Paschal Donohoe
Dublin Central · Ireland
“I raise the importance of our economy and funding of public services, and a particularly vital public service referenced in the programme for Government. I do so from the seat in Dáil Éireann that I first pursued and held in 2011.”
“I am proud of the investment we have made through our local authorities in recent years in the funding, and opening, of new libraries. They are cradles of decency. They are beacons of light in a world in which things are changing so much.”
“I thank my own team, who have worked so closely with me over so many years to allow me to do my work as a Minister and a representative of Dublin Central. I acknowledge that this is a complex and tough week for them, and I thank them for all they have done for me to allow me to do the work I have been trusted and privileged to do.”
“I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for his support in the many committees I have appeared in front of that he has chaired and the relentless but always fair way in which he has discharged his duties. I wish everybody in this Dáil happiness, health and success in representing their constituents.”
“31 of 1999), which provides for a stamp duty to be levied on health insurance contracts that are entered into or renewed between authorised insurers and their customers in each quarter, be amended in the manner and to the extent specified in the Act giving effect to this Resolution. 19.”
“39 of 1997), which provides for tax exemptions for a unit trust which neither is, nor is deemed to be, an authorised unit trust scheme, be amended in the manner and to the extent specified in the Act giving effect to this Resolution. 7. THAT section 291A of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 (No.”
The complete record
Every one of 741 lines we hold for Paschal Donohoe, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 15.
“I refer to the work the Irish Government has done in responding to the clear sentiment of the people of Ireland in our intervention in the International Court of Justice in the case taken by South Africa; what has happened in recognising Palestine as a sovereign and independent state; our support for a proposal from the Netherlands to review the EU's trade and political relationship with Israel; the fact that we were the first country to call for UNRWA to remain in Gaza and that for the past two years alone we have allocated €58 million to support its work; and the fact that Ireland has been at the heart, as demonstrated by the Taoiseach and Tánaiste in the past number of weeks, of making a case for a different diplomatic approach from the European Union to respond to the loss of life and horror that the people of Gaza are confronting.”
“In recognition of the horror that is being inflicted on the people of Gaza, the loss of life, the new low that we are seeing being perpetrated when aid is being used in a way that appears to be assembling people for further deaths and injury, let me outline what the Government has done and what we continue to do to respond in a diplomatic and practical way to this.”
“-----not only with questions on this but on many other priorities they want to see the Government make progress on. It is what we have done each year. We will need to do that now in the context of having normal budgets in a world that is becoming more uncertain and complex. We will need to look at how we can make improvements, budget by budget. That is why, as has always been the case, we will be in a position to give a clear answer to that when our budgetary work is done, and to respond to all of the needs that are there within our society in addition to this critical need of the affordability of education.”
“It is because of my respect for those families that it is important to give a clear and honest answer. It is important to recognise that those families also have other needs and issues that they want our country to make progress on. In order for us to make progress on those collectively, we have to make decisions as part of the budget process so we can ensure that the changes we make are affordable and sustainable and can be built upon in the years ahead. The families the Deputy is raising are the same families who engage with me, the same families who are contacting Deputies on the Government benches-----”
“The reality is that, today, 80,000 of our student population are benefiting from either no fees at all, because of the various schemes that are in place, or partial fees. All of that is in place because of our desire and the commitment we have to ensure that for Elaine, and for all the other families across the country for whom affordability is an issue, there are supports in place to help. What we will be doing, as we move to the necessity of having more normal budgets in place year by year, is looking at how we can make progress, which we will, on the affordability and quality of, and access to, higher and further education. That is what the Government will do, and we will work with the Minister, Deputy Lawless, and the rest of the Government to make progress on that.”
“They are available to other citizens because we recognise the importance of the affordability of higher and further education and we are committed to looking at how that can be improved. The reality is that, as the Deputy puts that question to me today, 143,000 students and their families benefit from free fees. They benefit from that because they deserve to benefit from it. We know that for those 143,000 families, there are students who might not otherwise be able to go to college and benefit from the ability to have their prospects reshaped by going to higher and further education and studying further. The reality is that 60,000 students at the moment benefit from lower forms of student contribution, again, because they deserve to.”
“What the Minister, Deputy Lawless, is seeking to do, and what he will do with support from the Government, is look at how we make progress on the programme for Government, how we can deal with issues of affordability and how we can make progress on the affordability issues in higher and further education while dealing with all of the other important issues that Elaine and the rest of the country want to see us make progress on. On the broad issue that the Deputy is raising on affordability, let me again state what we do. It is important to acknowledge what is there before we look at how it can be improved. It is important that even if these supports are not available to Elaine, they are available to other people.”
