prosperity for our people. I hope this outline of its provisions will facilitate an informed and constructive debate in this House. I commend the Bill to the Seanad and I look forward to the debate.

I welcome the Minister and his officials to the House. I welcome the Minister's comments on the Bill which contained some information of which I was not aware. I did not realise that it was not an offence to impersonate a Revenue officer; many people may regard it as an offence to be a Revenue officer. Nor did I realise that there would be floodlit racing by the end of the year, as the Minister mentioned, and many people will welcome this provision.

I agree with much of what the Minister has said and as contained in the budget, particularly regarding the measures in the area of preliminary taxation on small businesses, the seed capital scheme and the business expansion scheme. He has made many announcements that should be welcomed including the new tourism scheme for the midlands. It is important that when new schemes are announced and existing schemes extended we be presented with an analysis of the costs involved and the benefit that will accrue to the taxpayer and the nation. My colleague in the other House, Deputy Bruton, also emphasised this. Unfortunately, the Minister did not take the opportunity to do this but he may in his closing remarks.

I welcome many aspects of this Finance Bill but, as with recent Finance Bills, I feel that, overall, it is a disappointing legislation and represents a missed opportunity. I do not detect from the Bill, the Minister's comments or the Government in general enough reforming zeal in terms of restructuring the tax system and how taxpayers' money is spent. If we do not do this now in a time of plenty, if the Minister does not do this in a Finance Bill such as this, it will be far more difficult when the economy is not as strong as it is now. A number of economic indicators suggest there is reason for concern about the future.

The International Monetary Fund pointed out last year that there is an over reliance in the economy on the construction sector, though we did not need the IMF to tell us this. Many people would argue, with some merit, that much of our economic growth, particularly in the past four or five years, is based on the construction industry and private debt, which has grown hugely in recent years. These foundations are not strong for the ongoing prosperity of our country and economy. The failure of the Minister and Government to vigorously reform the way we spend our money and use this opportunity and time of plenty to create reforms is disappointing to say the least. The Minister referred to some of the areas that concern me in his comments and did not refer to others.

I have said before that I believe the major legacy of the past ten years of this Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrats Government is the disaster that is our housing sector. Many young people are struggling to get mortgages and keep a roof over their heads. Houses have gone from affordable ten years ago to unaffordable today, even to people with very good jobs. I am disappointed by the Minister's refusal to accept the point made from within the Government and the Opposition that reform of stamp duty is essential. The stamp duty system is one of the more complex elements of the taxation system. In fairness to the Minister he has undertaken efforts to simplify the taxation system. There is ample scope for reforming stamp duty on residential property, with its many rates and thresholds.

I do not accept the Minister's argument that exempting first-time buyers from paying stamp duty on house purchases would distort the property market. First-time buyers make up a small proportion of house purchasers.

I have never made such an assertion.

It has been asserted in this House that reforming the system to exempt first-time buyers from paying stamp duty would distort the market and increase prices because developers would pass on any reduction in stamp duty to the purchaser. I do not accept this argument. Figures show that of approximately €1 billion collected in stamp duty on residential property, only €50 million was paid by first-time buyers. This is a small proportion of the larger figure. A strong case can be made for reforming stamp duty with particular emphasis on first-time buyers. I am disappointed the Minister did not avail of the opportunity to address the issue in this Bill and previous Finance Bills.

The Minister referred briefly to the environment. The Government had adopted a short-term policy of purchasing carbon credits to offset our increases in our emissions allowance under the Kyoto Agreement. It has not developed a long-term strategy for meeting our commitments under the agreement without having to resort to buying credits. The next Government must examine this issue as a matter of urgency.

As I have frequently stated, in recent years a myth has developed that Ireland is a low tax economy. While taxes on income have been significantly reduced and further reductions in income tax in the budget are welcome, we do not live in a low tax economy. In 2005 or 2006, the Government, for the first time in the history of the State, presided over circumstances in which people paid more in indirect taxation than direct taxation. Indirect taxation is regressive because those on low incomes spend a much higher proportion of income on it than those on higher incomes.

Another legacy of the Government has been a continuous barrage of stealth taxes and charges. The increase in VAT introduced in the budget immediately after the previous general election has not been rescinded. The Minister could do a serious job in the area of indirect taxation. I look forward to the next Minister of Finance tackling the issue.

The Minister referred to effective tax rates, about which we have heard a great deal in recent months. The programme for Government between the Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrats parties featured a commitment that 80% of employees would pay tax at the lower rate. The term "effective tax rate", which has crept into the debate, was not mentioned when the commitment was given in the parties' manifestos and the programme for Government.

One of my principal concerns in the area of taxation is the repeated underestimation of Exchequer tax receipts in the past three or four years. I do not know who is at fault or how this failure can be explained. Last year, tax receipts exceeded expectations by €4 billion. I am anxious to learn how the Minister proposes to ensure expectations of annual tax revenues become more realistic. Are the figures deliberately massaged for political purposes to give an impression during the subsequent budget debate that the economy is in a stronger than expected position and the Minister for Finance can divvy out more money?

I and many other Senators have expressed concern about inflation. While the most recent monthly figure indicated a marginal decrease in the inflation rate, most observers agree that the rate will rise again in the coming months. It is worrying that our rate of between 4.5% and 5% is significantly higher than those of most of our European competitors. The Government made no perceptible effort in the Bill or budget to reduce the inflation rate. I am anxious to hear the Minister's comments on the issue.

