Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 11 Jun 1975

Vol. 282 No. 1

Wealth Tax Bill, 1975: Committee Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That section 2 stand part of the Bill."

The last Coalition speaker seemed to imply that Deputy Collins should not have referred to the number of people who are unemployed. He described it as trivialising the Bill before us. Who is to look after the interest of the massive number of people unemployed at the moment if we are not to refer to them? Who will ensure that the Government live up to their promises and act in a way that will bring back employment to those people? I said recently that the Government are doing everything in their power to buy off the unemployed. They are trying to ensure that the amount of outcry is cut to the minimum by giving out the dole. Surely anybody who has any realisation of the situation must know that they can only go on for so long and that the only positive contribution the Coalition can make to the unemployment situation is to create new jobs for those people.

A type of publicity campaign is going on at the moment implying that people do not want to work, that they are better off drawing the dole and that people actually earn more from unemployment benefit with pay-related benefit than they would in a job. How many of those 103,000 unemployed would prefer to be working? What dignity is there in joining a dole queue and drawing unemployment money every week in comparison to going out to work and using your sweat to get a fair return in monetary terms? It will require much more than money and promises to keep the 103,000 unemployed people silent in future. The time is rapidly approaching, despite the best efforts of the media to cover up the chinks appearing in the Government, when the people will realise that the Government have been a total failure. All the promises made before the last election have now been shown up for what they were. They were only promises.

Unanimity is growing up among the people that things are very bad but they are progressively getting worse. Scarcely a day passes without a headline appearing in the paper telling us about the closure of an industry. The normal headline is: "A further factory closes down". Many of us do not have to take up the papers to know that factories are closing down.

I think the Deputy is wandering away from the discussion on section 2.

I am not. I submit that the debate since last night has been on this point.

Acting Chairman

I was not in the Chair. The Deputy is getting away from section 2.

This is directly applicable to section 2. We are saying that the introduction of the wealth tax at this moment does nothing to solve the unemployment situation. It will create a situation where more unemployment will occur. I do not believe any of us is in doubt about that. I have asked before in the House what nation can survive on the lunacy of the live now and pay later type of Government we have? I do not believe it can be denied that in the past two years we have mortgaged our future for the next ten years. The Government are expending their energies trying to devise new and improved methods of taxing wealth, which is not there. It is because of the very measures that the Government are now taking that wealth will never be there.

Acting Chairman

I am afraid the Deputy is wandering completely away from section 2.

I am afraid you are being misinformed by the civil servant in front of you.

Acting Chairman

Those speaking last night and earlier today related their statements to section 2. The Deputy is not doing that. He is wandering on about the economy in general.

I sat in the House from 10.30 this morning until 3 o'clock and I listened to every contribution made. This is the first time, in a reference to unemployment, that any speaker has been reprimanded. I suggest you are wrongly informed of the situation. It would be interesting to go back and read the record for this morning if you want evidence. Unemployment is directly related to the imposition of taxation, no matter what type it is, whether it is wealth tax or any other tax. At a time when a spirit of initiative and enterprise is called for these qualities are destroyed by the introduction of this type of stupid, ideological legislation. As Deputy Collins said this morning this has been brought about by the Labour Party insisting on being in a position to go back to their people using the slogan: "We made sure they introduced legislation which will tax the wealthy". What a misnomer. That must be the greatest lie of all time after the 14-point plan. The people who will be affected by this type of capital taxation are the humblest workers in factories. People are debarred because of the penal taxation we are about to introduce from using their entrepreneur, initiative and enterprise and the first to be affected are the workers.

Far from putting the man they are supposed to be going after out of business they are increasing the dole queues. We are coming to the stage when those who try to do something constructive are penalised and those who succeed are squeezed. I can see in operation a frenzied policy of envy, a policy of begrudging. I challenge any member of the Labour Party to say if anyone of them employs anybody. Do they know anything about how business is conducted, about what is entailed in trying to build up a successful business, about the hurdles and hardships that have to be overcome, about the shortage of credit? How often do we have employers getting less out of the business than the employees at the end of the week?

The inevitable result of these type of capital taxation policies will be to kill off any man who is prepared to risk his money in industry, who is prepared to start a new business or to increase his existing business; indeed, who is prepared to invest from borrowed money in the vague hope that at some time in the future he may be able to pay not the capital but the interest. At this stage in our development national economic leadership was never so badly needed. At Question Time the Minister for Industry and Commerce pathetically tried to hold a situation that was untenable. Factories are closing down, unemployment is increasing and there is no money for various Government schemes. That Minister boasted about an export promotion that yielded £150,000. It was because the Minister led that promotion that it was given such publicity.

I led an all-party delegation to Libya recently and the orders that resulted from our visit have exceeded substantially the amount the Minister is now boasting of. It is pathetic that we have a Government who are burying their heads in the sand, clinging to some outmoded socialistic ideology that the wealthy must be taxed so that we will have enough money to distribute. Last night Deputy Desmond said only a few hundred would be subject to this tax but if this is the case what will be the cost of collecting? What will be the return?

Near my constituency we had a situation where one of the biggest American companies — it was rated in the top twenty companies in the world —was about to start an industry for the manufacture of computers and calculators but because of the attitude of this Government that concern pulled out of the scheme thereby depriving 500 people of jobs. When I attended the meeting of the southern committee of Cork County Council on Monday we were informed that a crisis situation has developed in the southern committee area where there is a shortfall of more than £3 million. As a result, further jobs are in jeopardy. This has meant that we have lost 2,000 new jobs which were about to be created in Cork Harbour. This occurred because we did not have the money to put in the proper water and sewerage schemes and the jobs will not materialise.

