We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
THE TAOISEACH Enda Kenny has accepted “on behalf of the Irish people” the Golden Victoria European of the Year award from a German magazine publisher’s group at a ceremony in Berlin.
Addressing the German Magazine Publishers Association at the Deutsche Telecom headquarters, Kenny said he felt privileged to accept the Golden Viktoriaon “on behalf of the Irish people at home and overseas”.
The Taoiseach said Ireland’s commitment and contribution to Europe “far exceed” the country’s 40-year EU membership, and pointed out that the people of Ireland voted “more often more positively on Europe than any other EU member.”
He said that Ireland is now on the road to recovery, having honoured its EU-IMF commitments:
Last year our economy started to grow again, our exports climbed to record-levels. We’re bringing government spending under control. Internationally investors are showing new confidence in Ireland resulting in lower yields on Irish government bonds.
We’re determined to exit the EU-IMF programme on schedule next year.
However, Kenny said Ireland now had two key priorities – the first being to relieve the bank-debt burden equalling 40 per cent of the nation’s GDP, although he made no direct appeal to the German government on this point.
The second priority, he said, was tackling unemployment.
“It’s why Ireland’s forthcoming EU Presidency will be all about stability, jobs, growth,” he said.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Tax someone for developing !tax someone for not developing.whAtever you do your gona get screwed .
In theory, there’s a 3% tax on derelict sites, but the list of buildings so taxed in Dublin is tiny.
To be honest am sick of this word “Levy” and no I don’t own land or property.
Private land bought with private money, slight overreach by government to determine the use of it. CPO in extreme circumstances maybe but at fair market price and certainly not so a loss is imposed on the owner; capital gains will apply of course..
@Padriag – slight ? Lol, that’s understatement of the year.
The last time the govt tried stuff like this, homes were stripped of their roof’s and left to rot. We’ll end up with a landscape of the 1940′s like this: http://www.abandonedireland.com/Dromdihy.html
http://www.riai.ie/consumer_services/protected_structures/
” Responsibility for a Protected Structure
Every owner and/or occupier of a Protected Structure must ensure that the building, or any element that contributes to its special interest, is not endangered. Endangerment can be caused by deliberate or accidental damage, decay or neglect. The same duty applies to the owners and occupiers of a Proposed Protected Structure.
The protection applies to all parts of the structure that contribute to its character and special interest, including its interior, boundary walls, gates and railings, surrounding land, any other structures on that land, their interiors, and all fixtures and features of these structures.”
http://www.heritagecouncil.ie/architecture/news/archive/view-article/article/heritage-council-publishes-provisional-number-of-protected-structures-in-ireland/?tx_ttnews%5BpS%5D=1349412233&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=378&cHash=ea53ad4a78abb506a95d1f0a448
“The Heritage Council has estimated that there are 38,171 protected structures in Ireland. It has published an index to the Records of Protected Structures (RPS) held by each planning authority on its website.”
So some might end up being knocked then or sold on?
Any land in urban areas that is suitable for development should be taxed. CPOs if not used with a certain time frame.
Why do I think a former cinema on O’Connell St. is in the firing line?
It’s not anywhere near the firing line, let alone in it. That land and several properties near it are in litigation both with NAMA and the individual investors themselves. Nothing can be done there until all cases are settled. It was in the news on and off a couple of years ago. Part of a grand plan for a new shopping mall with rooftop gardens.
A tax by any other name. When the councils are the biggest land hoarders in this country why does this legislation only covers private lands owners. Looks like the private sector is providing another bailout for councils. The housing crisis will continue if council are allowed to sit on vast areas of land around towns. Endless taxes will be needed to pay for the mistakes of councillors who are now retired or abroad.
Yes, because it suits your needs.
Be very careful how you tackle this, in Venezuela Chavez started by doing the exact same which lead to land expropriation with the excuse of labelling them as “Lazy Land” which lead to shortage in farming and consequently shortage of basic food products. The right of private property is on the constitution and should be respected, but dealt sensibly if someone is speculating with property prices
Makes sense – they do something similar in the UK.
Property tax on all property occupied or unoccupied
If it has a roof then make them pay…
About fecking time.
Lets just hope you don’t have an empty spare room in your home, I’m sure it wont be long before thats taxed too.
Penalise someone for holding on to an asset on the chance it may increase in value. That’s ridiculous. Maybe if they changed the planning laws and built more smart might be good for the country.
Reading the news wants me to delay my home coming for quite a number of years.
HURRY UP AND DO IT SO!!!
All talk no action I’m sure. Too many vested interests.
There was actually some old lad living in the propped up building pictured in this article until recently. You could see him in the upstairs in the evenings.
What would happen if the property is old and protected, some building are very old and are protected by certain orders. Then knocking them down might be the cheaper way to go with a protected building?
@peter anybody know where the house in the main picture is?
Scary thought?
have your say