“First, I want to deal with the different language and points that the Deputy has made before I come to the really important issue of Elaine, her children and her children's future. For the Deputy to use language such as “stacking the deck against students” does no justice to the seriousness of this cause and demeans the need for serious debate regarding important decisions that this country has to make. When the Deputy suggests that the Minister for higher and further education is looking to make decisions that disadvantage students, that he is looking to make decisions that worsen the prospect of students, not only do I know that the Deputy really does not believe that, but I know that, by making that charge, she devalues the serious issue she is raising in the debate.”
“In the engagement every Minister has with the rest of Government and the Minister for public expenditure, the progress and supports in place recognise this is not only something that will be life-defining in a positive way but will also bring with it costs.”
“Of course, Sinn Féin will never acknowledge this in any contribution it makes. The difference between those of us who sit over here and Deputy Carthy is that we are interested in solutions rather than sound bites.”
“We will put in place measures, including those to deal with the cost of becoming a student and the challenge many families face, we know are affordable, can be funded and can be built upon in the years ahead. I, along with the Minister, Deputy Lawless, and the Minister for public expenditure and reform, Deputy Chambers, are very clear on what that objective is. We are very clear that the temporary measures in place when inflation was so high need to be looked at as well as at how we can put in place other measures that can make a difference to something we know is an acute difficulty for so many. So many are already receiving support which we know is needed.”
“Second, budget by budget, the Government has put in place measures we believe we can sustain and are affordable which can accompany all the other things we need to do in higher and further education for students. The capital investment the Minister, Deputy Lawless, announced several days ago regarding additional student facilities will bring more facilities for a group of universities. Only a week ago, the funding in place to help improve the quality of education students receive resulted in many Irish universities moving up the world league ratings regarding their academic performance. Budget by budget, we make changes we believe are affordable which recognise the challenges there. That is why we will do what we normally do in the approaching budget.”
“Today, households with an income of up to €64,000 do not pay a student contribution. For those families who have more family members or a higher number of children, that ceiling is higher again. For postgraduate education, maintenance grants have been fully restored and a SUSI support is now available for the first time for those in hybrid or part-time education. That is what the Government has done and is already in place as we recognise the great challenge many families and students face with the cost of education, which we know is high. Those are the supports in place. How have we been able to do this? We have been able to do this for two reasons. First, it is due to the hard work of the Irish people and the contribution they make to our economy that, in turn, creates the resources we are in a position to spend.”
“At present, with the support the Government has made available through the Minister, Deputy Lawless, as well as the work of this Government and the previous one, one in three students did not pay a student contribution. At present, half of students, through the SUSI scheme available, are supported in costs for becoming students, which we know are difficult. The Government has adjusted the standard rate income threshold by 15% to ensure more families and students are in a position to get the help they need.”
“-----and to make a difference to what we know is a huge cost for many families. The Government is clear in recognising education, particularly higher and further education, allows students to fulfil their potential and plays a vital role in the economic development of our country in creating jobs and culture that is the heart of the progress Ireland is making. Let me outline the supports we are already providing and what we are already doing to respond to the need we know is there.”
“I thank the three Senators who have contributed to this debate and others who might participate in Committee and Report Stages. I thank the Seanad for the facilitation of this piece of legislation.”
“I shared that information with the Dáil last night, but that is because we have a consistent way of looking at what the damage threshold is to allow you to avail of the exemption of local property tax between this legislation and the legislation that oversees the defective concrete block remediation scheme. We need to ensure they are consistent with each other and we are aiming to recognise the difficulties that lots of homeowners face from the impact of mica and the huge difficulty the spread of mica has caused. In this legislation, we are now broadening the number of counties that will be able to access the exemption because, very regrettably, we now know the number of counties that are affected by this is greater than when we brought in the first revaluation a number of years ago.”
“Where this ultimately ends up is people who are against this tax saying we have a surplus of €8 billion and we should use the surplus to pay for getting rid of the local property tax. However, we are awash with warnings from people, including me and the Department of Finance, saying that surplus, while it is very good to have it at the moment, is ultimately made up of a very small number of taxpayers. None of us want to be in a situation where we see tax revenue from a small number of taxpayers collapse again with all of the consequences of that and what that would mean for the future of our economy and country. One point the Senator made was about the concrete block exemption and the fact only 1,000 homes have availed of it, which is true.”
