Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 27 Feb 1968

Vol. 232 No. 12

Planning Appeals Bill, 1967: Second Stage (resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister for Local Government (Mr. Boland)

When I moved the adjournment last week, I was dealing with the false, slanderous allegations made by Deputy Cluskey here and which were so widely and maliciously publicised. I had not concluded dealing with the first of the two specific cases with which Deputy Cluskey dealt. I was dealing with the false allegations he made in regard to the housing scheme at Kilbarrack. The facts which I outlined were briefly that in June, 1962 this firm of builders applied for permission to develop 95 acres at Kilbarrack for private housing. Permission to carry out this development was refused in August, 1962 by the planning authority, on the ground that the lands in question were required for municipal housing. The firm of builders in question appealed to the Minister for Local Government on the ground, mainly, that this land had been purchased over a year previously, that it was intended to provide up to 1,000 low cost houses on the site, that these would be similar to the type of houses that the corporation would provide and that they would cater for the same type of person as the corporation houses would have applied to.

It was also contended by the private firm of builders that their building proposals were ready to start, whereas it was represented that it would be some years before the corporation would be in a position to commence their operations if permission was not granted. I told the House that these arguments impressed the Minister at the time and that the appeal was allowed on 7th May, 1963, almost one year after the application for planning permission was made to the corporation, so that a year was lost with that process and that despite the fact that this planning permission had been granted in May, 1963, in July, 1963 the corporation made a compulsory purchase order on these 95 acres and other lands in the area and that this compulsory purchase order further prevented the development of this land which could have gone on. Obviously the principle had been decided in May, 1963, and for this reason the compulsory purchase order was not confirmed by the Minister for this particular parcel of land, except for a small portion of it in respect of which the compulsory purchase order was confirmed. However, the compulsory purchase order was confirmed in respect of a further 228 acres in the area which was adjoining this particular site. I also pointed out that the municipal housing on the land in respect of which the compulsory purchase order was confirmed has not started yet but that the development which was held up from 1962, due to all this process, has been in progress now since 1966 and that it is practically certain that the entire 900 houses which it is intended to erect on this site will be finished in this year.

Mr. L'Estrange

On a point of order, is the Minister entitled to repeat? Every single word he has said since he started today he said at column 1607 of the Official Report for the last evening. Is that in order? If it is in order for one person, we can do exactly the same when we get the opportunity.

Mr. Boland

I am not repeating it.

Mr. L'Estrange

Word for word. I was following you as you spoke. You did not even leave out a comma.

Mr. Boland

I am recapitulating briefly on what I said.

Mr. L'Estrange

You are showing the tolerance of the Fianna Fáil Party. You want to keep us here for the next——

Mr. Boland

In order to conclude effectively the refutation of the slanderous and deliberate falsehoods that were made in the debate by Deputy Cluskey for the purpose of slandering my predecessor as Minister for Local Government——

Mr. L'Estrange

Is he not living in one of those houses at the present time?

Mr. Boland

——and individuals outside this House who are not in a position to defend themselves and also because it was publicised for that very same reason by the newspapers with splash headings in some cases. These 900 houses will be completed this year.

Mr. L'Estrange

The last time the Minister said "will probably be finished in the present year"

Mr. Boland

Deputy L'Estrange insists on interrupting and therefore it becomes necessary to say what has been said before.

The Minister's decision on the planning appeal and his reasons for it have been clearly vindicated by the fact that the extent of the demand for these low-cost private houses has made it possible for the private developers to press ahead more rapidly with their development than the corporation have done with theirs.

Mr. P. Belton

Why was the compulsory purchase order put on Forkin's?

Mr. Boland

I do not know what Deputy Belton is referring to. If he waits, I shall deal with another case which the leader of his Party raised in this debate and about which Deputy Belton may have some more accurate information.

Mr. P. Belton

I am only asking a question.

Mr. Boland

Deputy Belton refrained from speaking and, mind you, I thought he might have spoken in view of the particular case the leader of his Party used to further this slander campaign. I thought he might have felt called upon to speak but apparently he did not and I am dealing now with the cases that were referred to. I am dealing with the slanderous allegation, the deliberate, false, slanderous allegation made by Deputy Cluskey.

Mr. P. Belton

I am only asking a question

Mr. Boland

Deputy Belton who refrained from speaking on a matter in regard to which he would have some information is now apparently at some other thing. I will deal with that matter tomorrow or next week. It seems to be some question of Forkin's land but I shall deal with it——

Mr. P. Belton

I just asked a question: that is all.

Mr. Boland

——in due course. There is plenty of time.

Mr. L'Estrange

That is the tolerance Fianna Fáil show. You want to monopolise Private Members' Time for the next two months.

Mr. Boland

That is not the point at all. The point is that this is a bogus Bill submitted by the Fine Gael Party. It was submitted obviously in furtherance of the decision which the Fine Gael Party took some time ago to abandon their attempt to secure the removal of this Government by normal political activities and instead to embark upon a deliberate campaign of wholesale slander. That was a coldblooded decision by the Fine Gael Party. This was put down as a vehicle by them. I want to deal with some of the allegations made by them. I also propose to show that some of the decisions taken by a Fine Gael Minister for Local Government when he was there could have been interpreted in a similar way if there were people of the same mentality as Deputy L'Estrange there.

Mr. L'Estrange

You have the right mentality.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy L'Estrange must cease interrupting.

Mr. Boland

Also, Deputy L'Estrange in his capacity as Whip has decided to prevent the majority of his Party speaking on this Bill before me in case I might have an opportunity of dealing with their slanderous allegations. I have to try to anticipate what those people propose to say. Maybe I might even try to anticipate what Deputy P. Belton might propose to say in regard to the particular case which the Leader of his Party referred to.

Mr. L'Estrange

Will you deny that Deputy Blaney is living in one of those houses now?

