Nearly every Member of the House has contributed something to this debate. The Department of Local Government is a very important Department. I would say that the word "local" is a misnomer. As far as the Department and the Government are concerned they are grasping slowly every facet of local administration. They are taking over completely the work that was done by the local authorities. I regret that this is taking place. Local authorities have contributed much over the years. It is with regret also I say that relations between the Department, the Minister and the local authorities are gradually getting worse. The General Council of County Councils, which has been in existence for over a hundred years, has contributed much to the work of local government. They have always done their best to co-operate with the Minister, no matter what Government were in control. It is with regret I say as chairman of that body that the Minister has not met us once since this Government came into office. I take this opportunity of inviting the Minister and his principal officers to meetings of the general council so that we can discuss with him various problems we have. I hope when the Minister is replying that he will assure us that he is prepared to work with the General Council of County Councils. There are many questions which can be solved by having dialogue between the Department, the Minister and the general council. I am very glad that the Minister is here today. I saw him out in Walkinstown yesterday with a grand smile.
Committee on Finance. - Vote 26: Local Government (Resumed.)
Ballyfermot.
I wish the Minister would have that smile here in the House when he is dealing with us.
Not Walkinstown, Ballyfermot.
I am sure the Minister moved around.
I stayed in Ballyfermot.
I saw the Minister operating and his genial smile would bewitch the population there.
And did.
I wish he would have that smile in this House and that we could act as Irishmen. If we differ in politics, what about it? We are prepared to discuss our problems. I am sure the Minister will, in the near future, change his attitude towards members of local authorities. I am saying that without any feeling of bitterness. I would like to see better relations between the Minister and the local authorities and the officers of his Department. I would ask him also to be very slow to take away powers that the local authorities have had for many years. They have done a magnificent job. I have been a member of a local authority for the past 20 years and I can say that all members of Cork County Council work together and they forget politics when they go into the council. They have done a very good job for the county and the ratepayers of Cork. I hope the Minister will accept my invitation to visit the general council in the very near future and I can assure him of a very hearty welcome.
It is hard to smile two days in succession.
I am glad to see I have changed the Minister's outlook. His smile is as good as it was yesterday. We will be great friends before I finish.
There is one problem in Cork and in all the maritime counties that has not been mentioned in this debate. It is, of course, erosion. In the County of Cork with many miles of seafront the position is so serious that the Department urgently requested the Cork County Council five or six years ago to get their engineers to prepare a scheme or schemes of coast protection for the villages, towns, houses and tourist resorts. This was considered very urgent by the Minister at the time. Cork County Council directed its engineers, who were busily engaged on other business, to prepare schemes. These were supposed to get very big Government grants. That is five years ago. We sent up 20 or 30 schemes and we got back the usual letter telling us to make out our priorities. We did that and reduced the number to four very important schemes as far as my memory goes now.
However, Youghal was No. 1 and very little has been done there. As a matter of fact, I think it started only this year. The amount of money given was very small and it will take a good few years before even Youghal is completed. There are other places such as Union Hall, a village which was nearly wiped out during a heavy storm three or four years ago. This was No. 2 on the priority list but nothing has been done since. Two other places on the coast, Courtmacsherry and Roscarberry had schemes but we have heard nothing about them since. The Department knew that this was very urgent five or six years ago but still nothing has been done. This is very important for Cork county with a long seaboard. The tremendous damage done during storms could be avoided if a very small amount of money was spent on work on this seaboard. If the Department of Local Government gave small grants for this work we would be able to fight this coast erosion in County Cork.
I have been informed that in other parts of the world they take steps to avoid coast erosion and that the army has been used in some countries to combat coast erosion. I would ask the Minister to have Army engineers and personnel employed, except when an emergency arises, on this work of preventing coast erosion. They have done this in other countries and I would suggest to the Minister that he would discuss the matter with his colleague in the Department of Defence.
Every local authority in the country at this time are having their estimates meetings. As the Minister is aware, it is compulsory for them to have their estimates in before 1st April. During the last few years we have had to wait for the Department to send us down details of the road grants for each county and we have never had this information before the estimates meeting. We are therefore compelled to strike the rate for the county at a time when we have not before us the amount of road grants we are getting from the Department. It is complete guesswork with the county manager and his staff until they know what grants the Department are giving. I would ask the Minister to consider sending to each council before the estimates meeting the amount of road grants they will get. It is only right that they should have that information before the meeting.
This grant has gradually been reduced over a number of years. As everybody is aware, the amount of money we will receive this year will not do the work that an equivalent amount of money did a number of years ago. In the meantime wages have gone up, the cost of materials has gone up, all costs have gone up, but the amount of money we are getting by way of road grants would not do half the work the same amount of money did three or four years ago. When the Minister is giving us the grant for next year he should consider increasing it considerably to meet the difference between the cost of wages, materials and other costs. If the amount is not increased it will not be possible to do all the work that should be done to keep our roads up to standard. The grant must be increased instead of being reduced.
Another problem I wish to deal with is the delay in sanctioning housing schemes and housing grants. Every Deputy, no matter to what party he belongs, finds it difficult to get building programmes sanctioned by the Department. There is a regular shuttle service up and down with documents going from the councils to the Department; some of them are stamped front and back they have been travelling up and down so often. It is about time the Minister sanctioned the building of those houses. Last year, when we sent up from West Cork a number of schemes for sanction, we found they had gone up and down at least three or four times and in the meantime the cost of those houses increased month after month. If we got the sanction we looked for a year ago we would have saved between £300 and £400. Therefore, as well as the delay, there are increased costs.