“I cannot help be struck by the lingering feeling, however, that if he was in my shoes, he would do the same thing with this Bill here this afternoon. I am sure he will refute that in the response back in a moment. He will know from his work as finance Minister that if you make a decision to get rid of a particular form of taxation, you rarely have easy answers as to how you replace it. However, I know his view and the view of his party in relation to this legislation, which I debated elsewhere. Senator Murphy made the point that we have alternative ways of raising the €600 million, but there are few easy ways of raising €600 million. When I look at the alternative ways of doing that, all of them create costs, difficulties and trade-offs that I believe we should not be doing as a country.”
“They key thing is if you do this every five years, over many years we will build up an increasingly significant revenue stream for local authorities. There are many other jurisdictions that have introduced local property taxes and found it very difficult to revalue them at all, meaning the bill is calculated off the value of property at a distant point from previous years. The fact we are now completing our second piece of revaluation legislation will help with that. Senator Byrne made the point about how important this is to local authorities and the importance of consistently doing revaluations, which we are aiming to do here in this legislation. Those are all the ways in which we are trying to deal with the issues he raised. While Senator Murphy and I differ on this, I understand the points he has made.”
“That is because the mid-point of the valuation band goes up, and because the mid-point goes up, that requires those to pay a higher LPT bill. The vast majority of people are staying within that band. By moving the rate, we have tried to ensure the new tax people will pay will be as affordable as possible. For those who are at the very start of the LPT bands, band 1 and band 2, it is €5 and €10. For those who move up, it will be around €20 to €23 extra we will ask them to pay. It goes up more for people who have higher value homes, but it is a reasonable assumption to make that the majority of those who are living in higher value homes will be a in a position to pay the higher local property tax bill.”
“The way we do this is that we re-price or rebalance all homes back to what their valuation would have been at the start of the revaluation period. Revenue then provides guidance to allow new owners of new homes to do it. Of course, word of mouth and looking at information that is available on the web will allow homeowners to do that themselves in many cases. That is to ensure we are taxing homes in a fair way. On the points made by Senator Crowe, he talked about affordability. I will emphasise a point the Senator noted. The majority of homes will stay inside their existing valuation band. To be completely clear with the House, and all the Senators who have spoken on the Bill here this afternoon know this, even if you are inside the same valuation band, your LPT bill will still go up after this legislation is passed.”
“There was a real issue of equality regarding a home built in 2011 for which local property tax was being paid and a home built in, say, 2017 or 2018 for which it was not. One of the benefits of being on our second revaluation is we ensure that, as homes are built each year, they are brought into the local property tax net. That will then ensure that all homeowners are making a contribution to local services. The second point in response to the important issue is how we can then ensure that homes that are built later on in the lifetime of a revaluation are taxed in the same way as homes that were already built or were built earlier in the life cycle of this revaluation, during the five year period.”
“While I do not believe many or even any local authorities will go all the way up to a 25% increase, I want to give the flexibility to authorities that if there is a really important project they want to deliver within a given year and they believe the importance of that project is acknowledged by the communities they represent, then flexibility is there to do that. Senator Byrne asked me how new properties would be taxed and the issue of equality between properties that were more recently built and pre-existing ones. I have two points on that. The benefit to the two revaluations we have done, both of which I have been involved with, is, absent the revaluations, we were in a situation where any homes built since the local property tax was first introduced in 2013 were not paying the tax at all.”
“This is all just a recognition by councillors that if you bring in additional revenue, local authorities are very well-positioned to know how to spend that money well and that is what we have tried to get right here in this legislation. Senator Byrne also touched on the importance of the deferral scheme and acknowledged the changes we have made to it. He welcomed that we are going to allow the LPT to be put up by more. We are going to allow local authorities to increase it by up to 25%.”
“We have tried to get the balance right between what we are asking people to pay - to be as affordable as possible and well below the level at which the value of homes has been going up by in recent years - and in turn giving our local authorities the confidence they will know how much money they will have from the local property tax over a five-year period. Since I brought forward this legislation, I have heard lots of Members of the Oireachtas speak very positively about the contribution the local property tax has made. That is demonstrated by the reality that the majority of local authorities have put up local property tax rather than cut it. Dublin City Council, the one I know the best, is about to make the decision that for the coming year it will stop reducing it by 15%.”
“It was a slip of the tongue nonetheless, so I apologise. I know what it is like. I was referred to as Paschal Sheehy for all my early years in here and then I eventually turned into Paschal Mooney before becoming known as Paschal Donohoe. I apologise to Senator Byrne again. The point he opened by making was on the trade-off between the need for affordability and the stability of income. That is the balance we have tried to get right. A small number of people will be moving band and we are asking them to pay €20 or €25 extra. I am conscious that for lots of people, finding extra money is difficult with the cost of living, with everything and with the challenges that many are facing.”