The time of the House is being wasted by the introduction of penal legislation at a time when we should be introducing incentives to people to create new jobs. In May, 103,000 people were unemployed and funds were found to try to buy their silence. However, nothing has been done to try to cure the disease. As long as public outcry can be bought off until the next general election the Coalition feel they have done a proper job. The fact that every day that passes we sink deeper into the morass does not seem to matter at all to the responsible Ministers.

It has become obvious to anybody who studies the political scene that the needs of our economy are totally subservient to the short-term personal political needs of those who govern us. We have the ridiculous situation brought about by the Minister for Justice in the Seanad who is trying to introduce the Criminal Law (Jurisdiction) Bill. I do not know what the Minister is at. What relevance or importance has that Bill now? Our people are crying out for new jobs but the Government see as their most important function the introduction of a Bill that is meaningless towards the creation of employment. Maybe, if the British Government cracked the whip and told our Government that they must provide more jobs for our people, as they cracked the whip in regard to the Criminal Law (Jurisdiction) Bill, we might get more action.

Individually, the members of this Government are intelligent men but collectively they seem to act like idiots and that is something I cannot fathom. Surely there is a member of the Government who can use a grain of common sense and suggest that they all get down to the business of running the country. It is great having the PROs, the publicity, Dr. Cruise-O'Brien and the Minister for Education going on the radio and television —they are nice and articulate people —but that is not their job. Their job is to manage the economy of the country. If they were to be judged on the results of that management in any commercial enterprise they would not be employed for very long.

Does anybody care to remember the infamous 14-point plan that was put before the people at the last general election to stabilise prices, halt redundancies, reduce unemployment, and produce a planned programme of economic development? This must now be one of the sickest jokes of the century. Our transport and electricity costs have soared, but we introduced capital taxation; our industrial exports for the first time in ten years have dropped, but we introduce capital taxation, the Criminal Law (Jurisdication) Bill and discuss irrelevancies such as BBC 1, BBC 2 and RTE 2. Of course, this is the smokescreen to hide the reality of what is going on. It is a pity that we have not on the Government side the late Deputy Sweetman. Whether one agreed with him politically or not one knew that when it came to the business of the country he had his head firmly screwed on. He would not tolerate the type of messing that is going on now, the type of half-baked legislation we are getting, the type of legislation which is emanating from a shotgun marriage between pink-eyed conservatives on one side and punch-drunk socialists on the other.

That marriage, like the previous two marriages, will not work out. Costs and prices are soaring and our workers are being asked to restrain themselves and not look for more wages. No one can blame the workers looking for more in order to stay afloat, not to mind save or put away for the future. They need more wages in order to pay for the huge increases occurring daily. Why did the Government not throw in the towel and say they could not control prices?

Can we blame the workers for trying to protect their wives and families in a situation like that? If we were to stop this form of lunacy now, maybe we could make some recovery? There is some recognition for the first time that we have a crisis on our hands. I suppose we must be thankful for the fact that recognition has dawned on somebody of the enormity of the crisis. But what are we going to do about it? The Taoiseach who, in fairness to him, was never afraid to speak out the truth, has said we were living on borrowed time and on the goodwill of our creditors. It was rather significant that this was in the evening papers but was deleted from some of the morning papers the following day. Maybe somebody in the Government Information Services thought we had gone a bit too far. However, he is an honest man. He told the truth. That is the exact situation. We are living on borrowed time and on the goodwill of our creditors, and unless we pull up our socks immediately, there will be no future for this country.

In my constituency the town of Kinsale 16 years ago was virtually a ghost town, but because of incentives, encouragement and the building up of the advantages of Kinsale as an area for industrial development, it became a town of full employment. Alas, in the past two years that town is again approaching the situation of a dead town unless the Government change course and encourage more and more industrialists to set up industry here. It is all very fine to talk about the flight from the land, but unless we can provide industrial employment next door to agricultural employment, then we are going to have this flight from the land. There is no way in which wealth tax, capital acquisitions tax or capital gains tax will put an extra slice of bread into the mouths of poor people. The only way is to create new jobs, to give people the opportunity of earning more money, thus giving to their families and to the community a higher standard of living. The men of 1916 gave their lives in order that we might achieve that. There are one or two Ministers in the Government who would ask us to forget about 1916, that it was just one big bad dream, that it never occurred. But that is what those men died for, to give us the opportunity of working in our own country and giving our children those same opportunities.

What can be done about the situation? It is very hard when you are in opposition to make suggestions to a Government who seem to be totally deaf to the protests that are emanating from all sides about their capital taxation programme. However, the first thing I would say was vital was for the Government to create a mood of confidence among investors that we are a country who are not going to welsh on any deals or contracts we have entered into, that we are a country where your industry will not be nationalised the following morning, and that we are a country that can supply probably the best and most educated labour force in the world.

There are things we must impress on prospective investors. I am afraid we are not doing it. Confidence seems to be completely lost as regards what is happening in this country. The Minister for Labour, Mr. O'Leary, said recently:

The greatest danger of all is that many firms struggling now to keep their heads above water will sink for ever.