In the past two or three years, Ireland has become the second or third most expensive country in the European Union. If we are serious about maintaining economic competitiveness, we must keep our costs low and inflation rate down.

The Minister made a number of positive announcements on agriculture in the Budget Statement and Finance Bill. In order to firmly establish the biofuels sector and provide a viable alternative for agriculture and environmental benefits, excise duty on domestically produced biofuel most be completely removed. The Government must introduce such a measure as a matter of urgency.

As I have argued previously, the Government must introduce roll-over relief for capital gains tax, having reversed its decision to introduce such a relief immediately after the previous general election. I will outline again the case of man in my area who will lose ten acres of land because the new Dublin to Waterford route traverses his property. As an unwilling seller, it would be fair to exempt this man from capital gains tax and afford him an opportunity, within 12 months of having received compensation, to spend the money on buying replacement land. To do otherwise and impose capital gains tax of 20% would effectively allow the State to take two of the ten acres.

Many people do not understand how roll-over relief operates. A strong case can be made for providing this type of relief to persons such as the farmer to whom I have referred, who are required to give up land as a public service but wish to remain in agriculture. Such persons should be allowed to spend the compensation they receive in lieu of having land purchased to make way for a road without having to pay capital gains tax. I urge the Minister to introduce roll-over relief in this area.

I had hoped to discuss the topical and important issue of education and class sizes. The Taoiseach spoke for 23 minutes at his party's Ard-Fheis. Listening to his speech on my way home from mass on Sunday, I nearly crashed my car when he said he wanted to fire 4,000 teachers, before correcting himself and using the word "hire". He outlined planned expenditure amounting to approximately €6.9 billion, most of which consisted of rehashed and reheated promises from the previous general election campaign. Perhaps the Fianna Fáil Party's new green image on the environment has been earned from its tendency to recycle political promises.

I have serious concerns about competitiveness and inflation when I hear the Taoiseach talk about splashing such large sums of money around after the next general election. It is a matter of political priority as to which areas need investment. I look forward to being in a position following the general election, when Fine Gael is in government, to ensure we provide that political priority.

I welcome the Minister and his officials. I take this opportunity to congratulate the Minister on his three-year stewardship of the national economy and national finances. As I said in a previous debate, he was adjudged by the Financial Times to be the best Minister for Finance in the euro zone.

The budget has resulted in a situation where 38% of taxpayers no longer pay tax because their incomes are low or low to middle. I have noticed an interesting element entering public debate, namely, this situation is now criticised as being too generous to the low paid. Chambers Ireland and the economics editor of The Irish Times have both made this criticism, with which I do not agree as it is a situation of which we can be proud.

For comparative purposes, I considered the budget produced by Gordon Brown last week. A married couple with two children in the United Kingdom, with one of the couple employed and earning £20,000, which is approximately €30,000, will pay approximately £3,000 or €4,500 under the British budget. Here, a person on €30,000, virtually the exact equivalent, will pay €858, according to the Minister's budget tables, or approximately one fifth of what is paid in Britain. The idea that this is not a low-tax economy is simply not true.

Perhaps this is the way "new Labour" in Ireland would operate if it was in government. What Gordon Brown was doing was taking with one hand and giving with the other.

The Government would never do that.

For example, a drop of 2% in the rate of income tax was balanced out by abolishing the introductory rate of 10%. The cut of 2% in corporation tax which, according to the Financial Times was partly stimulated by competition from Ireland even though Mr. Brown likes to talk only about the big seven economies, was paid for by small businesses which saw their introductory rate of corporation tax increase.

We do not fully appreciate what an incredibly fortunate situation we are in. When the Opposition refers to stealth taxes it must include, for example, a 3% rise in public transport fares, which is a complete devaluation of the term.

I never mentioned public transport. Failure to index the bands is the most vivid failing.

I recommend to the Opposition the Minister's speech at the Ard-Fheis——

No thanks.

——in which he dealt very fully with the stamp duty proposals of Fine Gael and how they would completely destabilise the property market and put equity at risk.

The Senator has not studied the question. Let us study it before we call it nonsense. The stamp duty issue is irrelevant to large tracts of the country. I visited an estate agent in Tipperary, where the average price for a good detached three-bedroom house is approximately €220,000, well below the stamp duty threshold. Moreover, somebody must be buying the 93,000 houses that were built last year.

What many ignore with regard to stamp duty is the fact that this country does not have a property tax. I heard an auctioneer argue on "Morning Ireland" that the onus fell on the seller, particularly at the higher range. People of my generation have seen astronomical increases in the value of property. Some of the media campaigns have not been motivated by concern for first-time buyers but by people sitting on properties worth at least €1 million, who want the market to continue ever onwards and upwards.

One of the problems the Minister faces is that he is under pressure in every budget to increase the excise duty on cigarettes which, unfortunately, has a major impact on inflation. I recommend that he would in future pick from the indirect tax area some countervailing reductions which would neutralise the cost of living impact, if he cannot get agreement from the social partners to eliminate this.

In contrast with the position across the water, small businesses will have good reason to be pleased with the budget and the Finance Bill. If I understand correctly what I read, the bizarre challenge by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions to the raising of the BES thresholds has been dismissed by the European Commission.

