Madam, - In his Budget Speech last December, the Minister for Finance, Brian Cowen, said that "any stamp duty cuts would. . . end up in the pocket of the seller.This will not help first-time buyers to purchase new homes".
Three days before the recent general election was called, he said that any cuts in stamp duty would be "irresponsible in the extreme", and that the "exchequer would be the loser".
This week, however, Mr Cowen has undergone a remarkable change of tune. In the Dáil on Tuesday he derided the very stamp duty regime which he had stoutly defended for many months leading up to the election. Mr Cowen said that it created "a financial obstacle [ for first-time buyers] to establishing their own homes in the neighbourhoods and communities in which they grew up", and compelled them "to buy new homes which, in many cases, are considerable distances away from their families and support networks".
Mr Cowen has presided over these realities for almost three years as Minister for Finance. Is he seriously suggesting that the gravity of the problems facing first-time buyers only dawned on him when he awoke on Tuesday morning? The points Mr Cowen made this week are the same points which he has rubbished for years when presented with them by Opposition spokespersons - so what other conclusion can be reached? Mr Cowen described the cuts he was announcing as "timely, affordable" and as having "obvious and desirable social benefits".
Madam, how can the proposal of cuts in stamp duty be denounced as "irresponsible in the extreme" in April, but then welcomed as "timely, affordable" and "desirable" in June? The simple answer may be that we have just witnessed one of the most embarrassing political U-turns of recent years. Mr Cowen seems to have been forced to abandon everything he had said prior to the election - by the Taoiseach and his Cabinet colleagues - simply to curry favour with the electorate, and to secure (albeit by the narrowest of margins) a third term in office for Fianna Fáil.
As a result, Mr Cowen's first act as Tánaiste has been the abandonment of a long-held economic principle. As a shrewd politician, surely he, more than anyone, realises that this was not the most glorious start towards his slow ascent to the leadership of Fianna Fáil? It is little wonder that the Taoiseach was so willing to name Mr Cowen as his "obvious successor". An heir who is so easily manipulated would be a dream choice for a leader with even the mildest of Machiavellian instincts. - Yours, etc,
BARRY WALSH,
Clontarf,
Dublin 3.