I want to ask him and his colleagues what are they doing about ensuring that these firms which are trying to keep their heads above water will not sink for ever. Is introducing taxation a method of ensuring that they will not sink? Is the introduction of a penal system in relation to thrift and hard work and enterprise going to ensure that they will not sink? I say that it is time the members of this Government, and especially the Labour members, woke up and realised what business is about. We are told that Ireland's rate of inflation is the worst in the Community. Can anyone tell me what one positive step has been taken to curb inflation?

The farmer who is the backbone of the economy, under the wealth tax proposals is subject to £1,000 fine if he does not give information on his neighbour. "Spy for us or else you are fined £1,000". Surely that is going back 70 or 80 years in the treatment of the people, when we ask the farmer to spy on his neighbour, to give information to the Revenue Commissioners so that he can be taxed or he is fined £1,000. That is a ludicrously stupid situation at this moment of economic crisis. I suppose that the euphoria of attaining office has not yet given way to the realisation of what government is about, the harsh realities of government, and maybe they are not aware of the facts of our economic situation and what can be done about them. I think the Government have thrown in the towel and have said "Leave it to the PR men. We pay them enough and we employ enough of them so let them cover for us", and there are many PR people working in the Government Information Service who will have to earn their money if they are to continue to cover up for the Government. The day of reckoning is very close; when the people are going to demand action and not alone action but constructive action by this Government.

One of the most popular misconceptions about the Government's capital taxation proposals is that they will affect only the very rich, but the contrary is true. The poor people will be the first to suffer. The cost of these proposals, particularly the annual wealth tax, will undoubtedly find its way into the prices of various commodities and add to our already crippling cost of living. Prices are going to increase and workers are going to demand more wages and the cycle will go on and on, all because of the action of the Government. In so far as these capital taxation proposals inhibit enterprise, they will cause the loss of further jobs, as they have already done, as is evidenced by the results for many of the firms which we discussed at question time; but more important, they are going to hinder the creation of any new jobs, and all this at a time when we have the worst unemployment situation we have had since the last Coalition were in office.

The Government have also refused to build into their proposals an automatic adjustment of the threshold for liability in line with inflation. One would imagine that inflation did not exist, and yet it is running at 28 per cent per annum at the moment, the highest in any of the EEC countries. The result is many thousands of Irish people who now think these proposals will never affect them will find themselves very shortly caught up in the net, and Deputy Barry Desmond was being honest on the radio when he said that once the principle had been accepted, it was an easy matter after that to adjust the rate, thus clearly indicating to us and the people in the country the danger of this tax. The slogan of "Tax the wealthy" is a great slogan but eventually it is going to include practically everybody.

I submit that the Coalition's capital taxation programme will directly, or indirectly, affect every man, woman and child in this country and that as a result some of them may have to emigrate, others may not be able to go into the type of employment for which they deem their qualifications suitable, and others will have to join the lengthening dole queues. I have had the extraordinary situation over the past couple of weeks of having graduates coming looking for a job, not a teaching job—some of them had their B.A. and Higher Diploma—but any job. Surely we cannot sit complacently here and look at a situation in which what we consider the cream of our country, on whom there has been a substantial investment by the taxpayers, coming out of our universities and looking for a job. One person said to me "As long as I do not have to queue at the dole office, I will work at anything". The Coalition Government have a lot to answer for in putting young people in that position.

Before the last election, there was a great fanfare of trumpets about death duties being abolished. Everybody took the announcement at its face value and considered that this slogan of the Coalition was one of the principal reasons in rural Ireland for their getting into government. Nobody ever said then that these were to be replaced by another tax, another form of duty called an inheritance tax. I would go further and say that death duties being abolished, they have been replaced by three different taxes, wealth tax, capital gains tax and inheritance tax, because this Government are so hungry for money that they are just not going to stop at any source where they see any few pounds showing their heads. We all know that this a most short-sighted policy and a sure recipe for economic disaster.

What are we going to do about it? Are we going to sit down and objectively examine the details of our capital taxation proposals? Are we going to ask ourselves if section 2 of the Wealth Tax Bill is really necessary. Is it making any positive contribution to our economic development? If the Government answer honestly it must say that it is not and that in fact the opposite is happening; it is an economic liability. I have no doubt that the introduction of wealth tax will retard our economic development. It has already done so as I have instanced. In our case with an economy so much less developed than in the case of our EEC partners wealth tax is economic nonsense at present. Whoever in the Government had this brain child should be taken out and shot.

Some of our wealthiest partners in the EEC have no wealth tax, and those that have operate it on a much more restricted basis than is proposed here. I cannot think of anything better calculated to inhibit people from investing, taking risks and creating employment than this tax. Even more important is the effect on foreign investment. Nothing could be more calculated to deter and discourage that type of investment. Yet, this is what the Government are doing. Even they must realise that any taxation proposals at this time are undesirable, with inflation running at about 28 per cent, with unemployment about 104,000, an annual increase of 32 per cent in prices and a huge and dangerous balance of payments. I am particularly concerned that in the past two years our agricultural industry has gone through its worst-ever period. Many firms are now close to bankruptcy due to shortage of cash and no growth in the economy. This type of situation demands dynamic leadership from the Government, and we get capital taxation proposals.

I hear Coalition speakers in this House and at by-elections saying that we have a very serious economic situation but it is outside our control, that it is an imported crisis; yet we are introducing legislation that will compound that crisis and ensure we never recover from it. The Minister for Finance has adopted a conservative laissez faire attitude towards the whole problem, and instead of tackling our problems he has been spending the time of this House and of his Department on capital taxation proposals which would present problems far worse than those we already have and yield perhaps a tiny revenue to the State.

