asked the Minister for Finance whether he is aware that many people are disinclined to cut and sell turf in view of the way in which, in some areas, valuations have been increased because of the cutting and selling of turf; and whether, in order, by allaying such fears, to encourage the cutting of turf during the year 1947, he will cause the Valuation Acts to be amended so as to provide that the valuation of any land or turf bog or turf bank shall not be increased by reason of the cutting or the selling of turf therefrom in the year 1947.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Valuation of Turf Banks.
I am not aware that many people are disinclined to cut and sell turf because of increases in valuations and I am not prepared to ask the Oireachtas to amend the law on the lines suggested by the Deputy. Considering that the existing practice of valuing turbary has been in operation for a century, that the scale of valuation is moderate and that it is open to the ratepayer at any time to apply for a revision downwards in the event of a fall in net receipts the change advocated by the Deputy would not be justified. It would also be unfair to other ratepayers inasmuch as they would have to shoulder the burden of rates at present payable by owners of turbary and it might give rise to claims for similar concessions in respect of other hereditaments.
Is it not quite incorrect to say that failure to increase the valuation of these people would throw an additional burden on the rates and that none of the burden at present on the rates could be relieved in any way? This refers to the additional new valuation for the purpose of giving relief, if you like, to present ratepayers. The Minister must be aware that there is a large number of people who do not wish to go in for turf cutting because of the threat held over their heads.
I am not so aware. The increased valuation is very small compared with the annual income derived from the turbary which has been developed. The Act has been there for over a century, has been operated for over a century, and was operated by the Deputy when he was Minister for Local Government. I cannot see any reason why it should be changed.
Might I point out that there is an emergency with regard to fuel at present and that every possible obstacle in the way of the people cutting turf should be removed; that in certain cases substantial increases in valuation have taken place; that increases have taken place inequitably and unfairly throughout the country; that the people are afraid of that and have expressed their fears, as I indicated in specific cases here recently?
I am not aware that they are taking place inequitably. The Commissioner of Valuation has to do his duty fairly between the county council, who invoke his powers, and the individual concerned.
Are we to take it that the Government have taken an irrevocable decision that, even during the emergency, these valuations will be increased under the Acts as they at present stand in respect of turf that is cut and is sold?
The Government are just carrying out the law and the Commissioner of Valuation does not operate the law unless the preliminary steps are taken, that is, that the county council request him to make a revaluation.
Is it not a fact this law was passed to deal with times which were absolutely and completely different from the most difficult time which we are experiencing at present, and that it did not contemplate circumstances in which this country would be relying on turf for fuel to the enormous extent to which we are at the present moment?
It will be changed next September when we are going into the winter.
It is not in operation at all.
Not in certain counties, but in some counties it is.