Mr. Boland

Some time I may be able to deal with Deputy L'Estrange's allegation. The sooner I do so, the sooner my contribution to this debate will be concluded. If I have to explain what I am doing to Deputy L'Estrange at frequent intervals, of course, that will only delay matters.

Mr. L'Estrange

You have delayed over ten minutes already.

Mr. Boland

As I said, development by the corporation of the land covered by the compulsory purchase order has not yet commenced, and it seems clear that the full number of houses to be built on the land that was excluded from the compulsory purchase order and in respect of which the planning appeal was upheld will be completed before the corporation housing activities start at all. In view of that it seems clear that if the Minister for Local Government in May, 1963 had not made his decision on this planning appeal and if after that, he had decided to confirm the compulsory purchase order in respect of this land 900 fewer houses would be built at this time. That would, of course, mean that there would be 900 families without houses who will have them by the end of this year and those would be added to the corporation's waiting list. It seems clear to me that that is what is annoying Opposition Deputies. They would like to see the corporation's waiting list even bigger than it is.

Mr. L'Estrange

Six thousand are looking for houses in Dublin and cannot get them under Fianna Fáil.

Mr. Boland

This is clear evidence of the need that is filled by private builders who are represented here by the Opposition as being modern supercriminals. This private housing in the major corporation housing development of Edenmore and Kilbarrack will make a more balanced community, which is the basic aim in the planning of residential areas. Deputy Cluskey went on further falsely to allege that those houses which are almost all built and occupied have recently been offered to the corporation by private developers. This is not true. The area affected by this, on the merits or demerits of which I do not intend to comment, is a completely different one as Deputy Cluskey is personally well aware as a member of the local authority but knowing the truth, knowing what he says is false, he decided to make this false allegation and for the same malicious reason the Irish Times decided to publish the falsehood and also decided to suppress the truth when it was made known.

Mr. L'Estrange

What Fianna Fáil say is always true. What about the time you were to abolish the Border and restore the Irish language?

Mr. Boland

It was not enough for Deputy Cluskey to make those allegations. Deputy L'Estrange came in and made a further allegation, which he knows to be false, when he alleged that my predecessor as Minister for Local Government is living in one of those houses. That is untrue as Deputy L'Estrange knows. He knows when he says it that it is untrue and he knows also that he has the newspapers which will report that and which will not report the true facts. He has made that allegation as part of this campaign, as part of the decision by his Party. Deputy Blaney was living there before those houses started. He is living more than a mile away from the situation and Deputy L'Estrange knows that, but because of the filthiness of his mind, he made this allegation.

Mr. L'Estrange

I made it because it is quite true.

Mr. Boland

You made it because you know it is untrue and because that is the type of individual you are.

Mr. L'Estrange

It is the type of individual the Minister and others in his Party are. It is no wonder that Deputy Colley spoke about low standards in high places.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy L'Estrange should cease interrupting and allow the Minister to proceed.

Mr. Boland

Deputy L'Estrange makes that allegation because of the decision of his Party which was carried out not only by people like Deputy L'Estrange but also by the Leader of his Party. Before this debate is over, I will deal with the case raised by Deputy Cosgrave and I will show whether the person who was the appellant in that case is a supporter of this Party or not and we will see what Deputy Cosgrave will have to say about that. Of course, it may well be that there is some bit of enmity between Deputy Cosgrave and some of the members of his Front Bench. I would not be a bit surprised at that.

Mr. L'Estrange

You have four Taoisigh in the Fianna Fáil Party.

Mr. Boland

It has never been necessary to have a vote of confidence in the Fianna Fáil Party. It may, therefore, be that the person Deputy Cosgrave decided to attack was one of those opposed to Deputy Cosgrave in the recent trouble in the Fine Gael Party. However, that is a matter for him.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Boland

No matter how long those interruptions take, I will eventually come to that. Maybe not tonight but eventually I will come to the case mentioned by Deputy Cosgrave.

Mr. Molloy

Everybody knows that Deputy Cosgrave will not last another six months.

Mr. L'Estrange

How long will Honest Jack last?

Mr. Boland

We know he will last as long as Deputy Flanagan can protect him against Senator Garret FitzGerald. Deputy Flanagan has told us he is going to stay in the Fine Gael Party in order to protect Deputy Cosgrave against Senator FitzGerald.

Mr. L'Estrange

Thanks be to God we have many people capable of being leaders in our Party.

Mr. Boland

Let us hope you get him as leader.

Mr. L'Estrange

He will be next Taoiseach, Cosgrave, and that is what is annoying you.

Mr. Molloy

What about the job in the Sweepstakes?

Mr. Boland

As I say, this is just a campaign against the Fianna Fáil Party. Part of Deputy Cluskey's reasons for raising this was to attack individuals outside the House and I know the Opposition are even trying to brand everybody who engages in business in the provision of houses as being essentially evil. So far as this Government are concerned, we have always shown ourselves to be ready to undertake any task that seems appropriate by public enterprise, but that does not mean that private enterprise has been outlawed as some Deputies would like it to be.

I think private builders have an important contribution to make to the solution of the housing problem. A considerable proportion of our present housing stock has been provided in this manner. Even in so far as local authority housing is concerned, I have not found, and neither has any other Minister for Local Government, any way of having local authority houses built except by the employment of building firms. I appreciate the fact that these people are not in the business for the good of their health. They make money out of it and they make it whether they are building for local authorities or building for themselves.

I do say the business of building houses is at least as honourable a way of business as any other I know of. House building provides a great deal of employment. Employment content is good——

Mr. L'Estrange

One-half of what it was ten years ago.

Mr. Boland

It is skilled employment, productive employment and the end product is something urgently required and is very much in the national interest. I know of a number of firms who put a considerable amount of money into research in order to improve standards, reduce costs and increase the rate of production of houses. I am glad to say the Government have recently decided to make provision for technical assistance in this regard. Some people have done well in this business because of the manner in which the Government have been able to guide the nation's finances wisely.

Mr. L'Estrange

The contacts they had, and I am also aware that a great number of these businesses became bankrupt because of the operations of the Government.