We are wasting the time of the House debating legislation such as that now before us. Fianna Fáil will give all Bills detailed examination and debate, but it is necessary to convince us that the time and energy of the House are not being wasted on matters largely irrelevant to the problems facing us especially in rural Ireland. The Minister will not even build into the new taxation an automatic adjustment to keep it in line with inflation. Instead, he says we will review the position from time to time. Of what is he afraid? He has already shown that he will not agree with an automatic adjustment for inflation in income tax by means of personal allowances but again he promises a regular review. If that promise is like the 14-point plan we got before the last election, we know what it is worth. The result of that dilatory attitude of the Minister is that personal allowances are increased by 15 per cent while the latest yearly figure for inflation shows an increase of 24 per cent.

The Government's proposals are totally unfair to the self-employed man. These people trying to provide for retirement in the present inflationary situation are being hammered from every direction. With the present proposals and the inflation they cannot make any plans for retirement. It is an impossible situation. I suppose a wealth tax would make some economic sense in a buoyant economy and would certainly make some sense if productive assets were excluded. But they are not. Surely we need to employ productively the maximum amount of assets we can lay our hands on. Having taxed those assets already the Government, with this legislation, intend to tax them further. Whether the assets are used productively or not is immaterial to this Government; they are just a subject for taxation. This is economic lunacy where you have an economy which demands more investment and creation of more new jobs. I do not know how it will end, but I think that rather than having a just society we shall have a "bust" society. Nobody will get any pleasure from that.

We must continue to impress on the Government the dangers in the course of action they are taking. The managing director of the Bank of Ireland Group has said that loan demands continue to be slack, that they would be underlent during the next six months. Surely that is one of the most significant statements we have had in recent times. In other words the money is there but there is nobody to lend it to. The confidence of the business community has been shattered by the policy of this Government. Business people will not pay up to 16 per cent interest for money that will be eroded by inflation and capital taxation. Why should they render themselves victims of a bankruptcy court?

Young people leaving school are facing a dismal future. The dole queues continue to grow and industries that were founded and nurtured during Fianna Fáil's terms of office are now closing down. In every Department of Government there is total failure and, as we know, each Department is linked directly with the Department of Finance but in the absence of a thriving economy every Department will be a total failure. Since Fianna Fáil left office in 1973, fertiliser prices, for instance, have trebled and the prices of young cattle are a third of what they were then.

This is hardly relevant to the section.

It is directly relevant to the section.

Acting Chairman

It would be more relevant to a debate on the economy.

The farmer is to be the subject of wealth taxation. Surely his industry is important to him. Although cattle prices are only a third of what they were in 1973, the farmer is to be taxed further at a time when we should be offering him every help possible. No doubt, in the near future, section 2 of this Bill will apply not only to the big farmer but to the medium-sized and small farmer. Gradually, everybody will be brought into the insidious net of capital taxation. The imposition of this tax will place farmers' sons in an impossible position on inheriting family farms.

There is the question, too, of those farmers who engage in a small amount of work by way of hire for their neighbours. These people would be taxed both on their farm and on their hire work incomes. Not only this but the whole system of neighbourly co-operation would be destroyed in this way. Also, farmers will be required, at the risk of enormous fines, to spy on their neighbours, to tell the taxman how many cattle, sheep and pigs their neighbours have and what buildings they have erected.

A heading in the Farming Independent of May 10 referred to the wealth tax being a big shock and to one man being fined £1,000 for failing to spy on his neighbours. Surely farmers should not be taxed simply because of the efforts they have put into the building up of their holdings. Is it right that a farmer's son should be rendered bankrupt as a result of inheriting the family farm?

So far we have heard nothing regarding this Bill from the so-called spokesmen of the farmers—the NFA.

(Cavan): That is because they have read the Bill, that they understand it and realise that it will not affect them.

As the Minister for Lands illustrated last night, he does not understand it either. If Fianna Fáil were in Government at this time, the Deputy Fitzpatricks would be creating agitation. We would have a situation where it would be difficult to get in through the gates of Leinster House. There are no mass demonstrations by the farmers as there were in the Fianna Fáil days although those days were the best that farmers have ever experienced.

I wonder what has happened to those people who claim to be on the farmers' side? We might expect our farmers to be treated badly by this Government which comprises a vast majority of city personnel, of persons who have a distinct metropolitan bias. How can they understand what life is like for the farmers? They cannot know of how difficult is the farmer's life, of how very often he must attend to a cow calving during the night. At a time when we are introducing a wealth tax the farmer's income has dropped by more than 20 per cent and if we have regard to an inflation rate of more than 24 per cent, we can realise what is the overall decrease in his income. This proposal is an exercise of cynical power-grabbing by the Coalition.

The one outstanding success the Government have had is in media control. They certainly have controlled the media. They have made sure that anything detrimental to the Government will not be published, that the Government will be projected as a Government of intellectuals, an open Government, a Government with a social conscience, a Government who are united.

Acting Chairman)

This has nothing at all to do with section 2 of the Wealth Tax Bill.

It is very relevant to the Wealth Tax Bill for the reason that during the last election the Coalition Government promised the abolition of death duties but never said that they would replace them by wealth tax, inheritance tax, capital gains tax. That is the power grab I am talking about.