“I thank the Chairperson for the opportunity to respond to the different issues that have been raised there. I thank Senators Crowe, Deasy and Murphy for contributing to this discussion. I will begin with the points made by the first speaker, Senator Deasy, and the different issues he raised. I am so sorry. I meant Senator Cathal Byrne.”
“This measure was due to expire on 30 April and revert to the original 13.5% rate from 1 May. The financial resolution extends the measure to 31 October this year. The Bill provides for the required legislative basis for the extension. The cost of this is €85 million. Together with my Government colleagues I have sought to deliver on our programme for Government commitments to ensure fairness and stability in LPT payments. What we seek to achieve is to get the balance right between ensuring LPT charges remain affordable while also generating sufficient revenue to provide for local services. I believe we are getting that balance right. I thank the Senators for their attention and I look forward to hearing their contributions.”
“The passing of this legislation was also listed as one of the four tax-related milestones in Ireland's national recovery and resilience plan, NRRP, and was the final one to be completed. The Bill provides for a technical amendment which extends the definition of "associated entities" to include entities that are associated by reference to the ownership or control by the same individuals, or individuals connected with those individuals, within the meaning of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997. This update to the legislation will ensure it operates as intended and future NRRP funding requests will not be hindered. On a final matter with regard to VAT and the supply of gas and electricity, I introduced a financial resolution in April this year to extend the temporary reduction in VAT on the supply of gas and electricity.”
“Amendments are being made to update the wording of the exemption to ensure that homes in these additional counties that are eligible for the scheme are also eligible for this LPT exemption, as well as to reflect changes made to the defective concrete block remediation scheme since 2021. These amendments will have no adverse effect on any homeowners presently eligible for the exemption. The Bill also contains two sections that relate to two other taxation matters. The Finance (No. 2) Act 2023 introduced defensive measures in relation to payments leaving our jurisdiction such as interest, royalties, and other distributions, including dividends to jurisdictions on the EU list of non-co-operative jurisdictions for tax purposes and no-tax and zero-tax jurisdictions, to counter aggressive tax planning.”
“Accordingly, the Bill will also allow for a reduction in the chargeable value of a property by this amount for homes that have been adapted in this manner and where the qualifying conditions are met. I turn to the issue of LPT exemption for homes with defective concrete blocks. The Bill makes a number of amendments to the six-year exemption from LPT for homes that have been damaged by the use of defective concrete blocks. This exemption currently only applies to properties in Donegal and Mayo. The scheme has been extended to Clare, Limerick and Sligo local authorities since the LPT was last amended in 2021.”
“The Bill proposes to allow local authorities to vary the LPT upwards by up to 25% with effect from 2027 onwards. This will provide local authorities with greater flexibility with regard to this tax. On the matter of adaptation of homes for use by persons with a disability, the Act of 2012 provides for a reduction of €50,000 in the chargeable value of a property for homes that have been adapted for use by a person with a disability. The policy objective is to ensure that disabled homeowners whose properties have realised an increase in value due to necessary adaptations having been made are not liable for a higher LPT charge as a result of these changes. Through this Bill, the valuation bands will be widened to €105,000.”
“The next revaluation would therefore occur on 1 November. The system of deferral arrangements is an important support for those who have difficulty paying LPT, so let me provide an update on that and the measures contained in this Bill. The Bill amends the income thresholds for LPT deferrals, increasing them to €25,000 for a single person and €40,000 for a couple. It also provides that the income threshold for a partial deferral be increased to €40,000 for a single person and to €55,000 for a couple. These changes represent an increase of 30% to 40%, depending on personal status and whether the threshold is in respect of full or partial deferral. Regarding the local authority factor, Senators will be aware that local authorities have the discretion to adjust the LPT rate collected in their areas up or down by 15%.”
“Properties in band 20 will be charged on individual property values as before, which is to say 0.0906% on the first €1.26 million, 0.25% between €1.26 million and €2.1 million and 0.3% on the balance. These amendments will ensure that the majority of homeowners remain in the same valuation band while also increasing base charges by a modest amount. The changes are expected to yield an additional €45 million in revenue, which will provide important funding for local services. The Bill proposes to set the duration of the upcoming valuation period to five years, commencing in 2026 and ending in 2030, with future valuation periods also lasting five years. This provides certainty to homeowners about their LPT obligations while ensuring that properties continue to be revalued on a frequent basis.”