This is becoming a serious problem for local authorities in their efforts to house the people who are badly in need of housing throughout the country. I hope the Minister will, as far as he possibly can, give us sanction for those works when we send for it. I do not see the point of sending these schemes up for sanction when we have engineers in our county who are just as good as the men in the Department. They could easily carry out this work and do the job just as efficiently.
My colleague, Deputy Murphy, referred to the water schemes when he was speaking on this Estimate. We were very disappointed when the Minister refused to allow his inspectors even to attend meetings of local authorities in County Cork. These inspectors should be there to consult with local authorities about water schemes problems. Those schemes are all delayed by the Department. I am a member of the West Cork Council for a number of years and I know there are a number of group water schemes awaiting sanction or awaiting completion for a very long time. There is one scheme in Adrigole on the Berehaven Peninsula where the money has been collected for two to three years, but nothing has been done since. The people have written to the local authority that they want their money back, saying they would try to do something for themselves. Those are the problems we are facing in regard to water schemes.
The western committee of Cork County Council sent a request to the Department to give the village of Shannon Vale a water supply from the Clonakilty regional scheme. The village is only about a quarter of a mile from the headworks of the Clonakilty regional scheme. In the village there are 14 or 15 houses and the people in them have not got even backyards and they need this water urgently. I ask the Minister to sanction the scheme as quickly as possible so that the people of that village will have water in the near future.
In Cork, like every other area, we have planning problems but our problems are bigger because, the people there being especially interested in tourism, want to build chalets and houses for visitors. The planning authority have a big job to do because a year or two ago when we adopted the new planning system, plans for a period of over ten or 15 years were released and suddenly there was an avalanche of applications. The staff to deal with them is small and it will take some time to get decisions on them. A number of applications went to the Minister for final decision and on the whole I wish to express thanks for the manner in which they have been met by the Department. The biggest grievance is the delay between the time the application is made and the time it returns from the Department. I wish to avail of this opportunity to ask the Minister and his officials to expedite decisions on these applications.
A scheme of great benefit to rural communities was the rural improvements scheme. It was operated from Dublin by the Special Employment Schemes Office for a number of years and a tremendous amount of work was done on small roads throughout rural Ireland. Suddenly, a year or two ago, the number of uncompleted applications built up and the Department said they would transfer the schemes to the county councils. This was a wise decision because councils can get through the preliminary work more quickly. However, as far as my memory serves me, the backlog which came down to Cork County Council consisted of 215 applications which had not been dealt with by the Special Employment Schemes Office. Our people have been working on this backlog but we have not got it finished. Indeed at the last meeting we had to decide to tell people that we would not accept further applications until the backlog had been cleared. In order to help us to do this, I appeal earnestly to the Minister to be more generous with us in regard to these schemes in the coming financial year.
Schemes which have not been in operation during the past few years are those which used to be carried out under the Local Authorities (Works) Act. Schemes under this Act saved a lot of money to county councils because streams close to roads were cleared and villages which had been flooded for years were saved. Then, this Government were returned to office and the schemes were discontinued. I ask the Minister to include provision in the coming year to resume these schemes.
In the area which I represent a lot of money is required for tourist development. Many people depend a lot more on tourism as time goes on but the number and the amount of grants going to Cork under this heading is very small. For instance, County Clare got £187,000 for Kilkee. This, for one small area, is more than Cork has been given for the entire county during several years. We particularly require money to provide and to improve rural amenities because we cannot expect visitors to come if the amenities are not there.
I hope the Minister and his officials will consider the various points I have made. At the end, as at the beginning, I invite the Minister and his top advisers to attend the next meeting of the General Council of County Councils. He will get a great welcome.
I will be brief because there is very little new that can be said, so many Deputies have spoken already. There is no doubt from the number of contributions to the debate on this Supplementary Estimate of the interest Deputies take in this sector of Government administration, particularly those Members who are also members of local authorities.
I consider this Supplementary Estimate important from the point of view that the Department of Local Government are in no small way responsible for planning the Ireland of the future because of their activities in housing, water and sewerage schemes, and particularly in planning.
I was surprised that the Minister's opening speech was rather complacent. Does he appreciate that there are still people in this country living under appalling housing conditions? Does he appreciate the misery of two and maybe more families living in the one house? I am familiar with the housing situation in my constituency and in the county of Cork generally. My constituency borders the city of Cork where we have a considerable waiting list for houses. Quite recently, the southern housing committee of Cork County Council advertised a scheme of 28 houses for letting in the Douglas area. After a process of elimination we had approximately 70 applicants. We must provide proper housing for all of those people who cannot afford to provide it for themselves.
With the advent of more foreign industries here there will be a greater demand for houses for workers in those industries. A foreign industrialist does not come to this country just for the love of the people here. Anybody who will provide jobs here is welcome but it is a fact that these people come here primarily to make money. There is an obligation on them to provide assistance towards housing the workers in their factories. It is a strain on local authorities to provide houses for those people. It is unfair to ask our taxpayers and our ratepaying public to continue indefinitely to provide houses for workers in such industries.
It is an appalling situation that two, three and maybe more families may have to live in the one house in overcrowded conditions. This has serious repercussions. I suppose that nothing short of a crash programme would solve the problem. Unsatisfactory housing conditions and an unsatisfactory environment have an injurious effect on children and, in due time, will throw an extra burden on our ratepayers and taxpayers. Housing is one of the most important functions of the Department of Local Government. The Minister cannot be complacent about the present housing situation.
The system of providing houses is most cumbersome and leaves a lot to be desired. The local authority, with all their technical advisers and with all their engineers, and so on, should be in a position to provide houses without having to get prior sanction from the Department of Local Government. Unnecessary and protracted delays occur under the present system and these delays could be cut out if full powers were given to local authorities to provide their own houses. The extraordinary part of it all is that the unfortunate people who are awaiting proper housing tend to place the blame for the housing delay on the local authority. Surely the present system could at least be improved and streamlined?