This is where the Coalition have been successful, in covering up this type of power grab and the total failure of every department of Government. I am reminded of the story of the Minister for Love, the Minister for Love being of course Herr Goebbels, Deputy Conor Cruise-O'Brien himself, who ensures that all we get from the media is love, a representation of a wonderful bunch of fellows doing a great job for their country, making no mistakes, that there is no crisis, that everything in the garden is rosy, that housebuilding is at a record rate, with no reference to the fact that unemployment is at a record rate, that inflation, foreign borrowing and everything else that bodes ill for the economy is at a record rate.

I suppose the Government believe that by the management of the news media they can bluff the people into believing that any little success they have attained is due to the celebrated brilliance of the Government and that the fact that the whole economy is crashing about their ears is due to outside influence. The truth is slowly dawning on the more observant that everything in the garden is not rosy and that in spite of the Tullymander of the constituencies the next election will be the Waterloo of the Coalition Government. We have an obligation in this House to expel those political pirates who got in under false pretences in 1973, before the country is brought to its knees.

As representatives of our people, we cannot let the occasion pass without referring to the dismal record of the Coalition in relation to the provision of new jobs. I want to know why a town like Dunmanway was not given an industry despite promises by Coalition Ministers that it would be given an industry. I want to know why Dunmanway has not got an industry to absorb the male unemployment in that town and why that town has been discriminated against by the Government. If employment is not provided in rural Ireland there will be an exodus of the rural population.

Submissions have been made by groups as to the effect the wealth tax will have on business. These groups, who are politically independent, have demonstrated clearly to the Minister for Finance that the course being pursued by the Government is one of disaster, especially for family owned firms. Family owned firms which comprise the majority of firms in the country and which provide the major proportion of employment will be crucified under this penal legislation. What is needed now is a regeneration of the confidence necessary for family owned firms to expand their businesses. The best way that that can be done is by dropping these stupid proposals, by doing the big thing and the decent thing, acknowledging that a mistake was made in introducing these proposals, that they were introduced in the euphoria of winning an election and that the Government did not realise what they were doing. The Government should drop these proposals now. In this way they will be doing a public service. If the Government do not drop these proposals, it behoves every businessman, every farmer, every self-employed person to unite and to organise for the purpose of opposing this legislation because their future is doomed if the legislation goes through. We have to fight this Wealth Tax Bill if the Government will not acknowledge its shortcomings. We have to ensure that voices of protest go out from Parliament against it and that the people learn that its implementation will spell economic disaster for the country. We want a just society. We do not want a "bust" society. Having regard to the attitude of the Government, it is more likely that we will have a "bust" society.

The rate of wealth tax in a country like Denmark, for instance, is 0.9 per cent above the threshold and this rate is reduced if taxable income is less than 6 per cent of taxable net wealth and if there is no taxable income the net wealth tax is reduced by 80 per cent to an effective——

What is the Deputy reading from?

I am reading from the document that the Deputy has and that Deputy Belton read from this morning.

What is the document?

Wealth Tax and the Economy by the Save Ireland Group.

Does that document refer to abolition of death duties in the other countries?

I did not mention anything about death duties.

Read it in the context of the Irish situation.

The Deputy is being mischievous.

As long as the Deputy stays on the section he is in order.

(Cavan): What is the threshold in Denmark?

Does the Deputy know that?

If the Deputy had the guts to make a speech instead of whispering to Ministers during the debate there would be much more respect for him.

The Deputy knows I have been on my feet already in this debate.

In Germany the rate is 1 per cent above the threshold but the wealth tax is deductible for income tax purposes.

(Cavan): The Deputy should tell us what is the threshold in Denmark.

Was the Minister not listening to Deputy Belton?

(Cavan): I should like the Deputy to tell me.

It is important that the Minister realises what this Bill contains.

It is obvious the Deputy does not know what he is talking about.

It is more obvious that Deputy Esmonde has not the guts to say what he knows about it. I am surprised an Esmonde has been gagged in this way.

This Esmonde has not been gagged.

Why does he not talk on the Bill?

I do not come into the House and talk nonsense for a few hours.

The Deputy does not come into the House and talk.

Acting Chairman

Deputy Crowley should talk on section 2 without interruption.

We had the appalling spectacle of the Minister for Lands coming in here this morning when he was forced to contradict what he said last night because he did not understand the Bill. Yet he had the audacity to tell somebody else he did not understand the Bill. He has not been in the House when we discussed it and I doubt if it came before him at cabinet level. Now he is being given the information about the thresholds in the various countries by a civil servant. The ignorance of the Minister in relation to this Bill has been more revealing than anything else here. It should be a mandatory exercise for every member of the Coalition to come here and listen. They might learn what the Bill is about.

Acting Chairman

The Deputy is not entitled to refer to civil servants in the way he did in the last few minutes.

I did not name anyone. Surely I am entitled to mention civil servants?

Acting Chairman

The Deputy must not refer to civil servants in this House.

Acting Chairman

I would ask the Deputy to speak on the section.

We have a situation where unemployment is at its highest level and where factories are closing daily. We have a government who want to close more factories. We have their stooges behind them, smiling their way through it all. The attitude is that the situation is critical but not serious. It is time the Government woke up and put the interests of the country before their own interests.

It might be asked what else we could expect from a Government who are mainly Dublin-based politicians. They could do with an injection of a few rural-based Deputies who might put some common sense in their meditations. I fear for the economic future of the country. I have seen no indication that the Government have taken even one positive action to curb inflation and to create jobs.