Mr. Belton

Who are they?

Mr. L'Estrange

Who are they? More went bankrupt since 1967 than in any period in the history of this State.

Mr. Boland

We could go into that if you like. I went into it in my reply on the Estimate for my Department. I am surprised that Deputies L'Estrange and Belton should even have such nerve although it is 11 years since. You cannot deny that quite a substantial number of private builders went into bankruptcy as a result of the economic collapse that indicated the end of the last Coalition Government. Some people seem to think that was a good thing but the trouble was that in addition to getting rid of builders in comparatively small numbers, they also got rid of the building workers in thousands.

Mr. L'Estrange

There are only one-half the number employed now compared with 1956.

An Ceann Comhairle

Will Deputy L'Estrange please restrain himself?

Mr. Boland

I do not accept responsibility for private builders at all but I want to say that I appreciate as Minister for Local Government the contribution they have made to the solution of our housing problem. It could not have been done otherwise. It is to a great extent due to the fact that we have so many people engaged in the private building of houses that we will this year reach the target of 12,000 houses per year which we set ourselves to reach by 1970.

Mr. L'Estrange

You built no houses from 1958 to 1964, and you know that.

Mr. Boland

We will reach that target because the economy of the country is able to provide the money, because we took care of the fundamental necessity to ensure that that situation obtains. As I said last week, I knew the Opposition papers which had provided such publicity——

Mr. L'Estrange

Which are the Opposition papers? We are entitled to know.

An Ceann Comhairle

Would Deputy L'Estrange please restrain himself?

Mr. Boland

I knew that having given eight inches to Deputy Cluskey's lie, they would refuse to publish the truth.

Mr. L'Estrange

Have you clear proof of it?

Mr. Boland

I have eight inches, plus a splash heading of the deliberate falsehoods that were printed here.

Mr. P. Belton

He said he votes in favour of Fianna Fáil. How could he be in opposition?

An Ceann Comhairle

Will Deputies please let the Minister continue? Other Deputies will be allowed to make their speeches.

Mr. Boland

These are incontrovertible facts in contrast to the falsehoods of Deputy Cluskey. The falsehoods were published but the facts were not because these people are interested in promoting the publication of slander based on falsehoods that has been adopted by the Opposition as a deliberate tactic.

Mr. L'Estrange

They are getting wise to the Fianna Fáil Party and they are getting wise to the corruption. It is time they got wise. Deputy Colley started it when he referred to the low standards in high places.

An Ceann Comhairle

If Deputy L'Estrange continues to interrupt the Minister, there is a remedy.

Mr. Boland

All Deputy L'Estrange wants to do is delay the debate. This of course is the interpretation put on "freedom of speech" by the Irish Times, freedom to spread as many dirty falsehoods as possible and freedom to suppress the truth.

We had a lot of talk about petrol stations, which is apparently a new dirty word. At the same time, it so happens that these things are essential for modern methods of transport. As far as I can see—I do not know whether this is true or not—it seems that the majority of cases for permission to erect petrol stations are refused. Certainly a great number of appeals come before the Minister and the majority of appeals are also refused. It seems to me also that some at least are the standard objections, the usual type of objections, that could with a certain amount of force be applied to practically all such applications. For instance, there is the question of traffic hazard. Obviously there is an increase in traffic hazard arising from every new means of access to a traffic artery and a petrol-filling station, of its very nature, involves a higher rate of ingress and egress to the site than most other things, so that obviously there is an increase in traffic hazard attaching to every new petrol station. Similarly, the objection that the establishment of a new petrol station will result in some disfigurement of the area can be applied in nearly every case. It is really a matter of opinion. Some people apparently are of the opinion that it is not possible to do anything with these things, that they are incapable of being made anything but an eyesore and a blot on the landscape, while other people, including those who submit the applications, think that if they are well designed, they can be made attractive in certain situations. Obviously the complaint that a petrol station will disfigure the neighbourhood and devalue property is one that can be made in the case of every single application.

There is one view that a petrol station is completely unacceptable in a residential area, whereas other people would put the case that, so far from being unacceptable in an area where almost every householder has a car, petrol stations are almost an essential amenity there. One thing is certain, however, and that is, they cannot be done without in modern times. The question is how many of them should there be and I have no way of deciding that. It is a fact that may arise in some cases that some of the objections to these things may come from people whose business will suffer competition if the particular application is allowed. There has been something of a campaign lately to establish the position whereby the local planning authority should have the sole say in matters such as this. Most people will see, if this position were to obtain, that, particularly in some of the smaller local authorities, established business interests might be able to exert undue pressure on decisions in this regard. However, I will have more to say about this later.

I said that as a result of this debate, I would find it necessary to make it clear that more Ministers than one have reversed planning decisions made by planning authorities, although the number of such appeals has, of course, only grown to any considerable amount since the passing of the Planning Act. There were appeals before that and other Ministers have dealt with such appeals. Before I go on to deal with another of the cases mentioned here by Opposition Deputies, I want to produce a case in which something like this happened. It was a case dealt with, not by my immediate predecessor but by a Minister for Local Government under the Coalition Government. This is a case which also happens to deal with a square, an application in Kenilworth Square where Dublin Corporation on 5th December, 1956 refused permission for the erection of a filling and servicing station and repair garage on the site of No. 44 Kenilworth Square South, at the junction of Kenilworth Square and Rathgar Avenue. There was an appeal submitted in this case which involved the site of a house which had been allowed to fall into disrepair in an area in which houses are, in general, reasonably well maintained.