Planning is very necessary and very desirable. I often wonder if the Planning Act was introduced in time. Our country has many places of great scenic beauty and many natural amenities. That is especially so along our coastline. Unfortunately, some foreigners have already bought up land adjacent to beauty spots and natural amenities. It is imperative to restrict development in such areas. That has happened in the case of some of our beauty spots in the south. We must preserve all our beauty spots. I could mention several instances of planning permission which was refused by the Cork planning office. Nevertheless, in some cases people who have been refused planning permission by the Cork planning office on appeal to the Minister for Local Government have had planning permission granted.
A person who feels aggrieved about a decision should have some one to appeal to. I know of one case where a planning applicant, who was refused planning permission in Cork, obtained planning permission from the Minister three days before the general election. If the Minister doubts that statement I can give him all the necessary information because I do not make false or wild charges. Planning appeals should be taken out of the hands of the Minister completely.
There are great changes occurring in the Department of Local Government. I can see the Department gradually usurping the powers of local authorities and I think the day that local authorities fade out will be a bad day for the country because the members elected to local authorities have a grass roots understanding of the people's problems. A move is being made to take over our main roads and classify them as national primary and national secondary roads. In relation to our health system—I know this is not the Minister for Local Government's responsibility—regional boards are being set up. We are moving too fast towards centralisation and a situation where people are becoming just numbers. Instead of taking powers away from local authorities it is necessary to give them additional powers in relation to matters like housing and water and sewerage schemes.
Time and time again I have made representations to the Department of Local Government about the delays which occur in the payment of grants. I am convinced that there is a deliberate go-slow policy in the Department about the payment of grants. I think it should be possible to pay a grant, whether it is a reconstruction grant, a new house grant or a water and sewerage grant, within one month of the date of completion of the scheme being certified as being in accordance with the Department's requirements and sent to the Department of Local Government. I have seen cases where people were waiting six months, nine months and even a year for payment. What happens is that people who are trying to reconstruct their own houses, not having the necessary money themselves, have to wait until the grant is paid before contractors can complete work. I urge the Minister to expedite the payment of grants.
Cork County Council, like every other local authority, has a housing list. There are a number of applicants on our list who have been waiting several years for a house. It would help to solve the problem if interest-free loans were available to those people who qualify for rehousing under the local authority survey. This would encourage people to build their own houses, if the necessary finance was available. What generally happens is that people living on £10 or £13 a week are reluctant to avail of SDA loans because they are afraid of the repayments. The interest rate is crippling this scheme. If it were not possible to provide an interest-free loan it should be possible to provide a subsidised loan. I am satisfied that such a scheme would encourage people, who are on a waiting list for so long, to build their own houses. Cork County Council sent a resolution suggesting such a scheme to the Minister for Local Government a number of years ago but it fell by the wayside.
The capital allocation for Cork County Council is severely restricted as far as regional water schemes are concerned. People who are on the list for a regional water supply will remain on it for years because the money is not there to provide a scheme. There is now a general awareness of the necessity to have a supply of running water in every house.
The group scheme is a very commendable scheme which could be operated in areas not reached by local authorities. There is, however, a lack of co-operation, and this has been referred to already in this House, between the local authorities and the Department as far as group schemes are concerned. The officials operating the group schemes in Cork are excellent men. I have seen them in my own area long after working hours organising group schemes and pointing out the advantages in order to try to get the co-operation which is necessary to get a scheme off the ground. Group schemes are no good except when they are taken over by the local authority. The Minister for Local Government has refused to allow his inspectors to discuss the water schemes both regional and group in that area, and we are now faced with the position where the county engineer has stated that the scheme will not be taken over because it does not reach the standard required by Cork County Council.
I know of a case where a group of nine houses was built adjacent to the town because building in the town is restricted, and where the council insisted on three inch main and the Department of Local Government insisted on one inch main. Unfortunately, the local authority was right because we have not the water to supply the new houses. It is a bad thing that we cannot have the Minister's officials in at our meetings at least to discuss a uniform standard. I would like the Minister to comment on that in his reply.
Unless the local authorities take them over, schemes will not serve the purposes which the people believed they would. Where there are electric pumps and booster pumps supplying groups, if anything happens, you must get the full co-operation of the group. There is the electricity bill and there are day-to-day breakdowns. Unless the local authorities take over, the schemes are not as laudable as they are supposed to be.
Yesterday was the first time I took part in an election in Dublin city and I was rather sorry about the abuse that the electors were subjected to. I want to refer to this briefly. All parties were concerned. The Minister was involved.
I did not abuse anyone.
He was one of the many who played a part in almost preventing people from going into the polling booths, or almost molested them on their way to the polling booths.
No. I do not think Deputy Donnellan would agree with the Deputy.
What have I got to do with it?
I do not think the Deputy would agree with that.
The Minister played as big a part in this as anybody. It is wrong and, as I said to somebody yesterday evening, I can now understand why there is such a low poll in Dublin city at every election. This is illegal. It is unprincipled and undignified of politicians to subject electors to such abuse.
There were three Fianna Fáil Deputies and nine Fine Gael Deputies there.
That is not so, and the Minister knows it better than I do.
It is so.
There were, as is usual, more Fianna Fáil Deputies than Fine Gael Deputies.
Myself, Deputy Tunney and Deputy Foley.
There were more Fianna Fáil people there than anyone else.
We only looked like more. Myself, Deputy Tunney and Deputy Foley. That is all.
There were more Fianna Fáil people than Fine Gael anyway.
And a Senator.
I am bringing this to the Minister's notice. Was Deputy Burke there?
Only for a few minutes.
Was the Minister for Transport and Power there?
No.