One Minister told us about 16,000 new jobs but he said in a whisper afterwards that 24,000 jobs were lost, leaving a nett loss of 8,000 jobs. The economic indicators are that by the end of this year between 150,000 and 160,000 people will be unemployed but the only contribution we can make to the situation is to introduce capital taxation. We are proposing to tax the people who may be our only salvation and who are the only people capable of creating jobs. The Government's policy is to tax them until they have no money left for industrial expansion.

It grieves me to see what is happening the country. No politician likes to have people come to his clinic every week looking for work. As far as the public are concerned, we are the people who are running the country and they hold us responsible for the economy. Because of the massive cover-up exercise by the public relations men in the Government Information Service the facts have not permeated to the ordinary people. However they will do so, and when that happens we must look out for sparks because sparks will be flying. Shortly after that the Government will have to give an account of their political stewardship and I will be very surprised if the answer is not a vehement and adamant rejection of that account.

I hope the gloomy future I fear will not materialise. I hope there will be sunshine in the future but I do not see it. I do not see any Minister trying to convince me there is any sunshine on the horizon and I despair of this most of all. When these people who should know the situation and who have all the facts at their disposal say nothing they imply that they see no hope for the future.

Much propaganda was made of the fact that we must tax the wealthy and that they will be the only people affected by this tax. I hope I have demonstrated that every man, woman and child will be affected by this insidious tax. The Minister for Lands described this as innocuous. If it is innocuous why bring it in? We have shown that this legislation will be harmful to the economy. If it is innocuous why not withdraw it? But, no. This Minister like his Fine Gael colleagues is a prisoner of the Coalition ideology, an ideology that was outdated in the 1930s, so-called Socialism. If the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs and the Minister for Industry and Commerce had their way we would have a Socialist State here in which wealth tax would not pose any problem because every person would be doing what we are asking the farmers to do now, spying on each other.

The Deputy knows there is an amendment to the section and he is here simply to make mischief and mislead the public.

Have we a new Chairman?

Acting Chairman

The Chair will decide that.

Just on a point of information.

We must give Deputy Esmonde a fool's pardon. He is put in here to do a job.

At least I agree with the amendment.

The Deputy could have fooled me.

Acting Chairman

Would Deputy Crowley continue now on section 2?

If the two Ministers I mentioned had their way we would have a kind of Socialist State in which free enterprise would be done away with completely. Free enterprise is a dirty word in the Coalition Government at the moment. It is something you do not mention in the polite company they keep. I think it was Deputy Haughey described them as the "smoked salmon society". Free enterprise is a dirty word.

Like Taca.

What does the Deputy know about Taca?

Who does not? Who has not suffered?

Does the Deputy know the meaning of "Taca"?

We saw it operate.

Acting Chairman

I would remind Deputy Crowley we are discussing section 2 of the Wealth Tax Bill.

I can well understand Deputy Esmonde's frustration at the attitude of the Government, but let him not vent his frustrations here on me. Let him vent them on the proper people. Get them to get up off their backsides and do something positive instead of going around making speeches and getting their PROs to cover up for them. When I first saw the Criminal Jurisdiction Bill——

Acting Chairman

I must remind the Deputy we are not dealing with the Criminal Jurisdiction Bill at the moment, and would he kindly stay now on section 2 of the Wealth Tax Bill?

If the Acting Chairman will give me a chance I will show him how relevant it is.

Acting Chairman

We are not discussing the Criminal Jurisdiction Bill.

The Chair will not allow me to make my point. I was aware when I saw that Bill introduced that someone had cracked the whip and I realised it was a cover-up to take people's minds off the main issues.

The Deputy is ignoring the ruling of the Chair.

The Deputy should not interrupt. He is continually ignoring the ruling of the Chair and the rules of order of this House.

Acting Chairman

Deputy Crowley must keep to section 2 of the Bill now.

I am keeping to it. I know it is painful for Deputies opposite because under this section we can highlight the dismal performance of the Coalition Government and the economic ruin they have wrought, and the introduction of another piece of legislation is a smokescreen which may work temporarily but will not work in the long term. We have the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs with his BBC 1, 2, 3 and 4. He sees the need, being a good politician, to divert people's attention away from realities, and so he gets them discussing television instead of the mismanagement of the economy by the Government. As far as we are concerned, we will ensure that the mismanagement of this Government is highlighted and that we do not have a situation in which the dole queues are numerically bigger than the number of people in employment.

Is the purpose of this section to abolish private property? That seems to be the long-term aim of the Government. I am surprised at Deputy Esmonde and others falling for this. Deputy Dockrell had the guts to speak out and say truly what he thought about the Bill. I am surprised Deputy Esmonde and others are not equally vociferous in their condemnation of this effort at abolishing private property. That is the fundamental issue. Many people in the past made the supreme sacrifice to ensure our right to private property. With the introduction of this Bill we may well find ourselves with another kind of landlord. Why should we adopt that attitude at this point of time? Why do the Fine Gael members of the Government allow it? Some of them are as convinced as I am of the right to private property and the necessity for a free enterprise economy. We know all Socialist systems have failed because the only way in which they can be maintained is by a secret police force, by armies, by censorship of the media——

We have that already.

The light is gradually getting through to the people. I referred to big brother Dr. Goebbels, the Minister for Love.

The Minister for Love?

Yes. We only get good news from the Minister for Love. He makes sure that any news emanating from him is good news.

Acting Chairman

Could we get back to section 2?

