asked the Minister for Local Government if he will now give sanction, applied for last August by the Wexford County Council, to tenders submitted to him for the erection of forty-two houses; and if there has been any communication to the County Council on this subject.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - County Wexford Housing.
10.
I am not in a position to say when acceptance of these tenders may be approved. The council were notified last March of a capital allocation for 1966-67 of £54,000 for local authority housing, including £24,000 in respect of existing commitments and £30,000 in respect of new works. The sum allowed for commitments was based on information supplied by them. They were asked to decide the order of priority of the works to be carried out on the basis of that allocation. A reply was received from the council on the 16th instant representing that their existing commitments were substantially more than conveyed in the information already furnished and that the full amount of their capital allocation would be needed to meet these commitments together with expenditure on 13 cottages in respect of which the acceptance of tenders has already been approved by me. Their submission will now be considered in conjunction with similar submissions made by a number of other housing authorities. A decision will be given on it as soon as possible.
(Interruptions.)
I gather there has been no finality in this matter yet as far as sanction is concerned?
We have only got a reply stating that the information which we originally sought and got from the local authority represented commitments much less, as given to us, than they now actually prove to be. That was only on 16th instant, a few days ago, and we are considering that situation now.
Will the Minister make a decision as quickly as he can?
As quickly as possible.
May I take it that if that information is supplied all round, the Minister will be prepared to alter upwards the amount of the allocations?
The more wrong information I have got from local authorities and the more it becomes evident that the information was wrong, the less there will be to divide among those who have given wrong information.
I cannot follow the Minister's reasoning on that. I am not sure he is able to do so himself. Is the Minister saying that even if the information he got or says he got at first was wrong, he is not now prepared, if the information is changed, to alter the amount of money made available?
The first thing I have to do is to satisfy myself that the first information was incorrect. There is some reason to suspect that it might not have been.
There is a good deal of time wasted in this matter where the building of cottages is very urgent.
We sought the information as best we could get it at the time. We were supplied with it; we acted on it within the limits imposed on me so far as finance for new houses was concerned but now, unfortunately, it transpires in the case of a number of local authorities the information originally supplied is said or alleged to be incorrect.
(Interruptions.)
Is it true that there was no communication from the Minister to the local authorities setting out the type of information he wanted and that anything that happened happened between officials in discussions or conversations on the telephone?
Yes.
And that if he has got wrong information it is the Minister's own fault?
You might as well say it was the council's own fault because the information was supplied by the council's officials.
Is it not true that the Minister's officials only asked for the information in respect of tenders, in respect of matters which they were bound to? In other words, the Minister asked for tenders which had been finalised and asked how much money would be required to cover them? Is that not the information that was sought and it had no relation to the programme for 1966?
In view of the bleak outlook in the matter of building houses by county councils, would the Minister not consider shortcircuiting all this tedious and lengthy correspondence by inviting certain of the officials up to the Department and have these difficulties resolved in one afternoon?
The allocations are based on the information we got on 22nd March. This is the beginning of May. It is only now that we are getting back information saying that the information with which we were already furnished was not accurate.
Not that it was not accurate but that it was not for this year's programme.
Is the Minister suggesting that local authorities must resort to deception in order to get money?
If that is the sort of question the Deputy wants to ask——
The Minister suggested it.
——I would say that there are local authorities who, if they thought they would get money by deceiving me, would try it.
Is it not a bad situation in which local authorities would even have to think of resorting to such measures?
The Minister has said that certain local authorities have given wrong information and he also said he would name the local authorities. Would he confirm or deny that Donegal County Council gave him wrong or incorrect information?
If the Deputy puts down a question for next week, I shall give the whole list of the local authorities concerned — not that I say they have given wrong information. It is they who are writing back to me to say that the information they furnished me with in advance of my making the allocations is not accurate. It is they who are saying it is not accurate.
No, not that it is not accurate but that it does not represent their programme for 1966.
We can leave that to the Deputy to decide.
The Minister is a bluffer. It is "Blaney's blarney".