I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time.
Local Government Provisional Order Confirmation Bill, 1953—Second and Subsequent Stages.
Could we not get an explanation from the Minister?
The purpose of this Bill is to confirm the Provisional Order set out in the Schedule, i.e., the City of Dublin (Extension of Boundary) Provisional Order, 1953.
The Provisional Order proposes to add to the City of Dublin contiguous portions of the county amounting in all to approximately 6,616 acres. The purpose of the extension is primarily to facilitate the carrying out of the corporation's housing programme. It is reasonable that the houses built by a local authority should be within the area over which it has jurisdiction, but the building land that remains within the present city boundary is utterly inadequate for the purposes of the corporation's housing programme. The corporation have already had to acquire land and undertake housing schemes outside their boundary, but the financial, engineering and administrative difficulties might prove unduly onerous if the whole of the existing housing needs had to be provided in an area not under the control of the corporation.
Originally, the corporation sought to have included in the city an area of approximately 11,000 acres, but consultations with the county council with a view to reaching some measure of agreement resulted in a petition for an extension of some 6,891 acres.
The whole question was fully discussed at a public inquiry. The county council was represented but did not oppose the extension, having regard to the terms of an agreement reached with the corporation in regard to financial adjustment and other matters. While these other matters are outside the scope of the Provisional Order and this Bill, there is provision in existing local government legislation for giving effect to nearly all these agreed matterswhere they are clearly defined. In article 7 of the Order, effect has been given to the agreement on the question of financial adjustment in respect of increase in burden. The intention is that when the amount of the average annual increase in burden has been determined—either by agreement or, failing agreement, by the Minister— that amount will be payable each year for a period of 15 years by the corporation to the council. I am advised that the wording of the article will enable full effect to be given to that arrangement and that fears recently expressed by the county council are not in any way justified.
There is an alteration in the description of the area to be added to the city as set out in the petition. It relates to some 275 acres in the Rathdown Public Assistance District. Special consequential legislation would be required to deal with the position which would arise if part of that assistance district were brought into the city. This matter has been considered on the basis that, pending reconsideration of the general question, there should be only one public assistance area within the new city boundary, and that the Oireachtas should not have to deal with piecemeal amendments of the general law on public assistance solely to meet a situation in which there would be two different public assistance authorities within the new city.
The added area is, therefore, approximately 6,616 acres. By far the larger part of the extension is on the north side of the city, extending from Baldoyle through Coolock to Finglas, an area of about 5,263 acres. The other portions are Ballyfermot-Drimnagh—1,021 acres; Crumlin—137 acres; Walkinstown—63 acres, and Churchtown—132 acres.
The Provisional Order contains the usual consequential provisions which could be properly included in it, such as the preparation of official maps of the added area, provision for adjustment of financial matters, the continuance in effect in the added area of county council resolutions, orders andnotice which are not inconsistent with the general terms of the Order, arrangements as regards jurors books, valuation lists, the basis of contributions to the vocational education committee, the adjustment of the agricultural grant and the saving from disqualification of members of the council who, by reason of the transfer of area, may cease to be local government electors in the county.
I understand it is not usual to discuss the Second Reading of a private Bill unless the matter is opposed. We are not opposed to this Bill, but there are a few comments I would like to make on it.
The system of Provisional Order and private Bill is undesirable for a major extension of this sort. I understand that it is the practice under the legislation to introduce a private Bill, but the two previous major extensions— one in 1900 and the other in 1930— were the subject of public Bills.
The history of the discussions which the Minister has outlined is substantially accurate, with the exception of the references to clause 7. I understand that Dublin County Council did not oppose the extension on the ground that the cost involved by opposition to it would be excessive in proportion to the benefits likely to be gained, but that the county council representatives made it clear that their agreement was subject to the express understanding in clause 7 that the increase of burden which would be met by the corporation would be not less than 15 annual equal payments. As clause 7 is worded at present, it says at line 2: "for a period of 15 years in respect of the average annual increase of burden" That, of course, might mean any sum and not necessarily a sum equal to the increase in burden. I understand that the Minister is advised that the proposed wording of the Provisional Order is sufficient to meet the requirements of Dublin County Council, but it would be better if the phraseology were altered to set out that, for a period of 15 years, the corporation would make 15 annual payments equal to the increase in burden thrown on the ratepayers.
