asked the Minister for Local Government if he will now give final sanction for the commencement of the building of thirty houses at John Street, Wexford, in view of the number of building workers now idle and of the fact that there has been such a prolonged delay since the proposal was first submitted.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Wexford Housing Programme.
45.
Tenders have been invited by Wexford Corporation for this scheme and the last date for reception of tenders is the 25th of this month. The question of my giving sanction to the commencement of building cannot arise until a specific proposal on the matter is received from the Corporation.
Is the Minister not concerned about the long delay since the first application was made by the Wexford Corporation to have these houses built? Is he not aware of the fact that because building has been delayed so much in Wexford many building workers are now idle in the town and many have been forced to emigrate? Will he also say at what date he will require the Wexford Corporation to invite tenders for these 30 houses?
That is quite a formidable list of Supplementary Questions.
Only three.
I shall give the information to the Deputy. With regard to my concern in this matter, I am most concerned that these houses should be built but I am equally concerned that the cost should not be exorbitant and that concerns the interests of the tenants, the ratepayers and the taxpayers. In the case of the scheme which is under question, the cost of the superstructure alone is £250 to £300 more than the labour cost of a similar superstructure by direct labour in the City of Cork. It is quite evident from that that the cost is out of all proportion to what it should be. The device now being adopted of the direct labour unit tendering in competition with other contractors on the specifications laid down will have the effect, as it has had in another instance, of giving us a much more suitably priced job than that proposed. It is certainly no pleasure for me to keep revising these things or putting them back. I want the houses built just as much as the Deputy or anybody in Wexford.
Surely the Minister could have got all that information six months ago?
In regard to the question of delays, I do not accept that the delay is in any way due to the action of my Department, or that any unnecessary delay has been caused by it. In fact, since September of last year, and up to January of this year, any delays caused in these revisions, possibly necessary delays, have been in Wexford and not in the Department. Further to that, I might say that to expedite things and cut out any undue delay, we have had our people visit Wexford twice to try to make it possible for the Wexford authorities and ourselves to reach a conclusion.
Surely the Minister must agree that there has been a painful delay? The House will remember that on three or four occasions I tried to establish the need for so many houses which the Minister denied and which some of the officials of Wexford Corporation denied? The Minister will surely remember that he said that there were only 30 houses required in Wexford and that subsequently the county manager, months afterwards, said 260 were needed?
Correct.
That took three or four months and now there has been three or four months' delay on the cost. In the meantime men are idle and have been forced to emigrate.
I said, from the information furnished to me from Wexford, that 30 houses appeared to be the need. Subsequent to that, the Deputy questioned that figure in this House and only subsequent to that was it elicited from the manager and the local authority that more than 30 were necessary. Who is at fault there?
Does the Minister agree that it is a scandal that they could change their minds so quickly?
It is not that they changed their minds; they did not submit the information they should have until we dug it out of them.
"Dug" is the right word.