I attended last night a meeting of the Buncrana ratepayers where this part of the Bill was discussed. There are three things that I would like to put before the Minister as a result of my own reading of the Bill and understanding of the situation as it exists in Buncrana and as a result of some of the proposals put before me at the meeting of ratepayers, which consisted of all political Parties. It was a meeting of all ratepayers and we had represented all political Parties and all organisations.
The first point is that they are in favour of accepting the Schedule, with this suggestion to the Minister; and the suggestion refers to the grading, that is, starting with £8,500 and adding to that basic figure an increase of £330 to the valuation per year for county-atlarge charges. You will notice that £330 is the figure added each year to the £8,500. The Minister explained that that figure was arrived at by finding the valuations for the four years 1946, 1947, 1948 and 1949 and finding an average of those and adding that to the old valuation. Now the people at the meeting, and I as well, do not quarrel with finding an average, but we do not agree that the four years chosen were suitable years on which to base an average.
I would point out to the Minister that during those four years there was a period of intense building activity in the town of Buncrana, one of the reasons being that mentioned by Deputy McMenamin, that it was a boom town during the emergency period for the reasons Deputy McMenamin has stated. The emergency being over, the war being over, money and materials and so on being available, increased building activity did occur to the extent that during the four years on which the Minister has based his calculations two shirt factories were erected, one hosiery factory was extended considerably, an urban council building scheme of 48 houses for the people of Buncrana was erected, and over and above that, there was a spate of reconstruction and very many private houses were built. To base an average which is going to affect the town of Buncrana for the next ten years on the four most prosperous years that Buncrana ever had or ever will have is not fair, I think. They do agree that an average should be found, and it has been suggested to me, and I agree with this suggestion, that seeing that the average is going to remain for another ten years, it would be only fair to go back for a period of ten years and arrive at an average based on the increase for those ten years. I would put that suggestion very strongly to the Minister. I have not studied what the figures for those ten years were but I do know that they would be nothing like what the increases in valuation that did take place for those four years were. I think it is most unfair to base it on those. The meeting last night, and I myself now, put that to the Minister as a suggestion, as a basis on which to arrive at something fair, something which would not go all the way but will go a good part of the way to meet the situation. I might mention that during those four years a very big dance hall was also built, which further increased the valuation.
The next point in connection with this that I want to mention is that already from the period when the higher valuations came into operation a sum of £8,000 has been paid to the county council. That is, since 1951 up to 1953 a sum of over £8,000 over and above their just payments has been made to the Donegal County Council. Had this Bill come into operation in 1951 rather than now it would have saved the ratepayers of Buncrana a total sum of £8,000. If an injustice is being remedied under this Bill, and I grant that it is being remedied, I want the Minister to go further and remedy the injustice of having Buncrana paying £8,000 to the Donegal County Council over and above what they should pay had this Bill been effective and over and above what any other town of the same population and valuation in the county has to pay. I urge that a method be found to recoup those ratepayers on that score. I know it is impossible to get the county council to fork out the £8,000 that has been paid and I suggest that this Bill be amended in such a way as to save that £8,000 over a period of ten years by reducing the figure added each year.
I want the Minister to do two things. I want him to reduce the figure of £330 to £250 because it is based on an exceptional period; I want him to further reduce that figure by such amount as will recoup the ratepayers of Buncrana the £8,000 they have been unjustly asked to pay to the Donegal County Council.
The third point I want to mention is in relation to licence duty, Schedule A income-tax and electricity charges. When the revision took place in Buncrana and the figure jumped from £7,000 to £11,000—it is now over £12,000—these charges also jumped. The licence duty went up fairly steeply. Schedule A income-tax increased. So far the electricity charges are not affected but they will be so soon as preparations are completed to supply the town with E.S.B. current. Special arrangements have been made in relation to Schedule A income-tax with reference to the City of Waterford. Instead of paying on five-fourths of the valuation, as is done throughout the country, Waterford City for the very same reason as exists in Buncrana has received a special concession through the medium of legislation passed here and is getting off with four-fourths: in Waterford City they pay on the actual valuation instead of on five-fourths. I suggest the same concession should be given to Buncrana in relation to Schedule A income-tax and that the licence duty be amended as well.