“The most significant proposal in the Bill is a revised method for calculating local property tax liabilities. The new approach maintains the number of valuation bands at 20, with all bands being widened by 20%. Some 96% of homeowners will remain in their existing band. The basic rate of LPT is to be decreased from 0.1029% to 0.0906%, which will apply to properties valued up to €1.26 million. This will result in a small increase in all LPT charges. The fixed charges for bands 1 and 2 will be increased from €90 to €95 for band 1 and from €225 to €235 for band 2. Properties valued between €1.26 million and €2.1 million will be charged at 0.0906% on the first €1.26 million, with a subsequent 0.25% on the balance of a midpoint value in excess of €1.26 million.”
“I thank the Chair. I appreciate the opportunity to present the Bill to Seanad Éireann. The local property tax has become a well-embedded and established part of our tax structure since it was introduced in 2013. It provides a stable funding base for local authorities and it has raised over €6 billion since it was introduced. The programme for Government contains a clear commitment to ensure fairness and stability in local property tax payments and to continue to retain revenue collected locally in the same local authority. This Bill seeks to amend the charging structure for local property tax in advance of the upcoming revaluation on 1 November. It is necessary that we enact this Bill before the summer recess and I am grateful for the Seanad's facilitation of that.”
“I move the following Second Further Revised Estimate: Vote 24 — Justice, Home Affairs and Migration (Second Further Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €2,613,120,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration, Probation Service staff and of certain other services including payments under cash limited schemes administered by that Office, and payment of certain grants.”
“Vote 43 — Office of the Government Chief Information Officer (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €57,486,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Government Chief Information Officer and that a sum not exceeding €900,000 be granted by way of the application for capital supply services of unspent appropriations, the surrender of which may be deferred under Section 91 of the Finance Act 2004. Vote 44 — Data Protection Commission (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €29,120,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for the salaries and expenses of the Data Protection Commission.”
“Vote 38 — Health (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €25,336,984,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Health and certain other services administered by that Office, including grants to the Health Service Executive and miscellaneous grants. Vote 39 — Office of Government Procurement (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €20,481,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of Government Procurement.”
“Vote 37 — Social Protection (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €13,099,974,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Social Protection, for certain services administered by that Office, for payments to the Social Insurance Fund, for certain grants and including payments under cash-limited schemes administered by that Office and that a sum not exceeding €1,380,000 be granted by way of the application for capital supply services of unspent appropriations, the surrender of which may be deferred under Section 91 of the Finance Act 2004.”
“Vote 31 — Transport (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €3,901,359,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025 for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Transport, including certain services administered by that Office, for payment of certain grants and certain other services and that a sum not exceeding €115,253,000 be granted by way of the application for capital supply services of unspent appropriations, the surrender of which may be deferred under Section 91 of the Finance Act 2004.”
“Vote 28 — Foreign Affairs and Trade (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €438,917,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, and for certain services administered by that Office, including grants and contributions to International Organisations.”
“Vote 27 — International Co-operation (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €809,149,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for certain Official Development Assistance, including certain grants, and for contributions to certain International Organisations involved in Development Assistance and for salaries and expenses in connection therewith.”
“Vote 22 — Courts Service (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €165,792,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for such of the salaries and expenses of the Courts Service and of the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, the High Court, the Special Criminal Court, the Circuit Court and the District Court and of certain other minor services as are not charged to the Central Fund.”
“for the payment of certain witnesses' expenses, and for payment of certain grants and that a sum not exceeding €16,586,000 be granted by way of the application for capital supply services of unspent appropriations, the surrender of which may be deferred under Section 91 of the Finance Act 2004. Vote 21 — Prisons (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €514,411,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for the salaries and expenses of the Prison Service and other expenses in connection with prisons, including places of detention, and for payment of certain grants.”
“Vote 19 — Office of the Ombudsman (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €16,991,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Ombudsman, the Office of the Commission for Public Service Appointments, the Office of the Protected Disclosures Commissioner, the Standards in Public Office Commission, the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Commissioner for Environmental Information. Vote 20 — Garda Síochána (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €2,366,953,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for the salaries and expenses of the Garda Síochána, including pensions, etc.”
“Vote 18 — National Shared Services Office (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €75,349,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for the salaries and expenses of the National Shared Services Office and that a sum not exceeding €1,000,000 be granted by way of the application for capital supply services of unspent appropriations, the surrender of which may be deferred under Section 91 of the Finance Act 2004.”
“Vote 17 — Public Appointments Service (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €24,958,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for the salaries and expenses of the Public Appointments Service and that a sum not exceeding €200,000 be granted by way of the application for capital supply services of unspent appropriations, the surrender of which may be deferred under Section 91 of the Finance Act 2004.”
“Vote 14 — State Laboratory (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €13,780,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for the salaries and expenses of the State Laboratory. Vote 15 — Secret Service (Revised Estimate) That a sum not exceeding €2,000,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025, for Secret Service.”