There is great interest in tax incentives for renewable energy. Several points have been made to me in this regard, one by a person in the forestry sector, namely, that we have a potential renewable energy resource in the thinnings from woodlands. It is important that these thinnings be used and not just encourage products such as willow and miscanthus.

Many businesses are interested in getting into biofuels. There is a danger that much of this material might be imported but there is also a potential for it to be grown here, particularly in the absence of the sugar beet industry. The point has been made to me that while many grants have already been awarded, excise duty is the crucial factor.

Hear, hear.

I am sure this will continue to be reviewed and examined in conjunction with the experts in the industry.

As a passing comment, I wish to refer to sports equipment. For example, hurleys are manufactured in this country. The point was made to me that if the VAT rate was 13.5% rather than 21%, it would help to eliminate the black market.

Tipperary will not need its hurleys for much longer in any case.

To be fair, one would have to extend the measure to the balls and instruments in all sports, not just hurleys.

Although I understand it is still subject to clearance, I welcome the new stallion stud fee regime. The positive way of considering this issue is to acknowledge that for 40 years a fantastic incentive has been in place which has moved the industry in Ireland from what was a very middling position in the 1950s and 1960s to one where, while we use the term too often, we genuinely are world class. I commend the Minister and his officials, first, for giving adequate notice of the change of regime and, second, for working out a viable regime which will help the industry to maintain its lead position in the world. Unlike some, although I do not live in the Shannon area, I commend the Minister on his incentives for the region as it is a potentially important area. I am also glad to see him make special provisions in the heritage area for Cork. It is right to be explicit about the beneficiaries of these provisions. The extension of the childminders' tax exemption is pragmatic and sensible. In light of experience, the original exemption of €10,000 has been adjusted to €15,000 for this badly needed service. I approve of the tapering out of various construction provisions, but feel the incentive for sheltered housing for the elderly is worth keeping.

Underestimation can be put down to the caution of the Department of Finance. I do not believe the Minister uses the red pencil on Revenue projections or adjusts them downwards at the beginning of the year. Neither he nor his predecessors would do that. There may be a subliminal element of the Department of Finance trying to keep the rest of the country under control, especially in buoyant conditions, but I would not criticise the Minister for that.

I was amused by the inclusion of the offence of impersonating a Revenue official. When I was very young I played an April fool's joke — this was at the time of the wealth tax — and sent my uncle a letter purporting to come from a Revenue official, which mentioned getting all his property ready for inspection and assessment in successive slices. I am sure he was not amused. If this provision had been available, he might have been tempted to make use of it.

I wonder if it has a retrospective element.

As somebody who has been closely involved in an advisory capacity in policy over the past 20 years, apart from the success of the peace process, I am immensely proud of the economic transformation that has been achieved in those years. I do not claim this success has been achieved by one party. It has been achieved by partnership and different coalitions of partners. The 1987-1989 Fine Gael Tallaght strategy arrangements contributed to it as well.

We are far ahead of where any of us thought we would be. We have doubled employment, moved from an acute debt problem to a situation where we have one of the lowest debts in the eurozone and from a situation of heavy taxes to a low tax regime. Although none of us believed it would be possible, we are now a relatively lightly taxed country. The main difference from where we were in the 1940s and 1950s is that we now have proper social services and proper infrastructure. Yesterday, I was delayed on my route to Dublin and had to take the old roads through Kildare and Newbridge because of the tragic accident on the N7. Those old roads are a reminder of the way things were. Today, we are able to finance, almost wholly out of our own resources, infrastructure needs and much of the aid provided to our farmers.

I congratulate the Minister on the Bill and on his management of the economy. As long as he is in charge, economic confidence is safe andsecure.

I welcome the Minister and his officials to the House. When I come to look at a Bill, I often find it is better to look at the Minister's speech on it, especially the last few lines. Towards the end of his speech on the Bill, the Minister said when referring to the national debt as among the lowest in Europe: "I have a responsibility to secure and build on the progress which has been made." He also said we were running a healthy budget surplus, our economy was strong and unemployment was low. I believe the economy is in good hands. My only fear is that there may be a degree of complacency or cockiness, not necessarily in the Minister but in the country as a whole. On that basis, I worry there is a danger there may be competition and so-called auctioneering in the area of the economy.

The Minister said: "Ireland's overall economic and budgetary position is now the envy of Europe." He is incorrect to confine it to Europe. It is the envy of the world. Yesterday, I received an invitation to visit Central America next month to speak about the Irish economy because somebody had heard me speak on the success of the Irish economy when I was in Brazil and Argentina in November. I had to do some work to prepare for my speech in November and examined the cause of the success of our economy. There were five main reasons for it: improved education since the 1960s, the identification of high-tech or sunrise industries, entry to the European Union, partnership and the decision to go for a low corporate tax to encourage investment in Ireland. This has been very successful and we are the envy not just of Europe but of the rest of the world.

I look at all legislation carefully, particularly Finance Bills, to ensure there is nothing in them that will damage our economy. Looking at the Bill in this light, I support the Minister's proposals in general. However, I would encourage him to concentrate on some areas, one of which was touched on by Senator Mansergh, namely, bio-fuels. When I was in Brazil, I was interested to see every petrol station advertise not just petrol but also what they call alcol, which is ethanol. Alcol is available in every petrol station there. I have a daughter who wants to drive a bio-fuel car, but she has difficulty in doing so because of difficulty with the availability of bio-fuels. I am not sure what the Minister can do to improve the situation and encourage the availability of bio-fuels in this country. CIE and Bus Éireann use bio-fuels to a large extent, but it is not easily available. I would like to see an improvement in this area.