The Deputy seems to be getting away from the Supplementary Estimate.
I am getting away from the Supplementary Estimate but the Minister is interrupting me. If he did not interrupt me I would not get away from it. While I am on that point I want to say that there is an unanswerable case to be made for giving the vote at 18 years of age. We are now at a stage where the register is being compiled.
I cannot change the Constitution.
It is a good job the Minister cannot.
It is necessary to give the vote at 18 years of age——
This is not just advocating legislation; it is advocating changing the Constitution.
It does not arise on the Supplementary Estimate.
It is something that should be dealt with. Recently people have become very conscious of the dangers of pollution. Plans are well advanced for the siting of a smelter factory in Cork. This is giving rise to concern and anxiety in relation to pollution. I have not met anybody who is anti-smelter but I have met a number of people who are concerned about pollution. This can develop into a big industrial complex in Little Island in County Cork. I want to pay tribute to the Cork Examiner which carried out a survey on this and sent people abroad to report on similar factories on the Continent and the pollution which occurred in the areas. The agricultural community in Cork are very concerned about this. I want to quote from the leading article in the Cork Examiner of Monday, 2nd March, 1970, which sums up the situation:
What did emerge very clearly from this investigation was the fact that pollution was possible, though not inevitable—the distinction is important—given proper safeguards, and at this stage this is perhaps the most vital issue for this country as whole, and for Cork in particular. It has long been known that our anti-pollution laws are not at all as stringent as they might be, and some may even aver that they are so ineffective as to be almost nonexistent. This being so, the case cannot be too strongly made now for a complete reappraisal of the entire situation, and for the establishment of the sort of legislation that would prove an effective barrier against pollution of any sort.
I can see and understand the concern and anxiety expressed by a number of people in that area of Little Island. There are questions that are not answered. This project is at the initial stages and the Minister should make a statement about it to clear the air and assure the people that, if legislation is necessary it will be introduced, and if our anti-pollution laws are obsolete, this will be rectified. This is what the people want. As I said, they are not anti-smelter but they are concerned about the repercussions which may come from the smelter factory.
I also know that a certain study group in Cork have studied this problem at great length. They sent representatives abroad and they issued a report. The farming community, the residents in the area, and a great number of people in Cork are most concerned about it and I would appeal to the Minister to deal with it when he is replying. There is atmospheric pollution and there is water pollution. They are equally important. In my area there is a certain concern which has a mechanical container. It is the first of its kind to be seen in this country. It is a sludge collector. I understand from inquiries I have made that it collects the effluent and sludge from cess-pits, sewers and factories. This is dumped into streams, rivers and waste land. Sludge collectors should be under licence and there should be some control over them. It is very easy to pollute a public water supply and it is a great danger.
Last year the road grant to Cork County Council was reduced by £128,000. This is a pretty sizeable sum, and it is against a background of increasing costs, wages and so on. To date we have not heard from the Minister what the grant will be for the coming year and we are now facing our estimates meeting. It is mandatory on the council to strike the rate before a certain date and the Cork County Council will refuse to do it— and let the Minister take the same action as he took against the Dublin Corporation—unless we are notified what the grant will be. I cannot see why the Minister cannot make known in time to the Cork County Council the amount of the road grant. In that county there are many dangerous roads, dangerous bends on which work needs to be done and the only reason we cannot do it is the lack of the necessary finance. I would appeal to the Minister to increase the road grant for Cork County Council for this year and to make it available in good time.
Many of the points I wish to make have been made already by Deputy O'Sullivan and Deputy Creed, both of whom represent rural areas like myself. In regard to the local improvements scheme, the grant we are receiving from the Department is not sufficient to take the place of the work which was previously done by the Board of Works. There is no way of doing the work except through the local improvements scheme or a councillor's notice of motion, and the money from the latter is so small as to be insignificant. The local improvements scheme is a good one and I would appeal to the Minister to increase the Department's contribution to Galway by at least 50 per cent this year and every year hereafter.
About 18 months ago I put down a question asking the Minister if it would be possible to change the percentage the local people have to pay for these local improvements schemes. If your valuation is under £5 you get a free scheme. It is on a scale after that: between £5 and under £7 10s you pay 2½ per cent or 5 per cent, and it goes up by 2½ per cent and 5 per cent thereafter. I gave a chart to the Minister indicating that the contribution from the local people was a little high. At that time he rejected it, but would he look at it again and maybe on this occasion accept it? There are many sand roads servicing little villages and houses and it would be a great help to the people living there if these roads were black-topped, if possible in the coming year.
Like Deputy Creed I could deal with the regional water schemes and the fact that there is such a small number of them being done, but I am very much in favour of the group water schemes. There is a motion on the Order Paper—to be taken in Private Members' Time at some time in the future—which was put down by a number of Deputies from that side of the House, incidentally, asking that the contribution of any of these people taking part in the group schemes should be no more than £40 per individual. This is something with which I fully agree.
Would the Minister set up an advisory service whereby applicants who wish to take part in group water schemes may be told exactly what they have to do? The people in rural areas know of the existence of these water schemes but an advisory service is badly needed. It should be possible for an officer from the Department to give advice to people on how to go about preparing a group water scheme or how to go about making application for planning permission. If a person wants to build a house at the moment he must go to his local TD or county councillor for information. A certain section of the Department should be set aside as an advisory service for people wishing to make application for any of these schemes I have mentioned, local improvement schemes, the building of new houses, the reconstruction of houses and so forth. It should not be necessary for people to go begging to one public representative or another for this information. It makes them feel they are under a compliment when they should be under no compliment whatsoever.
Planning is a good thing but I should like to see the planning laws universally applied. I have a feeling they are not. I know of houses that were built in Galway city and extensions added to them without planning permission. If they had applied for planning permission they would have been refused but they added extensions to these houses and, for one reason or other, no action was taken.
