Deputy de Valera has given notice that he wished to raise the subject matter of Question No. 49 on the Order Paper.
Adjournment Debate. - Dublin Dangerous Buildings.
There are a number of questions on the Order Paper which the Minister answered today and it is the subject matter of those questions which I wish to raise on the Adjournment. There is a crisis in the city of Dublin which is in part a housing crisis and in part a crisis relating to dangerous buildings, and the two are closely interconnected. It would appear that the local authority, the Dublin Corporation, has not been in a position to deal with the question of dangerous tenements at the speed that now appears to have been necessary. There is also the question of providing alternative accommodation for the occupants of such buildings, and, generally, the provision of housing accommodation in the city of Dublin has not been adequate to the need.
I am raising this matter on the Adjournment to urge upon the Minister that there is a crisis and that this crisis requires extraordinary action under one or two heads at least. From recent experience we realise that it is vitally necessary that a comprehensive and ordered survey of dangerous buildings in the city of Dublin be undertaken forthwith. The second consideration is that, because such a survey will take time, the measures necessary to deal with emergencies that are likely to arise should be instituted; in other words, some drill must be there for urgently dealing with buildings that threaten immediate collapse. I realise that is a difficult thing but already over the weekend the Dangerous Buildings Section of the Corporation did provide such a service and I am satisfied that that section of the Corporation has possibly averted serious danger by the vigorous action it took.
If we are to have a survey of such buildings we must face the fact that people cannot be allowed to live on in them and, irrespective of the availability of permanent accommodation, emergency measures may be necessary to ensure that people who are hurriedly evacuated from unsuitable tenements are adequately dealt with first on a short-term basis with a view to the longer term basis. The whole situation is such as to warrant extraordinary measures for speeding up the provision of permanent accommodation in the city of Dublin.
I shall not go into details in this discussion because the scope is limited but I want to place this on the record, that I was surprised when I asked to have this matter raised on the Adjournment that I was told that in the interpretation of order in the House I would be in order in raising only the subject matter of Question No. 49, that the other matters did not come within the purview of the Minister for Local Government but were properly matters for Dublin Corporation. I accept that ruling and I do not wish to go beyond it. It is possibly all right in ordinary circumstances for Dáil representatives to be precluded on that basis but I do want to suggest that this crisis is of such a nature that powers should be taken to intervene and ascertain the required information.
The Minister has intervened to the extent of having an inquiry. I do not wish in any way to prejudice this inquiry by allusions or references of any kind or by casting blame here or there. The inquiry must not be prejudiced and restraint is called for on our part in this House. Therefore, I do not wish to go any further than to make one comment on the inquiry. The Minister in reply to the question today said:
I have directed a public inquiry to be held into the circumstances connected with the collapse of buildings and the administration of the law respecting unfit dwellings and dangerous structures in relation to these buildings.
So far so good, but I should like the Minister to extend the scope of that inquiry to cover the ancillary problems that arise in relation to dangerous buildings, namely, the type of housing to be allocated, and so on. With those remarks, I shall leave the question of both the inquiry and the details that have been raised in other questions.
From my own personal experience and the experience of other Deputies over the weekend, I think we can say we may be faced at any moment with the problem which arose over the weekend. The Dangerous Buildings Section of the Corporation condemned, and no doubt rightly condemned, buildings without delay last Friday and Saturday. They secured the necessary court orders or whatever justices' orders are necessary for the purpose. As a result, the tenants of these houses had to evacuate them immediately. The procedure apparently was that the people so evacuated were then dealt with in the Allocation Section of Dublin Corporation. I have no doubt that every strenuous effort was made to make the allocation as quickly as possible but it is obvious that it was a physical impossibility, even if enough staff were there, to allocate permanent accommodation immediately to people in these circumstances. However, there was no adequate provision in the city of Dublin—and I say this from my own personal experience—for dealing with people who through no fault of their own were suddenly projected on to the roadway along with their furniture. We must face the fact that there are psychological factors in this and that there are limits beyond which you cannot expect people to go.