Now, Deputy Dillon described the type of activity which allows this to happen as Rachmanism. At column 1774, Volume 231, of the Official Report, he said:

We have our own system of Rachmans in this city, but they did not bring in any bands with tin whistles or bugles or drums. They let the rats come in. They let the rain come in. They let the houses sink into such a state of dereliction that they succeeded in getting the corporation eventually to say that the houses were then structurally dangerous, whereupon, they could evict all the people in them. That was not the end of the story. Here is where their procedure differs from that of Rachman. Rachman wanted to reset the houses to unsophisticated immigrant labour, but what our Dublin Rachman wanted to do was to get a big Georgian house declared unfit for human habitation so that he could knock it down and then go to the corporation planning authority and say: "Either you let me sell this site for development as office buildings or you can blooming well go and cut the grass on it yourself because I am going to leave it as a derelict site."

Well, in this particular case, it was not an office building but a type of development which, as far as I can gather, is looked upon as even more disreputable than an office building.

Mr. L'Estrange

Is this Mount Pleasant?

Mr. Boland

No, we will come to Mount Pleasant. This is Kenilworth Square. One would never think that a Fine Gael Minister had actually interfered with the integrity of a square, but this is what happened. Apparently Deputy Dillon believes that this type of activity is rife here and he blames this Government for instituting it, but in view of the fact that this particular incident I am dealing with occurred under Deputy P. O'Donnell, it might be more accurate to say that it was instituted by the Coalition Government. In fact, that may have been even before Rachman himself. Maybe it was from Deputy P. O'Donnell he got his idea.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. L'Estrange

Well, if the Minister wants to sling out innuendoes——

Mr. Boland

We have it from Deputy P. O'Donnell who did say that he never knew what he was signing, that he just put his name where he was told.

Mr. L'Estrange

He did not say anything of the sort.

Mr. Boland

We know there were no representations made by his colleagues. We can assume that there was nobody in the Coalition Government at the time, or in the Parties supporting them, who remembered back to the days of 1948, remembered the valuable votes that were available to them on that occasion and who felt that, out of gratitude to a person who had a vote at that time, but who no longer had it, this should be done.

Mr. L'Estrange

The Minister judges everybody by his own standards.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. Boland

I am quite sure no such representations were made. I am quite sure none of Deputy P. O'Donnell's colleagues prevailed on him to take a personal interest in what he was signing just this once and I am quite sure it was pure coincidence that the appellant in this case had such close Coalition connections. One thing I think even Deputy L'Estrange would admit is that he was very unlikely to be a member of Taca.

Mr. L'Estrange

I remember the Minister for Industry and Commerce talking about low standards in high places.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. Boland

This proposal was rejected by the corporation on the ground that the area was completely residential in character. During the course of the appeal, the corporation forwarded to the Department a copy of a petition received by them from local residents—local residents, mark you, whose views are, according to the Opposition, sacrosanct——

Mr. L'Estrange

How often has the Minister overruled representations?

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. Boland

——protesting against the unauthorised use of a garage at the rere of the house the subject of the appeal as a public garage and repair shop. In that petition the residents also voiced very strong objection to any permission being given to the opening of any filling station, garage, repair shop, etc., in the vicinity because the area was purely residential in character and any such usage would affect the amenities of their houses and of the area. I should, I think, read the petition for the benefit of Deputy L'Estrange:

We, the undersigned residents of Rathgar Avenue (North) protest emphatically against the utilisation of the private garage at the rere of 42 Kenilworth Square as a public garage and repair shop. This garage, which opens on to the east side of Rathgar Avenue, is situated less than 10 yards from the junction with Kenilworth Square (which is on the 47 Bus route). The road in the vicinity is only about 30 feet wide, and the garage in question is situated at a bend in the road.

We would point out that within the past year the Dublin Corporation has notified us that under the Town Plan several feet of our respective front gardens on the west side of the Avenue may be taken for the purpose of widening this road.

Since this workshop garage was opened cars and lorries are parked along the east side of the Avenue at this point almost constantly all day and to a late hour at night.

When private cars are stopped in the vicinity, even for a few minutes, a most dangerous bottleneck is created.

Fast traffic on this Avenue has increased, possibly four-fold during the past few years, and we greatly fear that a serious accident will occur. In our opinion these circumstances constitute a very serious danger to residents, to children and elderly people, and to the public generally.

We would also strongly object to permission being given in the future for the opening of any shop, workshop, filling station, garage or other business undertaking along the eastern side of Rathgar Avenue, between Garville Avenue and the northern end of Rathgar Avenue.

We object to this on the above grounds, but particularly because this is a purely residential area and any such uses of these premises would adversely affect the valuation of our houses, and the amenities of the area.

There is ample shopping and garage accommodation at both ends of Rathgar Avenue.

This was signed by a number of residents. Now, this site was described as being located in a pleasant, mellow residential area and the proposed structure was regarded as being highly discordant and one which would constitute an injury to amenity in this particular location. There were plenty of facilities of the type proposed in the neighbourhood, as was confirmed by the petition from the residents, and, as I say, the local authority rejected the application on these grounds.

On 17th December, 1956, the secretary of the committee of the Kenilworth Square Residents Association wrote to the Department protesting against the proposed development and suggesting that the Minister might receive a deputation. Without any deputation being received, permission was granted on 15th January, 1957. The order was made by the Minister on 1st February, 1957. The peculiar thing was that, as soon as the Minister's decision became known, the residents protested and asked that it should be reversed; they were informed that the decision was final and could not be reversed. Although there was this local opposition to this proposal, the really odd feature is that there was no newspaper publicity about it until detailed plans were lodged. As Deputies will appreciate, that was naturally some time afterwards and, as Deputies may remember, a change of Government had occurred in the meantime. As soon as the detailed plans were lodged, the principle of the matter having been decided by Deputy P. O'Donnell, we had publicity; we had publicity when it became possible to represent this as having been done by the Fianna Fáil Government. There was an article in the Evening Herald of 9th January, 1960, with the captions: “Mystery of Rathgar Site for Garage. Residents again up in arms.” That was an effort at trying to pin this on to the Fianna Fáil Government, whereas, in actual fact, the decision was made by Deputy P. O'Donnell.

Mr. L'Estrange

Will the Minister quote to show how they connected that with the Fianna Fáil Government? Quote the article.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. L'Estrange

Surely he should quote to prove how it is connected with the Fianna Fáil Government?