Planning as a whole should be taken from the hands of the Minister. I am not expressing my view of the Minister as an individual but we should not have one individual with so much power in his hands that he can say "yes" or "no" to anybody in the country who applies for planning permission. This power should be transferred to an impartial group who could decide without reference to the applicant or to his political standing.
Recently there was a new classification of the road network into national, regional and county roads. I wrote to the Department about this matter some time ago. The main Galway-Sligo road traditionally passed through Tuam, Dunmore, Cloonfad, Ballyhaunis and Charlestown. It has now been decided, and the Minister apparently accepts, that the national road should go from Tuam to Claremorris through Knock and Kilkelly and into Charlestown. Without criticising those who drew up these plans, whatever it might cost to bring the road up to the proper standard between Tuam and Knock, it would cost all the money in the world to do this through Kilkelly. I have travelled that road and I can see no reason why it was declared to be a national primary road. To get from Knock to Charlestown through Kilkelly would cost, in my opinion, £1 million a mile. It is going through as rough country as one ever travelled. The national primary road should have gone along the traditional route.
In Dunmore we set up a committee to petition Galway County Council and the Minister in this matter. In fact, the county council have no power at all. Many local bodies think they have power but in fact their meetings consist of a lot of hot air of which little notice is taken. We petitioned with a view to getting this Galway-Sligo road through Dunmore and Ballyhaunis. That has gone by the board but the Minister indicated in his reply that the road via Dunmore and Ballyhaunis to link with Charlestown would be classified as a regional road and the necessary improvements to bring it up to that standard would be made. I appeal to the Minister to make available the capital necessary to do this at the earliest opporunity. I cannot help referring to this road which is in a terrible condition between Dunmore and Tuam and Dunmore and Ballyhaunis. It is important that we should get the capital necessary to improve this road. Its present condition is deplorable due to bad bends and surface and it is very dangerous.
I put down a fair number of questions during the year to the Minister for Local Government and I recently asked a question about housing at the Children's Home, Tuam. As usual, the Minister, wishing to prove, I suppose, his ability, replied: "Did you see that I wrote to one of your colleagues and it appeared in the local paper last week?" I also wrote to the Minister's Department regarding these houses and I got a reply saying that they received my letter on 12th instant. Actually, I wrote two letters but they did not refer to the first one. They said the housing authority layout for the first 18 houses on the former site had been approved subject to one amendment; that the council have been told that they might seek tenders for the work. This letter was posted to me on 25th February, 1970. I have here also the paper, the Tuam Herald. The dates in this matter are very important. This paper went to press on 24th February so that at 12 o'clock on 24th, if you had any matter that you wanted printed, it was too late for publication.
The letter I got from the Minister regarding these houses was posted on 25th, which was Wednesday. But I see in this paper, which had to go to press on Tuesday, 24th, a copy of a letter similar to mine which was sent, as it said, to Deputy M.F. Kitt and Deputy Thomas Hussey. I want to know from the Minister how it is that when three Deputies from the same constituency write to him regarding a certain problem, as happened in this case—all separate letters, I suppose—he happened to reply to two of them a couple of days, at least, before replying to the other? He must admit that by doing this he is using his office as Minister for Local Government for political purposes. Has the Minister anything to say to that? I do not mind what he says; he is well aware of what he has done. What he has done in this regard is similar to what many other Departments have done and are doing in this line. If the Minister in his capacity as Minister for Local Government resorts to these tactics all the time—and this is a glaring example—I am sure if he got sufficient power and, as he said earlier in interruption, if he got the Constitution in his hands, he would make a fine job of it.
I appeal to the Minister to be impartial in his ministerial decisions. I have many examples to the contrary. That is not why he was appointed to that office. I hope the Minister will take note of the points I have made and put some of them into operation in the coming year.
I shall be brief because anything I might say now would only be repetition of what has already been said. A debate on an Estimate for Local Government brings one into a very wide field and gives opportunities to Deputies to speak on various matters. Many Deputies have chosen to be critical of the Minister's housing programme but have avoided being complimentary on the efforts of the Minister to solve this great problem. I do not think anyone is more aware of the housing needs than the present Minister for Local Government. He has done an excellent job in maintaining housebuilding at its present rate. Whenever the standard of living improves it is natural to expect an increased demand for improved housing and, to my mind, this is the answer to all the criticism we have heard. There is an improved standard of living in this country and that is creating a demand on local authorities for better housing. This is the way it should be and every effort should be made by the Department to meet this demand.
Cork city has achieved much in local authority housebuilding and we are in the happy position today of keeping pace with the demand for houses. It is estimated that from 1972 onwards we will need an output of about 300 houses per annum—which I think is a conservative figure. The population of Cork city is increasing, we are becoming highly industrialised and this will create greater demands on Cork Corporation so far as housing is concerned. We welcome all kinds of industry to our city because it strengthens our economy and an improved economy means more money for financing our housing programme. Private house building in Cork city has reached a significant figure. In 1968-69 the number of houses built in Cork was 554, which is an all-round record figure. This kind of building must be encouraged and it can only be done when houses are available at reasonable cost. I sometimes think that more increased grants at times only encourage an increase in the cost of private housebuilding which cannot be regarded as a satisfactory development.
A point I should like the Minister to look at is the hold-up of three large private housebuilding schemes in Cork, the number of houses involved being as great as 400. We have been inquiring from the local authority the reason for the hold-up and, perhaps, the Minister might inquire into the matter to ensure that private house building will not be held up without a very good reason.