I would like to focus on a specific area of this long and complex Bill, namely, taxation or the effective discouragement of charitable donations. For many years there were few wealthy people in Ireland and, therefore, taxation of charitable donations was not an area of contention. In recent years, however, we have an increasing number of well-off people but we have not done enough to encourage them to reinvest in the country. I was talking to somebody on the board of a university in this country who was trying to raise funds and finding difficulty in doing so. This person visited one of the schools in Harvard which had raised $400 million in one year from successful and wealthy graduates, but the Irish university to which he was attached had only managed to raise €12,000 by similar means.

There are opportunities now that did not previously exist. The challenge did not exist previously because we did not have significant numbers of wealthy Irish people 20 years ago. Now there are and they are generous and anxious to contribute to the economy that has helped them become wealthy. They are anxious to create foundations or make generous contributions. However, we have not recognised this. Take, for example, the legislation introduced in 2006 to ensure high income earners pay tax. The legislation introduced conditions which would ensure they would not get away without paying some tax. However, the sweeping powers introduced by the Minister may have included some provisions that should not have been included. Legal advice I received on tax issues affecting charities states:

A general cap on claims for certain tax allowances and reliefs by high-income individuals was introduced in the Finance Act, 2006 (now section 485C and Schedule 25B TCA 1997) with effect from 2007. This unexpectedly included the s.848A donation scheme within its scope. The restriction will operate by limiting the amount of relief available in respect of tax allowances and reliefs by the higher of 50% of the person's income before the reliefs or €250,000. It is extremely surprising that the Department of Finance would categorise a donation to charity as subject to the restriction for tax reliefs in the same category as that of commercial allowances and reliefs (such as property, capital allowances schemes, patent royalties, film and BES reliefs and exempt distributions).

The Minister introduced restrictions to ensure that the reliefs enabling those wealthy people to avoid paying tax included in that list donations to charity which are of no benefit to the donor. That was probably an error. I can understand how it slipped in but I ask the Minister to give serious consideration to changing that provision.

Charities must be registered for two years to be eligible in this scheme. This is understandable because people need to be able to check up on a charitable organisation to which they wish to donate. When an event such as the tsunami occurs, however, it is difficult to set up a scheme. Will the Minister consider another way to overcome that problem?

I am advised that "charitable donations should allow a credit against all taxes, not just income tax". The 1997 scheme "allows donors of heritage property to the State to credit the value against any tax including income tax". It might be possible to do something in that area.

Another point made to me, and previously to the Minister, refers to value added tax, VAT, on charities. For many years that was not in the Minister's hands because the European Commission did not permit the exclusion of charities. The Commission changed its regulations approximately two years ago, to permit some exceptions to that ruling. I met people from a charitable institution in Denmark who explained how they responded, which they did very quickly. Their institution does not pay VAT on certain of their expenditures. When one contributes to a charity some of the money will cover VAT on everything it spends. In Denmark, however, when one contributes €100 the whole sum goes to the charity because it will not be spent on VAT. The figures in Ireland would not be outrageously difficult for the Minister to handle but a scheme similar to that introduced in Denmark would be of great benefit.

I would like the Minister to pay particular attention to the way Ireland persists in discriminating against foreign charities for taxation purposes. It is in the public interest to encourage philanthropy to the maximum possible extent, so that at least some of the profits that the Celtic tiger has created are used for the benefit of mankind worldwide. I acknowledge the existing tax concessions in regard to charitable donations, which are very right and proper, but which unfortunately apply only to charities established here in Ireland.

No tax relief is allowable for any donations made to a charity that is not established in this country. This reminds me of the time when we were setting up the George Mitchell Scholarships in honour of the American Senator who did so much to bring about the Good Friday Agreement in 1998. The scheme passed through the Dáil and came to this House where it was to pass quickly. I noticed one line in it to the effect that the money intended to encourage American students to study in Ireland, although it was not limited to Americans, was to be spent in the State. I suggested to the then Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Martin, that this could not be right because if somebody was coming to study peace he or she should go North to do so. The Minister, however, had advice from the Attorney General to say that was tricky and the money should be spent only in the State. I put down an amendment to suggest that it should not be limited to the State, which the Minister accepted. Thank God he did because many of those who have come to Ireland from the United States have the opportunity to study in the North which they could not do had that minor technical point remained. They come every year and I have met several of them.

There is a parallel scheme in Northern Ireland.

There may be a parallel scheme but somebody who wants to come to Dublin to study peace studies or travel North can do both. This point reflected what is at work today, a bureaucratic mindset that operates on the principle that the world begins and ends at the Irish border. I would like to think that we are more broad-minded than that.

In the matter of the George Mitchell Scholarships commonsense eventually prevailed, and the Bill was suitably amended in this House. I am calling for the same kind of commonsense to be applied in this matter. Charity may begin at home, but it does not end there and there is no logical reason to discriminate in our tax regime against foreign charities. To do so reflects a blinkered and provincial thinking that does not sit well with the role we aspire to play in the world today. I do not believe that the Minister or his officials intended to do this. It happened by accident. Will the Minister give serious attention to this point because there is wealth in Ireland and we do not want to spend it all in Ireland. We want to help mankind in the rest of the world.