With regard to the other matters, Isuggest that the Minister should introduce legislation to deal with the rights of cottage purchase, contribution to seaside resorts, transfer of water mains and transfer of Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Act loans. I understand that the corporation representatives expressed the view at the inquiry that this would be the last extension. There is no reference in the Provisional Order to that undertaking, and everybody gives expression to the view that the continuous growth of the City of Dublin is bad, not merely for Dublin, but for the country, and that, unless some halt is put to that growth, the consequences for the country are likely to be undersirable. I understand that the corporation has not, so far, availed of the powers in the Town Planning Acts as a regional authority and that, if the corporation did avail of them, it would be possible to get an extension on a planned basis.
If this Provisional Order is agreed to, the Minister should introduce a Local Government (Dublin) Bill to regularise all the matters I have referred to and any other matters the Dublin County Council representatives raised at the inquiry into the proposed city extension. The fact is that there is no additional land available, except land in the green belt, and, if this extension is approved, the 6,600 odd acres represent the last remaining land inside the green belt, and any further extension would involve an extension into the area which has been accepted as the green belt. I should be glad if the Minister would draw the attention of the Minister for Local Government to these matters.
I regret that this Provisional Order is not more specific and detailed. It has a general application, and I am aware that the Minister, in his communications with Dublin County Council, stated in a long letter that it was desirable that this Bill should be presented in general terms, but it does not lessen the anxiety of Dublin County Council, so far as obtaining compensation in consequence of this city boundary extension in respect of the various services provided at the expense of the ratepayers of Dublin County is concerned.
A period of 15 years was mentioned, and apparently he stated also that the average annual loss for the 15 years will be recouped to Dublin County Council. If we are to have an average, we must wait until the end of the 15 years to find out what the average is. It would be better if we could get, through the Bill, an undertaking that a specific sum will be made available annually in consequence of this loss, and it should be possible to calculate the loss to Dublin County Council in consequence of this extension.
The reason for the extension is the increased population of Dublin City. It is a regrettable fact that the population of the city has increased by 25 persons per day over the past 20 years. The population appears to be growing consistently at that rate. It is regrettable that the planning authority of Dublin Corporation has not decided to build up the houses instead of building out into the country and covering the fertile land which formerly supplied vegetables and other food to Dublin City. It is proposed to cover a further 6,800 acres of fertile land with houses in order to meet the housing needs of Dublin Corporation.
The details of the financial adjustment are not contained in this Provisional Order. I regret that that is so, because if they were set out it would obviate the danger of any possible confusion and litigation between Dublin County Council and Dublin Corporation in the future, regarding the terms of the agreement reached between them. It would have been better if these details had been incorporated in this Order. It is regrettable, too, that we have not got an assurance regarding the cottage purchase scheme. When this city boundary extension takes place, the position of the tenants of cottages in that outer area now in the Dublin County Council area will be that they will be brought under the same regulations as apply to the tenants of Dublin Corporation houses.
We find in the area to which Dublin City will now extend a large number of families who would qualify for houses under Dublin County Council. The council are housing people wherethere is only one child in the family, but where the conditions demand it because of overcrowding or ill-health. In the case of Dublin Corporation, except in very urgent cases, there must be more than three children—in fact, I think it is even more than four children—in the family in order that a corporation house can be allocated, according to the waiting list in existence at present. This means that many families in the outer area which is going to be incorporated in the Dublin Corporation area will have to take their place at the end of a long queue of families waiting for houses from Dublin Corporation. The people with one child must take their place in the queue and they will be in competition with Dublin City families having three and four children.
It was the desire of Dublin County Council that we would receive an assurance from the Dublin Corporation —perhaps by means of this Provisional Order—that the people who would normally qualify for a cottage in the Dublin County Council area and in accordance with the county council regulations would be given the same chance of getting a house now. It appears, however, in the absence of an assurance, that those people will be obliged to wait their turn when the city boundary is extended.
There is not in this Provisional Order an undertaking regarding the development of Portmarnock. Dublin County Council succeeded in getting an assurance in principle from the Dublin Corporation that Portmarnock would be developed for the benefit of the inhabitants of Dublin City. Thousands of people, not only in the summer, but also in the winter, go to Portmarnock for a change. On any summer evening anything up to 20,000 young people can be found in Portmarnock. In Portmarnock we have not the amenities and facilities which should be made available to the inhabitants of Dublin City who go there. They could go to Dollymount or the Bull Wall, but many of them prefer to go out further into the country. Portmarnock is convenient for them, and they go there.
That is the reason why DublinCorporation admitted in principle that it would be advisable to provide finance for the purpose of developing Portmarnock as a seaside resort for the citizens of Dublin City. There is nothing in this Provisional Order which would ensure that this would be carried out with the least possible delay when the city boundary is extended. In fact, the boundary will be within two miles of Portmarnock and Portmarnock Strand. We have got no assurance regarding that matter.