On the matter of houses for old people, every local authority should apportion part of their building schemes for old people. This aspect has been neglected by local authorities for many years. By providing houses for old people within a housing scheme this ensures that those people are not isolated from the rest of the community. A report issued last week regarding the aged laid specific emphasis on this and I know the Minister has a particular interest in providing such houses.
Another problem in Cork at the moment is our fire brigade station. The existing station is not suitable and we are anxious to provide the most modern equipment for the brigade. Our plans are with the Minister and I would appreciate if he would expedite this matter because there is an urgent need for a modern fire-fighting service in Cork.
In regard to the purchase of old houses, I think local authorities should make available loans to young married couples who may wish to purchase those houses. For some reason local authorities seem to discourage this and I have heard of cases in my city where good old houses could have been purchased for sums varying from £800 to £1,200 but the potential purchasers were refused loans. It is a pity to see a good old house falling into a derelict state when it might have been purchased and maintained in good order and I do not know why local authorities are discouraging this practice. Building in Cork is at its maximum at the moment and we have not sufficient tradesmen to do all the necessary work. Recently one of our larger businesses had to bring from England 40 carpenters in an effort to keep abreast of the demands made by the local authority on them. This is a good feature and I am sure Cork will enjoy many long years of full employment in the building industry.
We are living in a time when people want to purchase their own homes. County Managers should prepare some scheme whereby local authority tenants could purchase their homes but when they are preparing such a scheme let it be within the financial reach of the tenants. There is no point in local authorities spending weeks drawing up some scheme and then finding it is beyond the capacity of the tenants to purchase the houses. Much money could also be saved by local authorities as far as maintenance of houses are concerned but the schemes on hand at the moment are completely beyond the capacity of tenants to purchase their own homes.
Another point which I mentioned some time ago is that many of our local authority houses have large gardens both at the front and the rear and in some cases it is a burden on tenants to maintain them in good order. I sometimes wonder if we should have gardens only at the back rather than at the front of the house. Space is an important factor where housebuilding is concerned, especially in Cork where ground is not easily available, and when schemes are being prepared we should have another look at this aspect of our housebuilding.
The Minister has, I think, done an excellent job so far in keeping abreast of the demand and we, in Cork, are in the very happy position, for the first time in the history of our house building activity, in which our tenants actually have a choice of house and I know that in the years ahead Cork will go on keeping abreast of the demand.
First of all, I should like to make a few general observations about the activity and the responsibilities of the Department before I go on to deal with specific matters in more detail. One of the most contentious matters arising on this Supplementary Estimate is that of rates. In general, one would have no objection at all to the idea of a property tax. No tax is ever welcome and I think property should be taxed just as much as income is taxed. However, our present rating system is a very old-fashioned and archaic one. In most cases valuations are out-of-date and bear little or no relation to the actual earning capacity of the property on which the valuation is made. There is a great need for a re-valuation of all property for rating purposes. If one has a property tax it is questionable whether the financing of certain specific services should be by way of property tax. It is arguable that the revenue from such a tax should go into a general fund so that no particular tax, be it a tax on property or a tax on income, would rise too quickly relative to the other. A particular example in my own constituency is that of malicious damage. Last year there was an outbreak of malicious damage and it is most unfair that the rates in one year should be suddenly jumped up because of this increase in malicious damage, which is something over which the vast majority of ratepayers have no control whatsoever.
In his opening speech the Minister took considerable credit for the increase in housebuilding over the last few years. Far be it from me to deny credit where credit is due, but it is undeniably a statistical fact that more houses have been built in the last few years than in the preceding years, though the rate of progress has not equalled that achieved during the last inter-Party Government. What has been happening is that the Minister has been trying to catch up on the backlog left by his predecessor. In response to severe public pressure he is now stepping up activity in housing. I welcome this activity and I welcome his responsiveness to public pressure, but it must not be forgotten that the backlog was allowed to develop and the Minister is now feverishly trying to catch up.
Reference was made during the debate to the type of house being built. So far as I can see there is a shift away from local authority housing to grant-aided housing. This shift has been faster than would be warranted by the increase in the standard of living, which would naturally lead to people building their own homes rather than going into local authority housing. The shift away has been too fast, even in the light of the improvement in the standard of living, and it is now fairly evident that Government policy is directed towards a move away from providing houses for the less well-off sections of the community, namely, those who normally come in under the heading of local authority tenants. The Government are now moving towards the provision of houses for the middle income group. The shift may not be as great as other speakers have argued, but there is undeniably a shift and the less well-off sections are not getting the service they should be getting from the Government in respect of house building. I hope that in future the Minister will give greater emphasis to the building of local authority housing because lack of housing is felt most by those who have the smallest incomes. They are the people most concerned in getting local authority housing. If the Minister is going to step up housing he should concentrate as far as possible on local authority housing which will cater for those who really need houses.
One result of the shift is that the State contribution is somewhat lower than it would be if it were local authority housing which was being erected. The Minister is succeeding to some extent in producing statistics to prove more houses are built without, in fact, increasing the State contribution. For political purposes this may be producing a very useful statistic but the figures do not indicate a commensurate increase in Government activity in housing when the statistic is accompanied by a shift away from local authority housing to grant-aided housing in respect of which the State contribution is less. I would not deny the Minister credit for improving the housing situation over the past few years, but there are certain deficiencies. There is definitely need for greater concentration than there is at present on local authority housing, the housing which serves the needs of the poorest sections of the community.
Another point I should like to raise is the delay encountered by local authorities in respect of schemes they submit to the Department. There may be certain staffing difficulties in the Department but some of the delays cannot be excused on that ground alone. These delays have been taking place for quite a long period and, if there were staffing difficulties, surely these could have been overcome and the position improved in the light of past experience. Surely staffing arrangements could have been made to meet the anticipated demands in respect of schemes sent in for sanction. A great deal can be done in the Department to ensure that schemes are dealt with more quickly than they have been heretofore.