That is exactly what I am talking about. I hope Deputy Esmonde has guts to come back and support his colleague, Deputy Dockrell who told the truth about the Bill and who sees the implication of what it is about. We will have a socialist state. This is what the minority in the Government want. The minority are the controlling body of this Government. They want farmers to spy on each other and they also want the people to spy on each other. That is the only way a socialist system works. We should reject that system because it has proved to be unworkable in all the countries it has been tried in. It was as outmoded in 1930 as it is now.

We have a Government of so-called intellectuals introducing this type of legislation, which will do away with the right to private property and which will eventually do away with the free enterprise system. What Deputy Desmond said was true, and we know he is a confirmed socialist. He said on Radio Éireann that once the principle has been accepted it is an easy matter to adjust the rate afterwards. This clearly indicates the danger of this wealth tax. We might say that only the wealthy farmers will be affected now but next year it will be the less wealthy, the year after others will be affected until eventually everyone is brought in under the socialist umbrella.

We have a Government of intellectuals with their roving ambassador, Dr. Garret FitzGerald going all over the world solving everybody's problems but ours. We have Ministers concerned with everything else except the economic plight of the people. We do not hear any of them referring to the 104,000 in the dole queues because that is bad publicity. That is not what our PR men want us to talk about. They want us to talk about airy-fairy theories. They do not want us to get down to the nitty-gritty job of creating employment for the people and creating the right for them to have a job.

A Fine Gael Member said here a few years ago that governments have no obligation to create employment for the people. Fianna Fáil say they have an obligation to create employment, that the people have the right to employment and the right to a job they are suited for. I am afraid it is hoping for too much that the Coalition will take any notice whatsoever of the pleas coming from this side of the House. Maybe our pleas will be answered by the people through the ballot boxes in the not too distant future. They will give the answer to the Government's pathetic attempts at government during the past two years. I want to quote from the Official Report, Volume 278, No. 10, column 1543 what Deputy Bermingham said on this Bill:

I feel the Minister has not gone far enough in the wealth tax. He should have gone higher than 1 per cent. I believe he is on the right road and that at least he is trying to show that the Government are determined to be fair in regard to the taxation system. When the White Paper was issued it was stated that the rate would be 2½ per cent. Several representations were made to the Minister and he has now come up with what he considers to be a fair assessment at 1 per cent.

That is a very significant paragraph from the speech of Deputy Bermingham. That is more or less the statement of Deputy Desmond. He said: "Once the principle has been accepted it is an easy matter to adjust the rate."

We are now getting to the kernel of the issue. This is the brainchild of the new republican labour party of 1975. They want to tax the wealthy. Deputy Desmond comes in and says there are only a few hundred of those people and asks what all the furore is about. The Minister for Lands tells us it is an innocuous Bill. If it is who is pushing him into supporting it and, as a member of the Government, being a party to its introduction? I believe there is something far more insidious involved than the mere introduction of a taxation Bill. I believe there is a complete new principle in relation to the Government of the country involved in this, which is taking away our rights to private property and the continuance of the free enterprise system.

I am a dedicated supporter of the free enterprise system. I do not come from a wealthy family. I have not inherited wealth and I do not have somebody who can come along and give me £40,000 or even a much smaller sum. I come from working class people. The only system that I know that is right is the free enterprise system, not the system of communism which ensures that anybody who wants to become a tool of the state can be the same as the man who is working the hardest for that state. Of course, it is because we on this side of the House are the products of working class homes in the main that we are concerned about the employment situation of working class people on the introduction of this legislation.

We all know that the wealth tax per se is not going to affect a couple of hundred people as suggested by Deputy Desmond. Those people will get out fast and take their wealth elsewhere. Those who will be affected will be the people who would be employed as a result of the utilisation of that wealth of the couple of hundred mentioned by Deputy Desmond. We have the worst taxation record in Europe and foreign industrialists are deterred from coming here. This is happening at a time when we should be encouraging not alone the utilisation of our investments and capital but the inflow of capital necessary for the creation of new jobs. We should be making efforts to attract capital investment instead of putting obstacles in the way of those anxious to invest their money.

As a result of all this local authorities will not be able to carry out many of their schemes. There will be no inflow of capital with the result that they cannot borrow. We cannot condone mad cap legislation that will put so many jobs in jeopardy. Are the Government united on this or is it like the Contraceptive Bill that we will have some Members voting with us against this legislation?

The Deputy is straying from section 2.

The introduction of wealth tax is the greatest deterrent to the creation of new jobs. I cannot understand why the Government are taking this step. Is this the price Fine Gael have to pay to stay in Government? Had they to give into the mad socialism of Dr. Cruise-O'Brien and Deputy Keating?

The Chair has already pointed out that Deputies ought to keep to the section.

If the implementation of the wealth tax proposals is not relevant to section 2, what is?

The Deputy is embarking on a Second Reading speech.

The points I am making are also relevant to the Committee Stage. Everybody else was allowed to debate this matter in full with the exception of me. What has brought about the change in the rules in the meantime? The Leas-Cheann Comhairle has been in the Chair for a considerable time and he is aware of what has been said. I accept the ruling of the Chair. I challenge the members of the Government party to speak on this Bill, and not be hiding so that we know and, more important still, that the people know, exactly where we stand in relation to these proposals. We say the effect on employment will be disastrous. It will mean the closing down of factories, and the loss or curtailment of many jobs. The future is very bleak unless the Government drop this illtimed and ill-conceived Bill.