I am not alone in thinking this. The European Commission considers that this discrimination is contrary to the Treaty on the European Union, and it has already begun to take proceedings against Ireland in this matter. Rather than fighting this unwinnable case to the bitter end, I suggest that the Minister bow to the inevitable and concede the matter now, by means of an amendment on Committee Stage.

A recommendation.

Yes it is not an amendment but a recommendation. I thank Senator Mansergh. It is worthy of consideration because life in Ireland has changed. There are wealthy people here now, some of whom wish to change the world. Some of them are doing a wonderful job in that direction. Let us make sure we encourage them to do so not by limiting ourselves to the borders of Ireland, worthy as that is but to by enabling them to make changes in the whole world.

I am pleased to have an opportunity to speak on the Finance Bill today. I recognise that the economic prosperity and success of the country is due to prudent management and initiatives made by successive Ministers for Finance, through the Finance Acts, and their management of the country. We would not have this success or the ability to put money into social welfare, education and increased spending on health without the increased prosperity in the country.

My concern today however is that these benefits have not been balanced. Spending under the national development plan on roads and health outside what used to be termed "the Pale" in areas from Donegal down to Kerry is unbalanced. For example, the forecast expenditure in the Border, midland and western, BMW, region to December 2006 was €15.2 billion. I am not an economist and ask to be corrected if I am wrong in believing €1 billion is €100 million.

It is €1,000 million.

That is better or worse, as the case may be — we just could not figure that out. When we start to discuss figures in billions, this is perhaps one of the things that goes wrong.

I will outline information given to me by the Department of Finance and I apologise if it is wrong. The expenditure forecast for the BMW region in the period 2000 to December 2006 was €15.2 billion. It was supposed to be €18.2 billion and there is therefore an underspend of €3 billion. The per capita GDP data for 2004 indicate there is no balanced regional development. The GDP for Dublin per capita was 33% higher than the Irish average and in the Border, midlands and west region, it was 25% below average. The disposable income per person in 2004 in the BMW region was 6.8% below average. There was €17.142 billion in disposable income in the BMW region compared to €50.921 billion in the south and east.

The National Development Plan 2000 to 2006 recognises an imbalance between the regions in terms of national economic progress. The new national development plan states there is no longer to be a BMW region or regional spending, and that spending will depend on potential, as measured by the ESRI. What is the potential of Galway over Dublin, or of Clifden over parts of the east? How will we define spending in the west, which is underdeveloped and has not been given all the money it was supposed to receive? It was allocated but not spent? What kind of strategy will measure potential? According to the Border, Midland and Western Regional Assembly, the changes proposed to the spending regime in the national development plan for the period 2007 to 2013 comprise a retrograde step. I agree with it.

The Minister is aware there is a water crisis in Galway. Many are saying it is not a matter for national Government but for local authorities. Are we living in a country in which national emergencies affecting 90,000 people are not addressed? Kofi Annan has stated clean, safe water is a basic human right, as confirmed in UN documentation. Ninety thousand households in Galway do not have this basic human right and it is not acceptable for Ministers and others to say it is not an issue for central Government but for local authorities, which have responsibility to clean up the mess. If it took €60 million to clean up the mess in Galway, only €500 per person would be required. I do not know if €60 million would suffice and am only using the figure for illustrative purposes but we should consider my point nevertheless.

Is the Minister aware that there is no capital expenditure proposed for the paediatric unit in University College Hospital, Galway, until 2011? The hospital cannot accommodate one child per room and does not have en suite toilet facilities for children or parents. There are four-bed rooms in the children’s section of the hospital, in which little girls and boys may or may not be accompanied by a parent and have parental protection. If one child in the hospital is accompanied by a parent while another is unaccompanied, what kind of safety is provided? Children and parents are sharing toilets that were installed in the early 1950s or 1960s. This does not suggest the existence of a centre of excellence or a super-regional hospital. The Minister, when he entered Government in 1997, promised there would be cardiac surgery in the west. We have a facility with six beds and two cardiothorastic surgeons——

Is that really relevant to the Bill?

Absolutely. If we examine all the other points Senators make——

It might be more relevant to the Appropriation Bill.

If the Cathaoirleach bears with me, he will realise this is important. It is not often that we have the Minister in the House. My comments are completely related to the Finance Bill because the money comes from the Department of Finance. I will try to make my comments more specific to the Bill. They all concern how we are spending our money. Expectant mothers must wait 20 weeks to have a scan in the hospital in Galway. The Minister might say this is not his problem as it concerns the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, but it is. The Government made promises to the people of Galway in the past two elections and has failed to deliver on them. I was not elected, as the Minister knows, but I will not stand here and say this is good enough for Galway.

The roll-out of BreastCheck has been raised on the Order of Business and we will be discussing it in the health debate in the coming days. It was promised that it would be rolled out nationally in 2000. In 2003, it was promised it would be available in Galway in 2005. It will not be available until October or November of this year and this is not good enough. I am not referring to roads as these comprise an entirely different story but we must make a stand, as I intend to do, and argue that the circumstances I have outlined are not acceptable for the west, including Galway.

On a point of order, does the Cathaoirleach not find it astonishing that there is no member of the Labour Party participating in this debate?

That is not a point of order. I call on the Minister to reply.

There is no member of the Progressive Democrats present either.

Order, please.