I wonder if I could raise a point of order? I understand that Standing Orders allow for half an hour on the Adjournment Debate and the Minister will have ten minutes to reply. There is nothing to prevent Deputy de Valera, if he so wishes, from speaking for 20 minutes but I should like to say that I would like to intervene for three or four minutes. I understand also that Deputy Sherwin would like to intervene for three or four minutes. I understand, a Cheann Comhairle, that it might not be against the conventions of the House if the Deputy who raised this matter would be prepared to give way to allow two short speeches before the Minister replies?
That is not a matter of order.
It is not a matter of order but Deputy Costello has taken a lot of time to say it. I do not want to adopt a dog-in-the-manger attitude—
Will the Deputy give me three minutes?
There are a few things——
I gave notice that I wished to speak.
Notice was given to me that Deputy Sherwin wishes to speak, and Deputy Costello has given me notice.
I am more concerned in this as these events occurred in my area.
Can I try to facilitate the Deputies? If I give Deputy Costello three minutes, will the Chair allow Deputy Sherwin the five minutes? I will try to stop in approximately two minutes.
I will not watch the clock too closely.
I only want three minutes.
I want to facilitate the Deputy. We must be reasonable about this. There are two sides to this problem. One is that this emergency was aggravated by the weather. The exceptionally bad winter, the hot weather we had recently, and then the thunderstorm all undoubtedly aggravated the situation. I do know that the Corporation made efforts to meet this emergency but they were not sufficient and the situation which arose last Saturday, particularly in Fenian Street, was, from the public point of view, unjustifiable. We should have been able to cope with it and we were not. I want to ensure that this type of thing will not happen again. These are things which should be said in regard to the problem. We know that in 1956-57, because of a shortage of money, the Corporation were not able to raise the funds required for their programme. We also know that some time ago, as a result of people going away, there were very many vacancies. Somebody gave me the figure of 1,500. We know that that happens to be so but we also know that 800 families returned and that that aggravated the position. We know that there will be 600 more houses built by March. That is all very well. I must conclude now to allow the other Deputies speak. I think last Saturday's events were a crisis which should never have happened. The matter must be raised. I do not wish to apportion blame but I would ask the Minister to consider the matter on the basis I outlined.
I——
I would ask the Deputy not to force me to intervene.
I will only take three minutes. This is a crisis that has not arisen in the last month but has been with us for several years. It has taken four deaths to bring it to the notice of the proper authorities and it is most tragic that it required such extreme results to bring about what is very belatedly coming about, namely, a public interest in a situation in the city of Dublin which I believe to be a scandal and a shame in a community that calls itself Christian. The position is this. In 1955-56 the Dublin Corporation built 1,311 houses; in 1956-57 the number increased to 1,564 houses. The number of houses built by the Corporation declined to 1,021 in 1957-58 and to 460 in 1958-59. There was a slight increase in 1959-60 and a decline to 277 in 1960-61. There was a drop between 1956-57 and 1960-61 from 1,564 to 277 houses. That decline is responsible for what happened in the past few weeks.
The Corporation have a waiting list of thousands of people who are not able to get houses, people who would not be on the waiting list if the houses had been built. I do not blame the Corporation for this. I blame the Government because the Corporation have carried out the Government's stated economic programme of cutting down on social investment in favour of so-called productive investment. The decline in building in Dublin has been responsible for the disastrous conditions of the past few weeks, for the disastrous conditions which have existed for several years past. As a result, people are living in un-Christian conditions. Deputy de Valera talks about a survey; I have correspondence here—and Deputy Sherwin and every Dublin Deputy has correspondence— which will obviate the necessity for the survey.