Mr. Boland

In 1960 Fianna Fáil were the Government. There was nothing about when the decision was made. There was a photograph of the house —actually a Georgian house, to make desecration worse still.

Mr. L'Estrange

The Minister has demolished a great many houses in his time.

Mr. Boland

No. 44 Kenilworth Square. As I said, it was, of course, pure coincidence that the appellant in this particular case was a person who had been in a position to utilise a vote in this House in 1948 to establish the first Coalition Government, but who was in no such position at that particular time. Deputy P. O'Donnell has already gone on record as saying that he was not influenced by such considerations. He said he just put his name where he was told to put it.

Mr. L'Estrange

He never said any such thing.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. L'Estrange

He said it would be impossible for any Minister to study fully and go through every one of the applications and he was guided by his officials.

Mr. Boland

Maybe, Deputy L'Estrange is saying now that he possibly was influenced when he was dealing with this case. I will not contradict Deputy L'Estrange. If he wants to take responsibility for this decision of Deputy P. O'Donnell, that is good enough for me.

Mr. L'Estrange

The Minister did did not prove what was wrong with the decision.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. L'Estrange

There are petrol pumps all over the city in residential areas.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. Boland

It would be a more credible explanation that he might have. I just mention the case to show that if, at that time, there had been people on the Opposition side of the House, people of the same mentality as Deputy L'Estrange and his colleagues, similar insinuations could have been made. It could have been insinuated that this was a case of an incorrect decision being made in order to facilitate a person who had been a colleague.

Mr. L'Estrange

How was he a colleague?

Mr. Boland

I come now to the second instance which I dealt with on my Estimate, that is, the granting of planning permission in respect of a proposal for a petrol station at Mount Pleasant Square. I dealt with it already and I do not think there is any great need to deal with it at length again.

However, I must point out, first of all, that this is a privately-owned open space, that it is not and never has been available for the use and enjoyment of the public. It is owned by a local tennis club, privately. They have their own tennis courts and a pavilion which has been partly destroyed by fire which it was alleged was started by vandals. The area is surrounded by trees and bushes. It is fenced by means of iron railings which are further reinforced in part by a wooden fence, apparently for the purpose of preventing people from looking in. The houses surrounding it appear to be let out mainly in flats. I agree, I have already said so, that it provides a certain amount of amenity for the people who have not got access to it but that aspect of the amenity has been exaggerated greatly. It also provides a fairly substantial amenity for the people who own it, the local tennis club, and apparently it also provides an amenity for people who have garbage to dump there.

Mr. L'Estrange

Fianna Fáil could do with dumping some of theirs.

Mr. Boland

The owners of this site pointed out that they had received notice from the sanitary authority to abate the nuisance caused by the dumping of rubbish over the railings. They maintained they found it impossible to erect adequate defences against this and against vandalism and they pointed to the fact that there was currently a claim against the local authority in the amount of £400 in respect of damage to the pavilion. They claimed also that they were not able to provide the amenities required by their members, that they had tried by every means to raise money and that the disposal of part of the property for a commercial purpose was the only manner in which they could develop this area in the way they required to develop it.

I agree there will be some loss of public amenity due to the fact that the total amount of open space there will be reduced, but it is not correct to imply, as has been implied here, that the whole of the area will be occupied by this development. It will be only a small portion. There will be some reduction of amenity but it will be comparatively small and it will be partly compensated for by the removal of an existing hoarding which can hardly be said to be a visual amenity of any great value in the area. The removal of that will compensate partly for the loss of a comparatively small portion of the open space.

As against that there will be a gain in practical amenity for the owners and the members of the club. This matter has been used as part of a smear campaign but personally I am satisfied, taking everything into account, that there will be an overall improvement in total amenity in respect of this open space. The conditions attached to the granting of permission were that detailed plans should be submitted for approval and should include a revised layout, which should indicate any advertisement or advertising structure to be erected in the development. The conditions also provided for the removal of the existing advertisement structure on the frontage.

Mr. L'Estrange

Can the Minister answer one question? Will the speculator who bought the land or the original owner get the big profit? The Minister knows that it is the speculator, not the original owner, who made the big profit and he has deliberately refrained from mentioning it.

Mr. Boland

If Deputy L'Estrange believes these fantastic stories let him go ahead.

Mr. L'Estrange

It is the speculator, not the original owner——

Mr. Boland

Nobody with normal intelligence would give credence to these concoctions by Deputy Cluskey.

Mr. L'Estrange

Will the Minister state in the House whether it is the owners——

Mr. Boland

I have no idea.

Mr. L'Estrange

You have every idea.

Mr. Boland

I do not accept for a moment, because I am not a fool, that there is any advantage approaching what has been suggested accruing to anybody, and nobody with normal intelligence would accept it.

Mr. L'Estrange

Anybody with normal intelligence would know the Minister is begging the question by refusing to tell the House who is getting the profit—that it is a speculator who is a member of the Taca organisation who is getting it.

An Ceann Comhairle

Will Deputy L'Estrange please restrain himself? The Deputy has no licence to interrupt in this fashion.

Mr. Boland

I have no knowledge of a member of Taca or any speculator getting anything out of it. I am briefly going over some of the matters I dealt with on the Estimate. There is the case of the member of Taca in Clifden to which Deputy Coogan referred but I will leave that until tomorrow because I do not want then to repeat something I have said and thus unnecessarily delay the time of the House——

Mr. L'Estrange

Delay the time of the House?

Mr. Boland

It might be better if I did it all at the one time. Deputy L'Estrange has been making these allegations and perhaps, therefore, it would be appropriate to deal with the question of another petrol station, another of those iniquitous things dealt with by Deputy P. O'Donnell when he was Minister for Local Government. I refer to a filling station at the junction of Leinster Road West and Harold's Cross Road—an appeal in which Deputy P. O'Donnell was so undemocratic as to turn down the decision that had been made by the planning authority. Dublin Corporation had refused permission for the building of a filling station on that site on 8th December, 1954. The reasons given were that the site was in advance of the building line along the frontage of Harold's Cross Road and that increased congestion and traffic danger would be created due to the location of the site at a road junction. The planning officer's report was fairly strong.

