The matter of programming about which I was talking when the debate was adjourned is one which I should like further to impress on Deputies as being of very great importance to the future of house building and building generally carried out by local authorities throughout the country. It is a matter that I will be dealing with much more specifically in the very near future and will be taking up directly with the local authorities concerned with a view to bringing about a balanced approach to the problems on hands at the moment and to ensuring that building, particularly house building, will follow a fairy even pattern, not a pattern of starting and stopping, as may have been the case in the past.
The general indications that I have given of what we have been doing as a Government and through the Department of Local Government in particular, are a complete answer to the assertions that we were trying to slow down the spending of money for such very necessary purposes as housing and other social services. There are a number of other items in the general overall position that should be mentioned, which are additional proof, if that is necessary, that far from depressing expenditure on these services which are of benefit to the community as a whole, in fact we have been doing the reverse, namely, stimulating and increasing expenditure and introducing further and greater expenditure under various other heads.
For instance, a matter of some concern to the agricultural community would be that from 1956 to 1963, by deliberate action of the Government and through legislation in this House, we have increased the amount paid from the general Exchequer by way of agricultural rates relief from £5.2 million in 1956 to £8.5 million in 1963-64. In addition, again dealing with the farming community, in order to induce farmers to avail of the improved grants provided by the Department of Agriculture for the reconstruction and erection of farm buildings, we brought into being a 20-year complete remission of all rates on such new buildings or reconstructed buildings as would come under this heading. Previously there had been exemption for a limited period of seven years. These two matters are again an indication of our wish to accelerate building, contrary to the allegation made that we are trying to depress it.
A few facts should be kept in mind in regard to the Road Fund and road construction. The relevant facts are that when we took over from the previous administration in the early part of 1957 we found the situation to be that there was £4.1 million of commitments laid at the door of the Road Fund. Incidentally, that commitment had risen from £1.8 million in 1953-54, which was the last year in which the previous Fianna Fáil Government had been in office. While £5.1 million was allocated for road reconstruction, repair, improvement and maintenance in 1956-57, this year there is £8.07 million allocated to our various local authorities and, despite this very noticeable increase, the commitments on the Fund are being contained at the, I think, fairly reasonable and safe figure of £3.4 million. It should be borne in mind that this £8.07 million is available for payment out to local authorities this year, which is more than could be said for the £5.1 million which was allocated in 1956-57, which, but for the advent of the Fianna Fáil administration in the early part of 1957, would not have been available for payment to these councils.
These are figures which should be kept in mind and should provide food for thought to those who talk about Fianna Fáil depressing spending, depressing building, depressing construction and who allege that that was deliberate policy generated by the terms of the Programme for Economic Expansion issued in November, 1958.
Now I come to the various things we have been endeavouring to do with regard to roads and road traffic. As the House is aware, we brought in and got through this House very extensive road traffic legislation a couple of years ago and since then we have been endeavouring to bring in by way of regulation the various matters which had yet to be attended to as outlined in the Act but which it was left to the Minister to bring into operation as and when the time was ripe. We did bring in regulations and put into operation almost immediately quite a considerable part of the Act dealing with penalties, new offences and so forth and in the past couple of years we have seen other fruits of the Act in the traffic signs, parking bye-laws, fines on the spot—so-called fines on the spot at any rate—and recently we brought into being quite elaborate and complex regulations dealing with construction, equipment and lighting of vehicles, which, no doubt, were very much needed but which took a considerable amount of time because of the complexities involved and the consultations which it was necessary to have before being in a position to bring in the regulations. At present we are dealing with all of Part III of the Act, which includes, amongst other things, the driving test regulations, and we would hope to bring in this Part of the Act in the very near future.
In addition, we have had submitted to us in the recent past the Report of the Commission set up to deal with driving under the influence of drink or drugs. The public have been given until the 30th of this month to express their views on certain aspects of this Report. The Leader of the main Opposition mentioned one aspect of this—the question of the intake of alcohol. I entirely agree with his approach to this matter, which is that a fixed figure of alcohol content in the blood should not now or ever be an indication of whether a person is drunk or sober. This figure, which will be based on all the experience we can garner, will merely indicate the point at which it is held alcohol can be taken and beyond which it can be said, not that a person is drunk, but that his driving would not be as good as if he had taken less alcohol. That is the approach that is intended. We should not go into the never-ending argument as to when one man is drunk and when another man is drunk, which cannot be decided by how many pints and how many half-ones they have had. The Leader of the main Opposition referred also to "breathaliser" tests and whether blood tests were objectionable or not. I do not intend to deal with these points now, because I do not think that would be relevant, but they will come up for debate in due course. As I said, we are giving up to the 30th of this month for the public to express their views. On the basis of that, we will decide what form this legislation will take; and the legislation will be brought before the House as soon as possible. Any flaws that have emerged in the working of the new Road Traffic Act will be corrected in this amending Bill.
The question of speed limits has been discussed. Naturally, not all of the views expressed coincided. The question of the siting of traffic signs is currently under review by the local technical committees. These will report to their local authorities, who will transmit to me their considered opinions, on which I will be entitled to act. I expect this to be done in a very short time.
One charge made on which I should like to comment is that the 30 m.p.h. limit is frustrating and causing accidents. I entirely disagree with the view that the 30 m.p.h. limit is the cause of accidents by frustrating drivers who want to get by.