Another important matter is the role of local government in the promotion of a more democratic community. While many people have been thinking of the introduction of democratisation in the field of industry and in the vocational areas—a development I welcome—local government as a field for improvement from the point of view of participation by ordinary citizens in the shaping of their environment has been neglected to some extent. Local councils are in danger of becoming mere rubber stamps for decisions taken elsewhere. In some cases the local authorities are too big to provide the ordinary citizen with any sense of participation in their activities. An ordinary citizen in the city of Dublin can feel no sense of participation in the decisions taken by his representatives in City Hall, if these representatives are allowed to function, which they are not at the present time.
In small councils there may be greater personal contact between the electorate and the elected representatives. There are many areas where citizens can feel no sense of participation in the decisions taken on their behalf.
There is need to review the whole field of local government to allow greater participation by the citizens. There is need for official recognition of the activities of development and residents' associations. They should be incorporated in the process of local government on a more formal basis than heretofore. This would help the ordinary citizen to participate through them in local government decisions to a greater degree. Elective councils are needed at a lower level than the county. In Meath there is a definite case for elective councils in electoral areas as well as at county levels. The electoral area councils could act as consultative councils in respect of local authority decisions being taken about their functional area, and also could be conferred with a power similar to the power of a Parliamentary Question such as we have in this House. They might not have responsibility for the actual decisions but they would be in a position to call before them an official who took a decision and make him explain his decision in public. This whole question of giving local councils the power to ask questions, even if they have not power over the officials answering such questions, is important. They would have the power to elicit information as to the rationale behind the decision and to expose the decision to public scrutiny.
It is arguable that the right to ask questions could be conferred on the councils not only in respect of those spheres of activity which are within the sphere of the Department of Local Government, such as housing, health and sanitary services, but also in regard to any decision taken by any Government Department in respect of their area. This would ensure that citizens would feel they had some influence on the decisions taken on their behalf. They would be able to ensure that no decisions inimical to their interests are taken.
On the 25th February, 1970, I asked the Minister for Local Government a question. The implications of this question are of interest. They may be of a rather more detailed nature than the matters with which I have been dealing up to now. I asked the Minister for Local Government the number of inspectors from his Department at present inspecting new houses for grant purposes in each county and the number of applications for new house grants in each county in 1969. I was very gratified by the helpful way in which the information was presented to me in reply to that question. The Minister's officials went to great lengths to provide me with this information in as useful a form as possible. The reply was in the form of a tabular statement which showed the number of new houses for grant purposes, the number of inspections in each county, and the number of actual allocations of grants in each county during 1969. I was able to work out the average number of allocations per inspector, thereby finding out that certain inspectors in some counties have a high work load while others in other counties have a low work load.
The figures are indicative of the fact that there is a great need for more inspectors in some areas where they have a great number of inspections whereas in other areas the need is not so great. This would explain the imbalance between areas in regard to the number of inspections. It would explain why it is difficult to get an inspection carried out in some areas. I know of two cases in my own constituency where a house was ready for inspection in July, 1969, but was not inspected until last month, a time lag of six months. I made representations to have the inspection carried out. Otherwise the delay might have been longer. A time lag of six months between completion of a house and inspection, for grant purposes, is too long. People are kept out of their money. Often they need that money to pay the contractor who is pressing them. They may not be able to pay the money until they have been paid the grant.
Four inspectors are now engaged in new house grant inspection work in Dublin. Four are employed on this work in Cork-Kerry, two in Mayo, two in Galway and Tipperary (North Riding) together, and one in each other county. Some time is also spent on this work by the six supervisory inspectors. By taking the figures for the number of house allocations in each county and the number of inspectors operating in those counties I was able to work out whether the inspectors were above or below the average in regard to the work load imposed on them. There were 9,888 house allocations in 1969 and 32 inspectors. The national average of allocations per inspector was 309. In Carlow there were 66 allocations—substantially below the average. The inspector was not overworked. In Cavan there were 101 allocations—the inspector's load was also below average. In Clare there were 385 allocations but only one inspector which put him substantially above the average as regards the number of allocations.
This is particularly aggravated by the fact that Clare is a large and widespread county with great distances between one house and another which the inspector might have to inspect. One inspector for the whole county is very unfair. They have very many housing allocations coming up and they have only one inspector to carry out the inspections. I am sure there must be a considerable delay in this field in the country.
Taking Cork and Kerry and the borough of Cork together I find that the average, with four inspectors, is 373 which is also substantially above the average for the country of 309. There is, therefore, a fair case for saying there is a need for increasing the number of inspectors in the Cork-Kerry area. Donegal is about average at 295. Dublin with four inspectors is away above average with 884. This I suppose is understandable in view of the fact that the inspectors do not have long distances to cover and also because there tends to be large schemes of houses coming up for grant and I suppose if the inspector approves of one he will approve of the lot. While I could not be sure that there is a need for an increased number of inspectors in Dublin I would imagine that there probably is. Galway and Tipperary (North Riding) are below average at 270. Kildare, one of the counties I represent, is well above average at 354. Like Clare it is a dispersed county in which the distances to be covered are quite lengthy and a county in which there would not be large schemes of houses to be inspected and approved en bloc. It would appear to me, therefore, there is a need also for an increased number of inspectors in Kildare. I suggest that Meath and Kildare could be combined and given an extra inspector because Meath also is well above average in this respect in that there were 323 allocations there.
Another place which is well above average is County Limerick where the figure is 470. There is definitely an argument for combining Limerick with Clare and giving them one or two extra inspectors to ensure that delays would not be as severe as they probably have been. Another place which was above average was the county and city of Waterford at 366. I would say there was also a fair case for having an extra inspector there.