I thank all Senators who contributed to the debate and I want to reply to some of the key points that have been made. I disagree with Senator John Phelan that we have not reformed our tax spending. The opposite is the case in that the tax burden has reduced considerably for all earners in the past ten years, directly as a result of the policies pursued by the Government. Many more people are working than were working ten years ago and they are paying much less tax on what they earn. Those on the minimum wage pay no income tax and those on the highest incomes cannot use tax relief schemes excessively to avoid paying any tax. I include the charitable donations scheme in this regard because, while it is very laudable, it could be used disproportionately such that the exemptions available would enable some to pay no tax on their incomes. This would defeat the purpose of the exercise.

Our record on taxation is evident to all. This year, nearly 846,000 persons will be outside the tax net, compared to just 380,000 in 1997. This represents a significant achievement in the context of a workforce of more than 2 million. Some 600,000 new jobs have been created in the past ten years. Allied to this achievement, the Government has maintained its commitment to keeping business taxes low to strengthen and maintain the competitive position of the economy, and it will continue to do so.

Senator John Phelan implied that taxpayers are highly taxed because the Government, through some form of stealth, is using VAT to increase the Exchequer's tax yield. This is not the case. In 1997, under the Rainbow coalition, indirect taxes, comprising VAT and customs and excise duty, amounted to 45% of the total tax take. In 2002 they amounted to 46% and the forecast for 2007 is approximately 43%. This represents a slight fall in the share of the overall tax burden accruing from indirect taxes since 1997. A slight increase in Exchequer taxes as a percentage of GNP, of approximately 2.8%, is expected in 2007. The increase is entirely attributable to capital taxes — about 3.3% for taxes as a percentage of GNP.

Senator John Paul Phelan made a point about effective tax rates and the number of income earners paying at the higher rate. Unlike the old allowance system, the tax credit system works by first calculating the tax liability at 20%, and 41% where applicable, and then deducting from the tax so calculated the value of the individual's tax credits. The allowance used to be applied before one got into the marginal tax rate. For some people, when the credits are taken away, they are left with no tax liability, others are left with a liability which, as a percentage of their pay is less than the standard rate and for the remainder they will pay somewhere between 20% and 41%, on average.

The bottom line is when people earn €30,000 a year and they pay €6,000 in tax, they pay 20% of their income on tax. It is semantics to suggest we have not made this commitment. Not alone have we made the commitment, we have taken 40% of taxpayers out of the tax net altogether. It was a central part of our taxation policy during the course of this tenure of office to exclude people on the minimum wage from the tax net, and to do so two and three times in a row because it is in the interests of social equity to do so. Whether one can do that ad infinitum is something we will have to consider. A certain point may arrive after which one may not be able to continue to do that. During our term of office we said we would take people on the minimum wage out of the tax net. We have done this for 846,000 people compared with 380,000 ten years ago out of a much lower number of people at work at that time — 1.34 million compared with 2.066 million, which is the third quarter figure from the Central Statistics Office.

I do not accept the points made either in regard to criticism of our spending programme. Overall, we have succeeded in keeping public finances within sound and sustainable overall parameters — which we will continue to do if we are returned to office — to the extent that this country's overall economic and budgetary position is now the envy of Europe and, as Senator Quinn stated, perhaps even further afield. The national debt is among the lowest in Europe, we are running a healthy budget surplus, the economy is strong and unemployment is low. The Government has put in place a comprehensive value for money framework that addresses every aspect of public expenditure from the planning phase right through to implementation and delivery. We are taking concrete and innovative steps to promote value for money and to link public expenditure with public service outcomes.

Regarding forecasting, Senator John Paul Phelan referred to underestimations of tax revenues. Senator Mansergh made a comment on that which is probably accurate. It is difficult to get these estimates correct for a variety of reasons. First, if one looks back 30 years under all Governments, we find in fact that one of the biggest errors was made in 1976 by a Fine Gael and Labour Government when the forecasts were more than 10% out. The recent poor forecasting performance has been due to rapid increases in stamp duties and capital gains tax. There is no political input into these forecasts under this or previous Governments of any colour. As for the methodology for tax forecasts, I have instigated a root and branch review using the resources of the Department, the Revenue Commissioners, the ESRI, the Central Bank and the European Commission. The last review we carried out was in 1998 and we published that report.

For the record, we have forecast VAT, income tax, corporation tax and excises, the big four which represent 85% of tax revenue, fairly well and this is encouraging to some degree. I am conducting a review to find out what is the best forecasting projection, given the rate of growth we are achieving, the different nature of the economy and the varied levels of business in which we are engaged. I want accurate figures too. It is nonsense to suggest we are purposely underestimating. If one takes a tax base of anything more than €50 billion and one is 2% out, that is €1 billion. That is a lot of money but it is only 2% on a base of €50 billion. These are projections based on statistics and one does the best one can.

Trends can change. For example, the slowdown in the property market that would happen if we were to introduce Fine Gael's stamp duty regime would put my figures out of kilter pretty quickly. I certainly will not be underestimating if that is introduced. This idea is just not thought through. I ask that it be reconsidered. How can one introduce a stamp duty regime over a three-year period and suggest it will not dislocate the market? In effect, this would signal to people who want to get into the housing market that they should stay out for as long as they can because the longer they stay out, the better will be the deal on stamp duty. That is crazy. It does not make any sense. It was not thought through. I respectfully ask, as the Fine Gael Party concentrates on currying favour with the 50,000 people who are in the transaction market this year and annually, what will be the effect on the equity that has built up in their properties in recent years of the 1.6 million householders who are not in the business of buying or selling property?