There are 19 people living to-night in Cabra in a two-bedroom house. There are 12 people living in Cabra— eight of them young people aged between eight and 20—living in a two-bedroom house. There is a mentally handicapped child in my constituency who cannot go out into his front garden because there is a step and he will fall down. He cannot be transferred to another house because there are not enough houses. There is a spastic 17-years-old child who cannot be transferred; there are a lot of people living in grossly overcrowded conditions. This is a national emergency. Deputy de Valera says he will not apportion blame. I apportion blame and say it is not the fault of the Housing Committee of the Dublin Corporation and it is not the fault of the inspectors of the Corporation. The Government must accept responsibility for what has happened.
The Deputy is making political capital out of poor people's misery.
This is not making political capital.
The Deputy is a disgrace.
I am not accepting that either Deputy de Valera or Deputy Costello is right. I know they are interested in the problem but I know that most of their data is gleaned from what they have read but I can speak from experience and what I know to be a fact. There is a great deal of difference. I am a member of the Housing Committee of Dublin Corporation and I have attended practically every meeting of it for the past eight years. I know why the houses are there and why they fell, but I am trying to reserve what I know for the court of inquiry. It does not make much sense talking about it here. Too often a matter of this sort is made a political issue. I am not interested in that. I am only interested in telling the truth and I will tell it to the court of inquiry.
I know why there are 550 condemned tenements there and I know why the people are in them. It has little to do with the fact that there are no houses. There are 800 single people or pairs of people in those 550 condemned tenements. Those people do not get houses and let us not say it is because there were no houses. Single people and people living in pairs do not get houses. If there was a lack, it was a lack of one-room or two-room flats. The houses are a separate issue. However, I shall make the case at the court of inquiry.
I am only asking the Minister to do something. He can do something. Three weeks ago, I spoke to him and said the position is bad enough. I asked him if he would do something. I asked him if he would consult the Minister for Justice and get him to amend the Rent Restrictions Act. That Act allows business people to get possession of habitable dwellings. They merely have to give them a few pounds and they can go to the court and tell the court that they want it for a business and the court has power to give possession. In my area alone, 80 per cent of all those dangerous buildings are located. Practically 40 per cent of them are adjacent to my house. I live in Linenhall Street. These houses are all in front of and behind me.
I am talking not from what I read but from what I know. In this same area at present there is an application for possession of 19 habitable dwellings at Phibsborough Road by a supermarket and they will get possession. Only a few months ago, nine habitable dwellings in Abbey Street were taken possession of. About nine months ago, ten habitable dwellings were obtained in Benburb Street. These are all in an area where 80 per cent of the dwellings crashed in three weeks.
I asked the Minister about this three weeks ago—there was nothing he could do in that short time. I asked him if he could get this part of the Act suspended so that no more applications would be entertained for habitable dwellings until such time as there was no crisis. I am not here to hit one Party or the other. I shall not rub it in that people talked here out of turn. You can only know about a thing when you live with it.
I could speak on this matter for three hours. I could accuse lots of people. I could swing people's heads. I shall not do that. I would ask the Minister to see the Minister for Justice and to arrange to stop until further notice the granting of applications for habitable dwellings in this city. With that, I shall say no more now.
This is a matter which, having been raised on the Adjournment, I hoped would be considered and discussed on a basis in keeping with the seriousness of the position. I am rather sorry to observe that Deputy Costello, of the three who spoke, seemed to have no real intention in speaking but to make what little political capital he could out of getting his voice in first. I shall not give the obvious answer to Deputy Costello but he knows what the answer is.
Deputy Costello was not evident in this matter or in any of these questions today. It is amazing how evident he has become in the past few minutes. I have been appalled that what has happened should happen. I was stunned. Until I have found out quite a deal of the facts as to why it happened I shall not commit myself as to what I think or whom to blame. It is not a question at this stage of who is to blame but what is to be done.
Deputy Sherwin has indicated that he will withhold what information he has—and that he knows others of like mind—until the inquiry takes place. I do not intend to make any lengthy statement on this matter. Like all others concerned with and interested in the housing of the people of this city, I am appalled and stunned by what has happened. I trust that, arising from our inquiry, we may find out why it happened and, more important, may find a way to ensure it will never happen again.
The Dáil adjourned at 10.55 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 19th June, 1963.