(Cavan): I should like to intervene for a brief period for the purpose of putting the record right with regard to a few matters. First, in connection with the liability to wealth tax of companies established here by foreign companies, Deputy George Colley yesterday afternoon read into the record a letter from Mr. Frank Reilly dealing with the tax as it applied to companies or industries established here by foreign companies. He was dealing, in fact, with companies established here by United States companies, and that is clear from the letter. Apparently Mr. Reilly thought, and Deputy Colley thought, that such companies would be liable for wealth tax.

I want to repeat now in the clearest possible terms that companies established here by and owned by foreign trading companies are not liable to tax. Assume for one moment that company A, a United States manufacturing company, set up a business or factory here. The company here, B, is incorporated here. The shares in Company B are held by the United States company A.

The Minister is correcting his own statement.

(Cavan): Company A is not liable for tax here. Trading companies, whether Irish or foreign, are not liable for wealth tax. The shares in the United States company which, in turn, owns the Irish company, are US assets in the hands of the shareholders of the US company. These shareholders are presumably citizens of the United States and no question of tax can arise. I think it necessary to put that on the record, because the debate has gone on here all day on the basis that such companies are liable to tax. I want to state in the clearest possible terms and beyond yea or nay, that they are not so liable.

The second matter I want to deal with is the point made today on a couple of occasions that this tax will affect small Irish family business. It is true that the shares in Irish trading companies are liable to tax. The companies as such are not liable to tax, but the shares held by persons in trading companies in Ireland are liable to tax if they are held by persons domiciled and ordinarily resident here. However, those shares are liable to tax only if the person exceeds the threshold, which for a married man is £100,000, plus a house. If it is a family business, it is most likely that shares would be owned by, say, a father and an adult son or maybe two adult sons, and each would have a threshold of £70,000 if the person was single, and £100,000 if the person was married, plus a house. That is why I describe the tax as an innocuous tax, meaning to convey that it would hit very lightly on anybody.

Another matter is that Deputy Crowley sought to strike fear and terror into the farming community. He did very fairly say that it was strange that there was no protest from the IFA. I stated that the IFA obviously understood the Bill and knew there was no fear in it for farmers. A farm does not become subject to tax unless the farm, stripped of the dwellinghouse and every hoof of stock on the farm, is worth £200,000, because for a married man the threshold is £100,000, and the farm is taken at 50 per cent of its value up to £200,000. In fact, if you take the dwellinghouse and contents into account, you probably put the threshold at £150,000, and a farmer would want to have a farm of about 300 acres. Furthermore, Deputy Crowley spent quite an amount of time saying to the House and the country that under the Bill, if it was enacted as at present, a farmer—and he emphasised "farmer"—could be fined up to £1,000 if he failed to spy on his neighbour. That was never the effect of the Bill. There is a clause that requires people in possession of books, records and so on, meaning accountants——

That is not defined in the Bill.

(Cavan): If the Deputy would bear with me for a moment—making it obligatory for those people to answer queries, and from any reasonable interpretation of the section it was obvious that there was no intention of asking a neighbour to spy on a neighbour. However, to put it beyond yea or nay, there is an amendment, which I presume Deputy Crowley is aware of, which has been circulated, in the name of the Minister for Finance, and which I shall move and hope the House will accept, excluding any other person.

Any other person than whom?

(Cavan): Any other person than the accountable person.

Except the person who has the information.

(Cavan): No. If the Deputy has a look at it he will agree with me that it renders the thing absolutely harmless. There is no doubt about that, but I shall go into detail on it when I come to the amendment. That is the position, and that is why I think it is unfair of Deputy Crowley to try to misrepresent the position and mislead the people. I wanted to put those points beyond doubt so that the debate could continue, I hope, on the basis of fact rather than fiction.

I listened to Deputy Crowley's contribution to the debate on section 2 and I agree with him totally with one exception. The exception is that Deputy Crowley suggested that, because this is mainly a Dublin-based Government, a certain type of mentality brought forward this Bill. I want to come to the defence of the vast majority of Dublin men and women, because I know them as reasonable people with an intelligent approach to economics, be it home economics or national economics. I know they will dissociate themselves completely from this legislation and would not have brought it in in a million years.

There is a rare breed in the Government that in no way represents the mentality of the Dublin man and woman. Anybody with the slighest bit of economic sense will realise that this section, which is giving power for the introduction of the Bill, will have the effect of destroying confidence in the business community and in the farming community and destroying confidence generally in the sections of the economy that produce wealth and provide jobs, and that all this legislation will do is to further exacerbate the situation by causing further unemployment and further raging inflation. All of this is being done to bring in a miserable £3 million. The section reads:

Subject to the provisions of this Act and any regulations thereunder, with effect on and from the 5th day of April, 1975, a tax, to be called wealth tax, shall be charged, levied and paid annually upon the net market value of the taxable wealth on the valuation date in every year of every assessable person and the rate of tax shall be one per cent of that net market value.

This is socialism with very sharp teeth, and when you go on to read how the net market value is calculated under section 8, you find it is stronger than socialism and is heading for the realms of communism. I believe fully in a free enterprise society, but what this Bill is trying to achieve by backdoor methods is half way to communism. It panders to the most base instincts of man for cheap party-political motives, suggesting that if your neighbour is working hard providing a better standard of living for himself and his family, and if you do not feel like working you should get a share of what he produces. This can only be described as the politics of envy.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.
Barr
Roinn