Will the Taoiseach revisit the circumstances depicted in the excellent "Prime Time" programme earlier this week on taxation and how a coach and four is being driven through the tax code to assist the very wealthy and elite in our society in minimising or avoiding paying any tax when the great majority of people who get up at 6.30 a.m. to go work find themselves heavily taxed when one takes into account the number of stealth taxes and charges the Government has introduced? There is great anger among the public at the dismissive manner in which the Taoiseach dealt with this matter yesterday.

I ask the Taoiseach to return, first, to the question of tax exiles and the measure he introduced to facilitate people being out of this country under the 183 day rule but at the same time enjoying the hospitality of this country while not paying tax here in terms of their personal incomes. The Taoiseach seemed to tell me, or I thought he told me, yesterday until I read the record, that the question of the 183 day rule, the residency requirement, would be included in the review, but when I read the Taoiseach's answer it does not state that. I ask him again this morning if the residency qualification is included in the review. There is the question of whether, in the light of ten years' experience, it ought to be restricted or limited in some fashion. The Minister for Finance said it is not and he is quite satisfied with the way it is operating.

Second, a front page story in The Irish Times this morning is about a named company, Irish Ferries, saving €3 million to which it would otherwise have been liable in tax in 2003.

The Deputy's two minutes are concluded.

Whatever the justification for the tonnage tax system being manifestly exploited in the case of the yacht that is parked in the middle of the Mediterranean, staffed with non-Irish people, disporting itself in the Mediterranean for the rich and powerful, earning an income of €9 million per year and paying no tax virtually to this Exchequer, in the case of Irish Ferries would one not reasonably expect that if there is an argument for the tonnage tax system to continue to exist that at least that company ought to be expected not to be in engaged in shedding Irish workers, deliberately recruiting non-nationals and, as we know from some high profile cases, employing non-nationals at slave rates?

The Deputy has gone a minute over the time provided.

My colleague, Deputy Howlin, drew attention last October to the fact that the company had decided to lay off 150 staff on the Irish-France routes and to transfer its crewing to a third party agency — in other words, to recruit cheap, non-national labour in breach of the labour regulations and to disemploy Irish workers. Is not the least that we could expect from these companies that are treated so well in terms of our tax code that they would observe high standards in work practices?

On the first issue, there is a major review of all the tax shelters and tax allowances under way. It is my view that as part of that review they all should be looked at. Specifically, in respect of the measure the Deputy raised, as I said yesterday, that has been on the Statute Book for 11 years. Regardless of whether it is working well, it seems that now is a good time to review it. The answer to that question is "Yes", if I was not totally clear on that yesterday. I was informed since yesterday that the Revenue Commissioners confirmed that they are monitoring the application of the non-resident rules in respect of cases being handled by their large case division. The Minister for Finance asked the chairman of the Revenue Commissioners to keep him appraised of any developments in this area arising out of the current monitoring of the position by Revenue. The Minister is expecting an update report from Revenue after these have been examined. That is currently under way.

With regard to the question on shipping, this measure was introduced three years ago in the Finance Act 2002. It was designed to help the Irish shipping sector. Along with other EU countries, the Irish shipping sector faced competition from ships registered in Liberia and similar countries which were crewed by low cost employees. Several EU countries reacted to these developments by introducing a special low tax regime known as tonnage tax under which tax is paid by reference to the tonnage of the ships. The tonnage system was introduced originally by Greece 35 years ago, which has a major merchant shipping fleet. The system currently applies in 11 other EU countries as well as Ireland. The tonnage tax regime for these EU countries has to be cleared by the European Commission for State aid purposes. The European Commission is conscious of protecting the EU shipping sector.

Regarding capital allowances, which Deputy Rabbitte raised, commercial ships have also been entitled to capital allowances. A ship is an item of plant and machinery used in a trade and the capital allowances for plant and machinery are used in lieu of normal commercial depreciation of a business asset. A ship is the main asset of a shipping trade, in the same way as a lorry is the main asset of a haulage business. The existing regime for capital allowances for plant provides that such an asset can be written off at 12.5% over an eight year period. That is how the system works.

I am not dealing with these issues on a day to day basis. Therefore, I do not know if there are abuses. That is the system that provides for this measure. If there is any abuse of the system, I am sure the Revenue Commissioners would examine it.

Can I clarify the question of whether tax exiles are in the review? The Taoiseach said that they should be but then he went on to confuse that review——

I said "Yes".

Let me be clear. The Taoiseach went on and confused the issue with the large cases division of the Revenue that is examining the position of 250 plus high net worth individuals in this jurisdiction. That is a quite distinctly separate issue. The Minister for Finance said in the programme that he was quite happy with the system as it obtained to the tax exiles in terms of residency and that it was reviewed in 1994 and there was no intention to review it again. I want to be clear, is it included in that review that was specified in terms of the instruments that it encompasses? Are tax exiles in it or not?

Second, on the question of a passenger ship, is an examination or investigation taking place on the capacity of a yacht to convert itself into a passenger ship in order to benefit from this?

The Deputy's minute has concluded.

Will this review be made public well in advance of next year's Finance Bill? Does the Government have a view on an alternative minimum tax whereby nobody, irrespective of the instruments of which they avail, would fail to pay a minimum of their income towards the common good in this jurisdiction? I wish to ask the Taoiseach about instruments——

The Deputy's time has concluded.

——which drive urban renewal and the investor-led property side of the market. Is he aware that, although we have made many changes over the years, he has never looked at the regulations which are now more than 15 years old in terms of specifying the standards, space, design and so on of many of these apartments? In ten years' time, many of them will be very shabby. We are refusing to change the specifications to require certain standards to be adhered to by investors who are benefiting from the tax breaks available.

I call the Taoiseach.

I would have finished sooner if the Ceann Comhairle had not interrupted me, as he does every morning.

Seven minutes are allowed for Leaders' Questions in total. The Deputy is entitled to three minutes but he has taken five and a half minutes. The Chair must try to stay within the Standing Orders laid down.

I will do community service.

The Chair informs all Deputies when their time has concluded.

I will try to stay within the time allocated. I tried to be clear on this. The review the Minister announced on budget day relates to all the tax relief schemes. Residency is not a tax relief scheme.

That is what I said.

I pointed out to the Deputy that a separate appraisal is being undertaken by the Revenue Commissioners on residency. That report will also be given to the Minister for Finance this year.

The question of tax exiles will not be in the review.

The tax exile matter is not a tax relief scheme.

I said that. It is not in the review.

It is being reviewed by the Revenue Commissioners. I gave the Deputy the answer.

The Deputy is splitting hairs.

I said the Revenue Commissioners have confirmed they are monitoring the application of the non-residence rule. They will report to the Minister. I cannot be clearer than that.

The Deputy is splitting hairs.

The lads can fly out. There is no problem.

The Revenue Commissioners are carrying out a review and they will report back to the Minister who will take action if he believes there is a need for change. If there is no need for change, then he will not take action. That is the position.

Regarding shipping, I do not know if a case is under investigation or if there is any abuse. The rules are clear and the Revenue Commissioners have stringent powers in that area and would use them if anyone was abusing the system. I will not read out the details again.

Apartments and other accommodation are part of the tax relief scheme. Deputy Rabbitte has a point in that many of the apartments built under the tax relief schemes are turning into quite shabby accommodation, particularly in city areas. The schemes were used for rejuvenation purposes. However, if people continue to get tax reliefs in these areas, they could create a difficulty in the future. Many areas have benefited from these tax relief schemes for many years and much useful work has been done but some developments are not up to standard. Areas which have not got that chance should get it. The Minister made that clear in his budget speech.