asked the Minister for Finance whether he will consider the introduction of proposals for legislation to prevent the arbitrary revaluation of improved premises, in view of the fact that such revaluation is a penal imposition on progressive improvement and further, whether it is possible to grant remission rather than increases in rates.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Revaluation of Improved Premises.
I do not accept the implication in the first part of the Deputy's question that arbitrary revaluation of improved premises is taking place. The valuation of a premises is revised by the valuation office only if the revision is specifically requested by the rating authority and such revision is carried out in accordance with law. It is not my intention to introduce proposals for legislation on the lines suggested by the Deputy.
The second part of the question relates to matters which fall within the province of the Minister for Local Government.
Is the Minister aware that, invariably, in every appeal case to the Circuit Court regarding revaluations, the valuations have been substantially reduced? In view of that, would not the Minister think that the people who have to bring these cases to the Circuit Court should be relieved of the cost of doing so by getting his valuers to base their valuations more or less on the valuations that are fixed by the Circuit Court?
The valuers are not mine.
I take it that has always been the practice in recent years.
Always.
Therefore, I take it, further, that the Minister's Party, when they suggested in the last three and a half years that the Government were asking for revaluations arbitrarily, were wrong?
At the same time it is quite true that the then Government reaped the advantage of these valuations as we hope to do. If a man is not paying his rates or taxes, why should we not try to make the matter right?
Squeeze all you can out of him. That is your policy.
Question No. 21.
After Deputy Cosgrave, there is not much left to squeeze.