I regret to say that this Provisional Order is not more specific and detailed. It is possible that, even if there is goodwill on both sides, there may be disputes regarding certain issues between Dublin Corporation and the Dublin County Council when the city boundary extension has been confirmed.
I was very surprised that Deputy Rooney adopted the attitude he did on the Second Reading in regard to this Provisional Order. I do not know whether Deputy Rooney is fully aware of the fact that when the corporation decided to make a move to extend the city boundary and when the Dublin County Council objected to have an inquiry in connection with the matter, several meetings took place between the officials and representatives of the county council and officials and representatives of the Dublin Corporation. By the time the inquiry was held agreement had been reached by both sides. The main point of the dispute was the annual payment. The Dublin County Council asked that there should be a certain capital sum paid equal to 20 years' purchase on the loss to the county council as a result of the loss of rates consequent on the acquisition of the extended area. Agreement was reached, the corporation not wanting to make more than ten annual payments. That was so stated at the inquiry and was included in the Provisional Order.
There were quite a number of other items. There was a request from the county council that the corporation should provide from its water supply 40 gallons per day per head of the population in certain areas through which the corporation pipes passed. There was agreement on that. Therewere certain other matters with which the corporation and the county council agreed, including grants by the City of Dublin to the county council to improve seaside resorts normally frequented by the people of Dublin during the holiday season.
Since those agreements were reached, a number of persons who were not present at these negotiations tried to find fault with or add to the terms to be included in the Provisional Order. I have no doubt but that the representatives of the county council who negotiated with the representatives of the Dublin Corporation are quite satisfied they have got everything they required. It may be of interest to the House to know that at one stage during the discussions it was agreed by the Dublin Corporation that they might not be prepared to go on with the extension because of the fact that it would require some £2,000,000 capital investment in order to bring the amenities of the extended area up to those of the city proper. The county council could not see itself taking on the burden of spending this £2,000,000 over the years to provide these amenities.
If the county council is speaking through Deputy Rooney they cannot have it every way. The Deputy in the course of his speech spoke about the corporation taking over fertile land which was producing valuable foodstuffs. In the next sentence he discussed the conditions of the people living on this fertile land who needed housing. He said they were living in overcrowded conditions. There was talk of certain rights in regard to people residing in cottages, the right they would have to purchase these cottages for themselves. When we found that the numbers involved were very small, we suggested by agreement that the people should be requested to make application to the county council before the corporation took over and before the contract for the taking over of the houses was concluded. Alternatively the corporation would undertake, if there was any legislation governing the city administration, to seek amendment by agreement to enable the corporation to carry outtheir undertaking that the cottage dwellers would not be any worse off than they are at the present time.
A great number of houses have already been build in the area which is included in the extended portion and which is at present situated in the county council area. The corporation acquired land and had houses built on those lands. They are not able to give the amenities required from the city point of view to those houses and would not be able to give anything like those provided on other sites that have been acquired.
I think it is very difficult to put a final stop to the development of the city or the country. It is true to say that Dublin Corporation did give an undertaking that as far as they could they would not seek any further extension of the city boundary. Obviously, the present corporation cannot bind the next generation. They do not know what developments will take place in the next 20 years and even if there was a stipulation in the Act that the boundary should not be extended, that could be amended if it was found necessary.
I sympathise with the county council because the large income they would normally get if the county were fully developed is being lessened as a result of having less territory. There was a compromise as between the 6,000 or 7,000 acres as compared with the 11,000 acres which we thought we would need for full and final development. It should also be clear to Deputy Rooney that, as we progress with the building of houses for those in need of them and who have to take their place in a queue, the provision will be adequate—I do not know in how many years, but ultimately it will be adequate—and the housing problem, as we know it, will soon disappear and we will have one less worry.
This inquiry was held by an officer of the Department of Local Government, before whom we were prepared to make our cases, but both sides indicated to him that we had reached agreement on certain things, such as the supply of sewerage facilities to county council houses which are not inthe area proposed to be taken over, a water supply in any area through which our pipes would go as well as the agreed quantity of water normally required for a person where water is available, and grants for the development of those resorts frequented by the population of Dublin in the holiday season. I do not know whether it is now suggested that Deputy Rooney has the authority of the Dublin County Council to say that the agreement reached between us should not now be accepted and that these matters should be dealt with in this Bill.