That was all forgotten as well. This will come home to roost; it will not work. I say this for a purpose. As Minister for Finance, I am duty bound to say it. I do not engage in speculation on these matters for obvious reasons and I do not think anybody else should be engaged in speculation either. There are procedures that can be followed if people want to seek taxation reform. It is not done on the basis of implementing a proposal over the next three years. Based on the figures for houses sold in the first ten months of last year, only 3,990 people out of a total of 44,500 bought houses valued at more than €635,000. As Senator Mansergh stated, it is proposed to reduce stamp duty for people who buy houses worth in excess of €700,000, but at the same time no effort is made to give a few extra bob to ordinary working people by indexing the tax bands. Fine Gael proposes to spend €460 million on 50,000 people and put at risk the equity of 1.6 million households. If that is the kind of Government we will have if Fine Gael is elected, I can guarantee the Celtic tiger will not roar too long.

On price inflation, the trend for 2007 is expected to be downward and more so from mid-year. We have passed the peak that was largely due to European Central Bank interest rate rises and international oil prices. When inflation is measured on a common EU basis, with mortgage interest stripped out, it is 2.6% compared with 1.8% on average in the eurozone. Our growth is three times the eurozone rate. That is not a bad performance, comparatively speaking, but we need to remain vigilant.

I am pleased the business expansion and seed capital schemes have been welcomed, as has the introduction of the mid-Shannon scheme. I have published all the cost benefit analyses of all these schemes and they are available on the website. They are in line with the recommendations from the consultants that we would have a time-limited, targeted approach to see if they would work out.

I made my point on stamp duty. However, the emphasis and the consistent policy in the housing market has always been to try to assist first-time buyers.

That is nonsense.

This is because they are——

Is that why the Minister got rid of the first-time buyer's grant?

Let me explain it to the Senator.

That is nonsense.

They are the only people who come into the market with little or no equity.

That is nonsense.

The second, third and fourth time——

The Minister has done everything in his power to put houses beyond their means.

Order, please.

——they will have enhanced equity. In some cases, equity has risen by 20% and 30% a year. Let us be fair and straight about it.

That is not being fair or straight.

They are the lifeblood of the housing industry. It is vital to have first-time buyers entering the market. In three budgets I made two carefully calibrated initiatives on stamp duty for first-time buyers: increasing the thresholds in 2005 and this year; and doubling the mortgage interest subsidy up to €125,000, not just for those going into the market to buy a house but also for those who have been in that market for the past six years, given that there had been some slight interest rate rises and to help cushion them against any problem in that regard.

One must be most careful about what one does with the housing market. One should not play politics with it. Approximately 260,000 families have members working in the construction industry. This represents 15% to 16% of GNP.

We are far too dependent on it.

It is gross irresponsibility and it ill behoves anybody——

Is the Minister talking to the Progressive Democrats or to me?

I am talking to Senator John Paul Phelan, given that Fine Gael is a prospective majority partner in an alternative Government which has come forward with the daftest idea I have yet heard from anybody.

That is nonsense.

If Senator John Paul Phelan asks anybody in the industry, he or she will tell him it is nonsense.

How come the Minister is in Government with the Progressive Democrats then? That is the Progressive Democrats policy as well.

Order, please.

Who introduced the budget?

The Minister should be allowed to speak without interruption.

As for any changes to the stamp duty regime, as Minister for Finance, I want people to think through carefully what they are doing given the importance of this sector for jobs in every community. People should be very careful what they are talking about.

We are far too reliant on the construction sector.

Senator Quinn asked how the country would deal with the question of philanthropy. A dialogue is required on that area. There is no doubt that private wealth has increased. We have not had a culture of philanthropy in the past of any great magnitude because not many people had the wealth to be philanthropic. In all these issues we must have balance between the public policy objective of ensuring that people can provide assistance to worthy causes through the charities Acts and so on while not allowing total discretion to those with assets to decide how those moneys will be spent if they do not come through the Exchequer system. In other words, we must ensure that everyone is seen to be paying their fair share while at the same time finding a means that will enable this culture of philanthropy to flourish. I am interested to discuss that issue in the coming months and hear what people have to say about it to ensure it is dealt with maturely and properly and not be considered subsequently to be some means of helping people on higher incomes to do as they wish with their income while keeping it out of the tax system.

I understand the point being made and agree that in wealthy societies it has proven to be an issue that is being accommodated. The Senator mentioned the private benefaction in American colleges and because of the level of benefaction, many of those major universities are the leading research centres of the world in a range of scientific and other areas.

I set up the Social Finance Foundation, which is a financial intermediary through which it is open to people in the private sector to subscribe to the Social and Finance Foundation. Where they do not have individual discretion on specific projects they wish to fund they are enabled to contribute to a foundation which is seeking to grow social finance and bring social capital to the communities of Ireland in a way that is more general in character than specific in terms of getting tax relief to do a specific project. I may be interested in asking people to consider a tax relief in respect of a general benefaction to such a foundation. Those people would know that the money they put forward would go towards purposes with which they would generally agree. That is an area for consideration in the context of that debate. I will get back to the Senator on the specific points he raised because I will not be able to cover them here.