Approval was refused by the planning authority to the proposal for a filling station at the junction of Leinster Road West and Harold's Cross Road, Dublin. The planning authority observed that Harold's Cross Road carries an increasing volume of arterial traffic and at this point congestion is not uncommon due to the parking of vehicles in the vicinity of shops along the west side of the road and the church and cinema nearby. Traffic hazards are further aggravated by the unsatisfactory approach to the four existing petrol pumps at Doherty's Garage directly opposite this site. These pumps are sited on the back of the footpath at the entrance to the service garage which is on a shopping frontage. The proposal involves the erection of an office, store and petrol pumps beyond the building line of the three houses, 225. 227 and 229 Harold's Cross Road. The site is opposite an existing garage and is in close proximity to the Holy Rosary Church and to a parochial hall. The proposal is very objectionable from a traffic point of view.

Now, this was rejected by the planning authority but permission was granted by the Minister and an order was made on 5th July, 1955, granting the permission. I do not think the person concerned was a member of Taca. I do know he was a person in practically continuous contact with the then Minister for Local Government whom he met every second day. Of course, I am sure he never mentioned the fact that he had a planning appeal in respect of this place before the Minister. I am sure the Minister would not listen to such a suggestion if he made it. As I said, we have Deputy P. O'Donnell's statement that when he was Minister for Local Government, he never considered these matters himself, that he just put his name where he was told to sign it.

Mr. L'Estrange

If you believe that statement, how can you blame him for it?

Mr. Boland

I am pointing out that if we had the same type of mind as Deputy L'Estrange and his colleagues, and Deputy Cluskey, we could actually make the insinuation that the permission was granted by the Minister by reason of the close personal association between Deputy P. O'Donnell, the then Minister for Local Government, and the particular applicant in this case so that the planning authority's decision was reversed. However, I am sure this was purely a coincidence.

Mr. L'Estrange

Was it wrong, in that particular case, to give permission? The Minister did not give us his opinion.

Mr. Boland

I think I did. However, I shall tell you now. I think I have already mentioned that the planning officer's report was to the effect that the site consisted of part of the garden attached to an existing house which was one of a group of new houses that front on Harold's Cross Road and Leinster Road West. It pointed out that, directly opposite the junction, is Doherty's Garage which also operates petrol pumps. It continued:

No "pull in" is provided so the servicing of vehicles must take place on the carriageway. The business done by this garage seems greater than the premises can accommodate and so, vehicles are parked not only on Harold's Cross Road but also on Leinster Road West. Having regard to these circumstances, I would consider that the traffic objection is well founded. An extra filling station in this congested location and obtruding on the heavy Harold's Cross Road traffic would definitely be objectionable.

Mr. P. Belton

That is very few out of four years, is it not?

Mr. Boland

I am not trying to produce them all. I am only on the second one yet. I can produce plenty more, if I like. I do not know whether or not Deputy Belton and Deputy L'Estrange will, in the coming few weeks, be engaged in the futile operation of trying to win a by-election in Wicklow, but, if they are, they will see another one on their way back at night. They will become very familiar with that particular one.

Mr. Corish

Is this the one to which Deputy P. O'Donnell referred as well?

Mr. Boland

No. This is one to which I shall refer. This was a case, again, of intrusion on an open residential amenity. In my opinion, the residents of the adjoining houses would have an objection—this being built in the garden of a house next door. Deputy P. O'Donnell decided to allow this. He says he did not decide it. He says he just put his name where he was told to put it.

Mr. P. Belton

Along Clontarf Road, they are all in front gardens and one is in front of a factory. I do not know who gave the permission.

Mr. Boland

Despite rejection by the planning authority, these have been allowed by more Ministers than one and by more Governments than one. In this Bill, there is an attempt to maintain that every such reversal of the decision of the planning authority by this Government is the result of corruption whereas Deputy P. O'Donnell did it just because the Secretary gave him 100 appeals a day and told him where to sign his name. However, in the case of Fianna Fáil Ministers, every single one of these is alleged to be the result of corruption, according to Deputy Corish's Party and Deputy Cosgrave's Party.

Mr. Corish

May I ask a question?

Mr. Boland

That is a matter for the Ceann Comhairle.

Mr. Corish

In every case where the Minister has to make a re-decision, is there not a recommendation from the officials of the Department, before he puts his signature to it?

Mr. Boland

Deputy P. O'Donnell says he has not time to read them.

Mr. L'Estrange

He said it would be impossible for a Minister to read all the documents attached to them. But he did read the Secretary's recommendations—and he said it.

Mr. Boland

I think it would be no harm to let it be known that some people closely associated with him were involved in these appeals. In one case, it was a Member of this House who had a vote in the formation of the first Coalition Government. In the second case, it was a person with whom he was in contact every second day, at least. Now that Deputy P. O'Donnell possibly has more time on his hands than he had when he was Minister for Local Government, he might like, some time, to know some of the cases that he did decide by putting his name——

Mr. Corish

Would there not always be a recommendation from the Department's officials? The Minister does not necessarily have to accept it. Is that not true in the case of an appeal?

Mr. Boland

There is.

Mr. Corish

I should be interested to discover, during the lifetime of any Government, how many times the recommendation of the Department was turned down.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. Boland

On the Second Stage of the Derelict Sites Bill, 1960, as reported at columns 404 and 405 of the Official Report of Dáil Éireann of 30th November, 1960, Deputy P. O'Donnell said:

With great respect to the present Minister and to all Ministers for Local Government, they cannot possibly deal with each appeal individually. On at least one day of the week there is a file of appeals handed to the Minister with the recommendation of the Department's Inspector on them and the Minister, unless he has some reason or other to examine each individual file, merely signs what an individual has put before him.