With regard to the annual payment, nobody can say at this moment what the actual figure should be, but there was an agreement between the representatives of both authorities that the officials of the Dublin County Council and the Dublin Corporation should meet and try to come to an agreement on the figure, and, if there was any disagreement between the officials as to the exact figure, both sides would regard the Minister for Local Government as the authority to whom they could appeal. There can be no dispute about it because, as the owner of each property who pays rates to the Dublin County Council at present becomes a ratepayer to the Dublin Corporation, obviously that is the amount of loss sustained by the county council, subject to the payment for services rendered by one authority to another, which is on a charge to charge basis. That was the agreement which was come to by those representing both authorities, and I am very sorry there should be a suggestion that there is doubt as to the final conclusion being satisfactory.
At the risk of incurring the wrath of Dublin Deputies, I should like to make some comments on what I consider is a very important measure. I should like to know from the Minister has the Government any idea as to when a limit will be reached with regard to the expansion of Dublin City. We heard Deputy Rooney and Deputy Briscoe suggest that the corporation agreed to a certain extent that there would be no further pressureon the Dublin County Council to provide areas for the expansion of Dublin City, but that that depends on circumstances outside the control of the Dublin Corporation. One of the circumstances outside the control of the Dublin Corporation is the huge number of people coming to the city annually from the rural areas.
On a point of order. Is it proper for the Deputy to raise on this Bill the general question of the vast problem in connection with Dublin City and the policy of this or any other Government with regard to it?
I do not think the Deputy is in order.
There is a matter of principle involved, and it would be unfair to let a measure like this through without offering some comments on this proposal for the expansion of Dublin City and what it will entail, which, I submit, is more relevant to a Bill of this kind than to an Estimate.
The Deputy is proposing to expand the scope of the discussion and is not in order.
I do not propose to do that. I only propose to ask a question.
If the Deputy wants to ask a question, I will allow him.
In view of this proposed expansion of Dublin City, is the Minister taking into consideration the fact that the people who will be housed in these new areas will have to travel many miles to their place of employment? I think that is relevant to this particular measure, because Deputy Rooney made the case that, if this building drive is to be intensified in Dublin, there is no need for it to be spread out all over the County Dublin, that those responsible should concentrate on erecting houses as close as possible to where the people work.
In recent months there has been an increase in transport charges, and one thing which weighs very heavily on anyman's budget is the cost of transport to and from his work. If we allow Dublin City to creep out into the heart of the county, is it not logical to suggest that the cost of transport for a man living in the outer areas will be prohibitive? I should like the Minister to say whether the Government have considered that, but, if you, Sir, rule me out on the point which I consider to be of the greatest importance, namely, this tremendous expansion in the size of Dublin at the expense of rural Ireland——
The Deputy can discuss that on another occasion. There will be plenty of opportunities.
I do not propose to elaborate on that. I do not want at the same time to be put in the position that I am opposing the housing drive in Dublin. There are many thousands of families in Dublin who are badly in need of houses, but I suggest to the Minister that the method by which these people should be supplied with houses is not by enlarging the city boundaries but by building up within the city area itself. I have seen excellent flats erected in Dublin, and I think that that would be a better solution of the problem of housing the workers than expanding out into the rural areas.
The danger that the Dublin Corporation and the Dublin County Council have to face in future is that, if pressure is brought to bear on the Dublin Corporation to extend, they will have no alternative but to get the land from the Dublin County Council. If this rate of expansion of the City of Dublin goes on, I can see the boundaries of Dublin extending to Athlone within the next 40 or 50 years. That is what it is heading for, and Deputy Rooney need not worry about Dublin County Council because it will be gobbled up in this extension that is now taking place in the City of Dublin.
I merely want to raise one point. Deputy Rooney referred to the very serious repercussions there would be if this matter was pursued to its logical conclusion; in other words, everyone would have to stay inhis own particular district and nobody would be allowed into Dublin except those who were born in it.
Under this new measure a number of council cottages will come under the jurisdiction of the Dublin Corporation area. Under the 1950 Act these cottage tenants can purchase their cottages a year and a day after they came into occupation of them provided they make application. The Act also lays it down that these cottages which the tenants opt to purchase outright must be put into a proper state of repair. A number of the cottages which will be acquired by the Dublin Corporation are not at the moment in a proper state of repair. I want to bring that matter to the notice of those interested in order that the spirit of the Act will be honoured by the corporation in allowing these people to purchase their cottages subsequent to the corporation putting them into a proper state of repair. Under the Act at the moment they can purchase these cottages if they make application within a year and a day of taking up occupation. There is nothing in the Act requiring the cottages to be put into a proper state of repair if they are taken over by the Dublin Corporation. I want to make that point perfectly clear at this stage.
The only other matter that causes me some concern is the fact that my little constituency is fast disappearing. I do not know where we will be in a very short time.