Senator Cox raised specific issues and although they are not my line responsibility, that does not mean I am not interested in them being resolved. A propaganda line has been pushed by members of the Opposition throughout the west——

Deputy Cox is a Government Senator.

——that we are not providing the moneys due to the BMW region. It is not correct to say that €3 billion has not been spent in the BMW region that would otherwise be spent. One of the economic programmes was based on whether there would be a take-up from business. That did not happen and obviously that money was not spent.

It is not just a question of money spent up to 2006. Under the Community Support Framework there is a further period in which the money allocated will be spent. I can give the Senator a detailed briefing which makes the point I am making to her. It is perhaps an understandable but inaccurate analysis of the position to suggest that the BMW region is being denied its due allocations for some reason.

The ESRI review of the National Development Plan 2000-2006 indicates that the income disparities between the regions are reducing. The ESRI will confirm that. The 2007 to 2013 national development plan is another major effort to continue the trend of trying to achieve balanced regional development. We have not had balanced regional development in this country, which is unfortunate. When the development began it was in the major conurbations and was Dublin centric in the main because we did not have regional development but we are effecting regional development. The national spatial strategy, which sets out where the country is going in the next 20 years in that respect, is the first overall strategy ever adopted and we ensure that the allocations under the national development plan are aligned with national spatial strategy objectives.

One of the main tasks that must be done if we are to effect balanced regional development is to create critical mass in the regions. My own midlands region is a particular challenge because we do not have a city like Galway, Sligo, Limerick, Cork, Waterford or Letterkenny-Derry. An examination of some of the income disparities indicates that the central midlands region, from Longford to rural Carlow, are the areas of most deprivation in rural Ireland. Thankfully, the west has progressed immeasurably. Galway is the fastest growing city in Ireland. It is a tremendous city. I accept there are challenges. Senator Cox mentioned the health services. I was glad, as Minister for Health and Children, to invest over €70 million to develop that area. It had to be done and is being done.

The paediatrics service will not get any money until 2011. We have no BreastCheck service. The Minister promised €70 million in 1997.

Order, please.

I listened to the Senator in silence. On the Senator's specific question about the paediatric unit, etc., we can take it up with the Minister for Health and Children but major investments have been made in the health services and the road network in the west. Regarding the National Development Plan 2007-2013, I have reprioritised the Limerick-Galway road, including the outer orbital for Galway. That was the first job to be done after the national motorway system was completed. We are now bringing forward the plans regarding that matter to ensure that Transport 21 will affect that roadway to be done. The Senator has also heard the proposal about the rail and so on.

I do not want to get into a contentious argument with the Senator on these matters but there are many positive developments in the BMW region generally. The western corridor road, for example, will be a major counterbalancing point in terms of national transport systems. Incidentally, all of those roads go through the midlands. They will not be in my constituency but we will not complain about that. We intend to make our way in the world as best we can. The population is rising in the west, thankfully. Many developments are taking place there. The historic position of the west has dramatically changed in the past ten years. There is more work to be done——

And a lot to do.

——and the regional disparities will not be eliminated overnight but I refer the Senator to the ESRI report which shows they are reducing. I have confirmed that the national spatial strategy and the alignment of national development funding in the next seven years will greatly accelerate that trend in the right direction. It is true that unless we effect regional development and ensure that is our top priority in the coming years, the imbalance in development we have seen could continue. We want to stop that. We devised the spatial strategy to overcome it but that is not to say we should not have had development in the first place. This country has come from a period of under-capitalisation historically but with the level of economic activity we have achieved we must ensure there is greater balance in that activity, not just in the west but in my part of the country as well. In terms of IDA approved jobs, the west has done much better than my region.

We had a road that was due to be finished in 2006. It will not be finished until 2010.

There are universities and multinational companies in the west. University College Galway is doing tremendously well in terms of research moneys, etc., because of its excellent relationship with——

They cannot get to the university because the road system is failing us.

——all of those companies. I am proud, as I am sure is the Senator, to be a member of a party that has expanded university places by 40,000 in the past ten years. While I realise there are many in the Opposition who would like to highlight some shortcomings, as there will be in every walk of life at any time no matter how prosperous we are, I would make the point that the Government benches have plenty of ammunition to throw if they want to put forward a more accurate and balanced view as to our position vis-à-vis where we were previously.

On a point of order, the Minister said the figures were incorrect. The Department of Finance stated this morning that 80% of the money will not be spent in 2007.

That is not a procedural point of order. I ask the Senator to resume her seat.

I will provide full clarification for the Senator and an accurate picture of the situation.

Is Second Stage agreed?

Question put.

On the question, "That the Bill be now read a Second Time", a division was called. In the absence of two tellers, the division will not proceed.

A Chathaoirligh——

There was plenty of time to appoint tellers. We have been waiting but they have not been appointed.

Nobody asked.

A Chathaoirligh, I have offered to be a teller.

The time is up. The division will not proceed.

You are saving the party, a Chathaoirligh.

On a point of order, the reason a teller was not asked is that I did not realise there was a time limit, which is my fault. I have two tellers; another Senator has agreed to be a teller with me. That should be put on the record.

I have made my ruling.

I accept the ruling that there will not be a division.

I was not notified of the tellers and the division will not proceed.

Question declared carried.

When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?

At 2 p.m. tomorrow.

Committee Stage ordered for Thursday, 29 March 2007.
Sitting suspended at 1.55 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Top
Share