Tairgim:
Go gceadófar go dtabharfar isteach Bille dá ngairtear Acht chun an Bunreacht a leasú.
I move:
That leave be granted to introduce a Bill entitled an Act to amend the Constitution.
I seek leave to introduce the Thirty-fourth Amendment of the Constitution (Inclusive Budget Reform) Bill 2014. This is a relatively short Bill but it could potentially have a significant impact on how the Dáil operates, how we discuss and debate the issues around budgets and how we deal with our budgets and other financial matters. I am bringing forward the legislation in the context of the Constitutional Convention and the national debate on political reform, North and South.
One source of great frustration to me as an Opposition finance spokesperson and, I imagine, to many other Opposition spokespersons is the bar on our bringing forward legislation or amendments to existing legislation that causes a charge to be inflicted on the State. I have never understood this ruling fully and I have never been able to get my head around what constitutes the bar placed on us by the Constitution.
Each year, when we are dealing with the Finance Bill, we put forward amendments either to repeal a certain charge that the Government is proposing or to introduce our own charge which the Government may not have identified at that point. Alternatively, there may be no charge as we commonly know the phrase. The amendment may not necessarily relate to a taxation measure but a saving which the State could make. However, when we place these amendments what usually happens is that on the day of committee we get a ruling from the Chair, or, if it is taken in the Dáil, from the Ceann Comhairle's office, to the effect that the amendments must be ruled out of order because of the constitutional provision. If we are to have a proper, robust and mature debate on issues in respect of finances and the economy then we must remove the restriction in the Constitution that prevents Opposition Deputies bringing forward measures which would impose a charge on the State.
In recent months I have produced several tranches of legislation that could not even be presented in the House because of this constitutional bar. For example, I drafted legislation which would make stateless multinational companies tax-resident in Ireland by default if they had no other tax residency anywhere on the planet. As a result of the constitutional provision the Bill could not be tabled in the House under an entirely appropriate ruling from the Ceann Comhairle. Then, some months later, the Government brought forward in the Finance Bill exactly what I had in my legislation. It was exactly the same thing. This makes a mockery of the process. As Opposition Deputies we are challenged at all times - in Sinn Féin we try to rise to the challenge - to bring forward solutions that are practical, costed and workable. We do so and we go to the bother of putting our ideas in the form of legislation. We go to the staff in the Houses of the Oireachtas and they have the legislation checked for its appropriateness and the way it is drafted, but we cannot even put it on the agenda or the floor of the Dáil.
Another rather detailed tranche of legislation which I have drafted relates to a wealth tax and the way a wealth tax could be applied, including who it would apply to, who would be exempt, how it would be calculated, what the rate would be, the powers in respect of calculation and appeal and what happens to the family home in given circumstances. All of these issues are dealt with in legislation I drafted on the wealth tax. Again, it cannot be introduced to the House because of the constitutional bar.
Another example that springs to mind is the travel tax introduced by the previous Government. During the previous term I recall putting forward an amendment to abolish the travel tax. It was ruled out of order. I was told that as an Opposition spokesperson I could not abolish the travel tax because it would incur a charge on the State and that this was prohibited under the Constitution. Yet, I could reduce the charge to 1 cent. I say this because sometimes it is no more than a joke and a mockery given the somersaults that Opposition Deputies must go through to try to find a way to amend legislation or bring forward proposals to try to circumvent the restrictions placed on us by the Constitution.
This legislation is simple. If we are genuine about political reform there is no reason anyone in the House should be prevented from bringing forward legislation to be debated in the House. The Government has talked a good deal about political reform. It must match its words with actions. I hope that not only will the Government allow this to pass but that we actually see it actioned. This is something the Constitutional Convention has called for as well. Let us do this to allow for a proper, robust, mature and appropriate debate in respect of issues that affect all our citizens throughout the State.