Before I conclude on this point, I should like to sum up. The places which I think require an extra number of inspectors are the counties of Clare, the region Cork-Kerry, possibly Dublin, County Kildare and County Meath, Louth—which I omitted and the average for which is 389—Waterford and Limerick. The Minister may draw my attention to the fact that a proportion of the time of the six supervising inspectors is also occupied on this work and it is therefore possible that these supervisory inspectors could move into the areas in which there is the greatest backlog and relieve the inspectors who, on my average, would appear to be overworked. However, this is probably a haphazard way of meeting the difficulties as the supervisory inspectors have other work to do and it is probably not an adequate way of dealing with it. I would ask the Minister to consider increasing the inspection staff as the need to do so would appear to arise from the figures kindly supplied by the Department.
As I was saying when I started my contribution, a considerable number of local authorities have experienced severe delay in respect of schemes submitted by them for approval by the Department. In some cases this may have been not so much because the Department had any real objection to the scheme but because they did not have the money to finance it. In order to avoid having to admit bluntly that they had not the money they said they objected to it on technical grounds and by spreading out the coming and going of memoranda about technical difficulties they succeeded in deferring having to pay for the scheme for some time until they had the money or until local feeling had built up to such an extent that they had to give in.
I should like to draw the attention of the Minister to some schemes in my own constituency. I know that in the past there have been very great delays in connection with some schemes from County Meath but at present there are not that many schemes with the Department which are experiencing delay. This is only the case because of the hard work done by my colleague, Deputy Tully, in harrying the Department into giving approval for these schemes. He has been particularly active in this regard and there are many schemes which would still be resting on some shelf in the Department of Local Government if it had not been for Deputy Tully who kept after the Department. There was a scheme for tender for 36 isolated cottages and we have an example here of what happened, the sort of delaying tactics undertaken by the Department.
The Department of Local Government were very magnanimous. In September, 1969, they gave approval to the county council to allow them to accept the tender for these 36 isolated cottages but—a rather important point —they did not give approval until February, 1970, for the council to undertake a loan to finance the erection of these cottages. Therefore, the granting of approval of acceptance of the tender in 1969 was virtually meaningless because they did not grant them until February, 1970, the necessary sanction for getting the loan to finance the scheme. This is an example of the sort of thing I have been talking about, where the Department is trying to hold on to the money and is going through a sort of charade of giving approval and not really giving approval in order to avoid having to pay up the money. In regard to housing the severest delay and probably the most culpable is not so much encountered in respect of approval of the initial drawings of houses but in regard to the approval of the acceptance of tenders. I can readily concede that where initial drawings are being sent in, where the question of a contractor has not arisen, where the plans of the houses have been submitted to the Department, there may be great delay and reasonable delay here. There are bound to be a great number of technical difficulties in studying drawings for a housing scheme. I would mention that the average time spent in regard to initial drawings of housing schemes in Meath has been about nine months in the Department. This has been the general experience in respect of schemes in Ashbourne, Dunshaughlin, Slane, Athboy, Enfield and Dunderry but these, thanks to a great extent to the work of my colleague Deputy Tully, have now been approved. The big difficulty in the past has arisen not in respect of approval of initial drawings but when the drawing has been approved, tenders are invited by the local authority. The tenders are sent in and the local authority send in a recommendation to the Department of Local Government as to which tender they believe should be accepted. A great delay occurs in this area where the Department does not sanction inspection of the tender without very considerable delay in many cases. I feel that this is much more culpable than the delay in respect of initial drawings because there are no great technical questions arising here. The questions posed to departmental officials are quite simple: "Is the contractor competent? Is the price right?" These are relatively simple questions on which there does not have to be a great amount of technical debate or memoranda going hither and thither. The fact that there has been delay here is really culpable.
In respect of schemes in Meath which will be submitted in the near future, particularly the Dunshaughlin scheme which has probably now gone to the Department, it is vital that there should be no delay in regard to acceptance of tenders. There is no real justification for this delay. It is particularly awkward in view of the fact that people see the advertisements in the newspapers inviting tenders for the erection of houses. Then the big delay occurs in regard to the acceptance of tenders and, as a result, people become despondent.
I want to make one point about grant inspections. There is one reason why there is a particular need to take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that inspections of new houses for grant purposes take place quickly and that no inspector is overloaded in respect of this work. The reason is that in many cases the people who build houses rely on the inspector to act, to some extent, as their architect because many of them cannot afford to avail of the services of an architect. If the inspector is rushed, if he has got an excessive work load, he will not be able to give them that high quality of inspection of the plan of the house which will help people and ensure that no mistakes are made in respect of the erection of the house. If the inspector is overloaded he will not be able to do the job properly. It is vital that wherever there is an inspector who is overloaded with work the necessary steps are taken to ensure that he is given assistance.
I should like now to pass to the question of the efficiency of county councils. There is possibly an argument for having some form of training, perhaps institutional or perhaps in the form of evening courses or something like that, for new councillors every time there are local elections. Many councillors have found that it takes them quite a long time to come to grips with the technicalities of local government, with all the various regulations and so on with which they have to cope. I feel that many of them, probably for the first year or two on a local authority, are not able to make the contribution which they should be able to make, that they are not able to stand up as well as they would like to for those who elected them, because they simply do not have a full knowledge of all the regulations and all the complexities of local authority questions. If these courses were provided it could mean really effective councillors right from the start. I hope that the Minister, in co-operation with the Institute of Public Administration, will take the necessary steps to ensure that there are courses held in Dublin, although I far as I know, there are some such courses held in Dublin, although I am not sure about this, but I feel they should be provided in each county for new councillors. This is probably not a matter for which the Minister has a particular responsibility, but I feel there is need for councillors to specialise in particular areas.