I agree with the Minister in making this Provisional Order Bill. More land is required for housing purposes in the city area. I disagree with Deputy McQuillan that flats are the ideal solution to the housing problem that exists in our urban areas. Flats are just a method of housing human beings and nothing more. The problem in Cork City is acute. The urban area of Macroom is larger than the urban area of Cork City.
We cannot discuss Cork on this particular matter.
I am dealing with the point raised by Deputy Rooney.
In relation to Dublin but not in relation to Cork.
I support this measure, and I would appeal to the Minister to make a similar Order for Cork.
Deputy Briscoe answered most of the questions raised in this debate and I do not think there is any need for me to elaborate on what he said. I should, perhaps, advert to the Local Government Act, 1930, which provided the wording for article 7 in respect of the arrangement. The words "in respect of" are being used and there is some objection to them. I can assure Deputy Cosgrave that there is no question that the matter and the wording is fully in order and there has been a final acceptance by the Dublin County Council in regard to the terms of the Provisional Order.
In connection with the ability of tenants to purchase their houses, if any amendment is required to the Housing (Amendment) Act of 1950, which enables tenants to purchase their houses and, incidentally, if the corporation at its discretion chooses to make a collective purchase scheme, the repairs can be carried out at its discretion. I think that answers the point raised by Deputy Burke. If there are any difficulties which would prevent the purchase of houses by tenants that matter can be brought before the notice of the Minister for Local Government in connection with any amendment to existing housing legislation.
I am informed that in connection with persons who are waiting for houses in Dublin County where the conditions for securing a house are less onerous than they are in Dublin, it is within the power of the Dublin Corporation to provide these people with houses. If there are people in the county who are still waiting to be housed and who have fewer in family than those in the Dublin Corporation area as a whole that matter can be raised and there is nothing to prevent proper arrangements being made.
All the other matters raised could be settled by agreement between the Dublin Corporation and the Dublin County Council. My own view is that the Minister for Local Government hasan enormous control already over all local authorities, a control which, as the House knows, even extends to ensuring that a rate is struck, collected and so on and so forth. I, and I am sure most Deputies, would prefer agreements to be implemented in these matters rather than encourage the Minister for Local Government to initiate and formulate a Provisional Order Bill to enforce agreements.
I understand it is possible under the Sanitary Services Acts for agreements to be made between the Dublin Corporation and the Dublin County Council in regard to the development of Portmarnock, for instance, and that the Dublin Corporation has recognised the fact that the vast majority of the people who go there in the summer come from the city area and that they, therefore, have some responsibility for the sanitary services there.
So far as the question of the amount of land required and the growth of Dublin City is concerned, I understand that the building of flats in the city would in itself never solve the housing problem and that it is necessary, therefore, to extend. It would be impossible for the Minister for Local Government to guarantee that there would never be any necessity for a further extension of the Dublin Corporation area. I think it is true to say that about 3,000 acres of land are required for 18,000 houses and the construction of 18,000 houses would go far towards solving the Dublin housing problem.
Deputy McQuillan raised the question of the difficulty of travel. The cost of travel is, of course, a problem affecting all cities that grow rapidly and it would be impossible for me to start on an elaborate discussion in relation to the growth of Dublin City and relate it to the whole sociological and economic development of the country. Dublin has grown continuously under three different administrations. There has been no change whatever under any of those administrations in the rate of growth and I see no hope that the rate of growth will be reduced in the near future.
Unless industry is decentralised.
As everyone knows efforts have been made to decentralise industry with a fair amount of success but the city has nevertheless continued to grow. I am not in the least optimistic in regard to the matter. In practically every small country in Western Europe there is an unconscious desire on the part of citizens, irrespective of the character of the Government or social customs, to have one capital city whose population approximates to close on 1,000,000 inhabitants. I think it would be much better if we could avoid that. If an examination were made of the population figures of the small countries in Western Europe it would be found that that continuous growth in urban populations seems to be common to all of them even though their history and land settlements and laws are quite different from ours. We cannot, however, decide on a matter of that kind through the medium of a discussion on this Provisional Order Bill.
There is now complete agreement between the Dublin County Council and the Dublin Corporation on all the matters raised and the Minister for Local Government has the power to settle matters which may be the subject of some future disagreement. Under existing legislation it is possible to make arrangements for all the matters which the Dublin County Council desire to have incorporated in this Bill but which it was impossible to incorporate because of the main Local Government Act, 1930, which governs the character of Provisional Orders in relation to the extension of boundaries. I may add that the terms of this Provisional Order Bill are similar to those provided in the case of the extension of Limerick.
Question put and agreed to.
Agreed to take remaining stages now.
Bill put through Committee, reported without amendment, received for final consideration and passed.