So he did read the recommendation put before him where he had a particular reason for so doing. It may be, then, as Deputy L'Estrange says, that, in fact, he made this decision himself. It may be that, while driving around in a State car, he suddenly realised what a great amenity this filling station would be in the situation——

Mr. L'Estrange

Deputy P. O'Donnell said there was not a hope of reading all the files.

Mr. Geoghegan

Deputy L'Estrange should restrain himself.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. L'Estrange

You did not read through all the files. He is misleading us here in the House throughout the whole thing. He said there was no hope of reading through all the files. There is no necessity to read through all the files.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. L'Estrange

Why is he misleading us about what he said?

Mr. Boland

In view of the opinion of Fine Gael now that the decision of these cases should be handed over to a board or boards presided over by a judge, and presumably subsidiary boards also presided over by a judge, it might be considered remarkable that Deputy P. O'Donnell, particularly when he knew that he was deciding cases without knowing anything about them, did not suggest at that time that these cases would be better dealt with by such a board—a judge with two technically qualified assessors with subsidiary boards, and the staff that all that implies.

Mr. L'Estrange

You had not the low standards in high places then.

Mr. Boland

The board was to be presided over by a judge—described in not very flattering terms by very many members of the Fine Gael Party.

Mr. L'Estrange

What about Judge Budd? What you had to say about him last week were not very flattering terms.

Mr. Boland

In the Official Report, of 26th November, 1958, Volume 171, column 1028, Deputy J.A. Costello had not a great opinion of a board presided over by a judge. He said:

...what I object to is the fantasy, the hyprocrisy, if I may say so again without offence, of trying to put it across the people that because the President is going to appoint a judge, therefore, this is an impartial tribunal which will advise on all the matters I have referred to and secure public confidence in its integrity and impartiality.

He went on to say:

Let me recall to Deputies that when the North were gerrymandering their constituencies, they put a judicial personage there to give an air of verisimilitude to an otherwise very unconvincing body.

At column 1030 he described the person taking up the post as:

...a tool of the Government in power, who is what the late Kevin O'Higgins would have called a legal careerist, who got his job on the bench because he was the lickspittle of a political Party.

Do they want to remove this from the possibility of being affected by politics by the appointment of a board presided over by a person who, according to them, would be the lickspittle of a political Party?

Mr. James Tully

Are the lights being rationed here?

An Ceann Comhairle

Yes.

Mr. James Tully

Then why do they not close the cinemas? This is an important place. We should not be in semi-darkness.

An Ceann Comhairle

This is due to economy measures.

Mr. James Tully

The lights should be on.

Mr. M. O'Leary

I do not think the Minister's speech deserves much light.

Mr. L'Estrange

There is not much light in it.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair thinks the Minister should be allowed to continue his speech without interruption.

Mr. Boland

Another case that was raised by more Deputies than one was the case of the granting of permission for the erection of a house at Errisbeg, Roundstone, County Galway This is the case in which——

Mr. L'Estrange

Coming events cast their shadows before. Deputy Molloy could tell us it would not be on RTE.

Mr. Boland

This is the case to which Deputy Coogan referred.

Mr. L'Estrange

And Deputy Molloy.

Mr. Boland

This is the case to which Deputy Coogan referred as being a case proposed by a member of Taca. Outline permission for this was refused by the planning authority on 12th May, 1967, the reason stated being that the site was in an area of high amenity value between the public road and the sea and it should be preserved free.

Mr. L'Estrange

There must be some amenity in it. Deputy Molloy was out on it.

Mr. Boland

The proposer in this case was a lady. I do not know how the name is pronounced—Preger—I have seen it spelled in a number of different ways. So far from knowing this person, as has been alleged, I do not even know how to pronounce her name or how to spell it, for that matter.

Mr. L'Estrange

Get an Oxford dictionary.

Mr. Boland

I can pronounce the name of the only other person who made any representations in this regard, and I will. He is a solicitor and I do not think the solicitor is a member of Taca.

Mr. L'Estrange

A solicitor works for his clients.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. L'Estrange

A solicitor works for his clients.

Mr. Boland

All right. I want to defend him from the slanderous allegation of Deputy Coogan that he is a member of the infamous body known as Taca and I feel sure that, if not Deputy L'Estrange, at least some member of the Front Bench of Fine Gael will be able to endorse my defence of this gentleman and assure Deputy Coogan that he is not a member of Taca because I do not think we have any Fine Gael directors of elections supporting us in that way.

Mr. M. O'Leary

They are all Fianna Fáil.

Mr. L'Estrange

They are all Fianna Fáil.

Mr. Boland

In his appeal the proposer stated that he proposed to erect a small summer house which would be situated on low ground and would not be visible from the road. An oral hearing of the appeal was held on the site itself. This was held on 22nd September, 1967. I am satisfied that at this appeal it was established that from its location the house would be completely hidden from the coast road but that it would be visible from the access road which is the main access to the adjoining beach and I am of the opinion that a properly designed house could be allowed on this location without doing violence to the objectives of the planning authority. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed subject to the conditions that the building to be designed would be constructed and faced with material in harmony with its surroundings, faced with natural stone, that the roof would be of low pitch construction and finished with material suitable to the weather conditions and the landscape. The reason for that was to preserve the character of the landscape. As far as I can gather, the detailed proposals for this have not as yet been lodged.

Mr. M. O'Leary

They have not been——?

Mr. Boland

Have not been lodged yet. There were no personal representations made to me in this case but there is a letter on the file in support of this from one individual other than the actual proposer himself, or herself— there seems to be some doubt—in one case the proposer is described as "Mrs." and in the other as "Mr." This letter is from a member of a firm of solicitors in Clifden, County Galway —R.J. Connolly & Sons, Solicitors— W. Brendan Allen. That is the only representation I have received.

Mr. L'Estrange

What is wrong with a solicitor making representations on behalf of his clients? Is he not entitled?

Mr. Boland

What I want to say is that I do not think that W. Brendan Allen is a member of Taca. I admit now that I do not know all the members of Taca. I have never looked up a list of them. I could not mention more than about 20.

Mr. L'Estrange

You spend their money.

Mr. Boland

W. Brendan Allen is not one of them. Deputy L'Estrange might know more about him than I do.

Mr. Molloy

The slander is exposed now. Deputy L'Estrange should "put up or shut up."

Mr. L'Estrange

There is nothing exposed. Will the Minister tells us how many Fianna Fáil Deputies made representations on his behalf?

Mr. M. O'Leary

The usual cat and mouse game.

Mr. Boland

W. Brendan Allen operates this firm of solicitors, I understand. He is a member of the National Executive of Fine Gael and Director of Elections, and a Mr. Connolly is employed by him, and he was a Fine Gael candidate in the 1961 election.

Mr. Molloy

A good Taca man.

Mr. Boland

Another case which has been used in a malicious way by the Irish Times to promote this campaign of slander by the Opposition Party, in connection with which they published on February 2nd a photograph which was alleged to be the photograph of this site but which was not a photograph of this site. Under the photograph it says:

The Minister for Local Government, Mr. Boland, has given permission to Mr. Elfried Preger, a German, to build a holiday home on the site in the foreground, overlooking Dog's Bay in Connemara. Earlier, Galway County Council had turned down Mr. Preger's application. The half-acre site is 150 yards from Gurteen beach, one of Connemara's most popular beaches.

The site of which they published the photograph was not the site in question because the planning inspector who conducted this oral hearing had erected profiles on the site and was satisfied that the building would not be visible from the coast road.

Mr. L'Estrange

When did the Minister say permission was given?

Mr. Boland

I do not think I said.

Mr. L'Estrange

What month?

Mr. Boland

I do not know.

Mr. L'Estrange

Would it be September?

Mr. Boland

I shall tell you.

Mr. O'Leary

No final details of the plans are available yet?

Mr. Boland

No. Permission was granted on the 22nd September, 1967.

Mr. L'Estrange

That was the very time the Minister for Industry and Commerce, Deputy Colley, spoke of low standards in high places.

Mr. M. O'Leary

There is a great coincidence there.

Mr. L'Estrange

He spoke about low standards in high places in Galway at the end of September.

Mr. Boland

I am surprised at any colleague of mine referring to W. Brendan Allen in those terms.

Mr. L'Estrange

I am talking about the man who gave the permission.

Mr. M. O'Leary

The significance of that speech is now clear.

Mr. Boland

I shall not accept it on Deputy L'Estrange's word. I do not think he would.

Mr. L'Estrange

A solicitor is entitled to act for his client, and it is unfair to attack him as the Minister is doing.

Mr. Boland

I am not attacking him; I am defending him from Deputy Coogan's attack. Deputy Coogan made the ultimate allegation of corruption against this man. Deputy Coogan stated here in this House in relation to the solicitor that applied for permission that this permission was given at the instigation of Taca.

Mr. M. O'Leary

It is unfair for the Minister to be attacking Taca here. It is unfair to the members of Taca.

Mr. Boland

We shall deal with Taca. Deputy O'Leary seems to be of the opinion that the association of W. Brendan Allen's name with Taca is damaging to the name of Taca.

Mr. L'Estrange

Brendan Allen can hold his head high in Galway or anywhere else. He did his duty honourably. It is the man who gave the permission——

Mr. Boland

Let him take it up with Deputy Coogan.

Mr. L'Estrange

The Minister should take it up with his colleague, the Minister for Industry and Commerce.

Mr. M. O'Leary

It is unfair for the Minister to be attacking Taca when there is nobody here to defend them.

Mr. Boland

I will defend them before I conclude. There was a public meeting held which was organised by the Fine Gael councillor for the area to protest against granting permission to put this small bungalow in a position where it could not be seen from the coast road, and knowing the stout manner in which local residents in cases like this attack anything that will intrude in any way upon the natural beauty of the landscape, I can well imagine the righteous indignation that prevailed at that meeting, but at the conclusion of the meeting a rather peculiar thing happened—at least I would consider it peculiar—that is, that the meeting apparently unanimously adopted a resolution requesting the planning authority to grant permission for a caravan park. Of course, a caravan park is a thing of beauty that would add to the beauty of the landscape, whereas a small suitably designed bungalow would detract from it.

Deputy O'Leary wants me to deal with the question of this organisation called Taca. I do not know everybody that is a member of it, because I have not gone to the trouble of trying to find them out, but I do not think there are any members of the National Executive of Fine Gael in it.

Mr. L'Estrange

As long as the hundred pounds roll in, the Government are quite satisfied to accept that.

Mr. Boland

As the name of this organisation denotes, it is composed of people who support this Party. I do not see any reason to be ashamed of that. It is because we have supporters in every section of the community——

Mr. L'Estrange

Chancers who are looking for favours.

Mr. Boland

——that we are here and that you remain over there.

Mr. L'Estrange

Speculators and chancers.

Mr. Boland

The people who are members of Taca are people who know what our policy is.

Mr. Corish

How does the Minister know that when he said he did not know who they were.

Mr. Boland

I know some of them, and I know they are there in order to give us a small amount of support, not sufficient to enable us to devote the same resources to electioneering, for instance, as the Labour Party——

Mr. M. O'Leary

Publish it.

Mr. Boland

——or the Lakeman Party are able to devote as a result of the manner in which they laid their hands on the contributions that were made by people who did not support them.

Mr. Corish

The Minister does not know what he is talking about.

Mr. Boland

Rigging of meetings, refusal to give information to people who demanded it as to when these meetings were held and the number of people who voted for the proposition——

Mr. Corish

That is a lie.

Mr. Boland

Meetings by which they got hold of sums of money which apparently have gone to Deputy O'Leary's head.

Debate adjourned.