When one considers the Minister's introductory speech on this Estimate and the tremendous evidence in it of planning at every stage I feel sure it will be regarded as a classic reference work on local Government. A person wishing to study our system of local government and see how it could be improved would merely have to refer to the Minister's speech which is an excellent example of how an Estimate should be prepared and presented to the House. I compliment the Minister on this very fine effort. If one were to comment adequately it would take many hours. There is no point in talking for talk's sake: one should try to match the Minister's excellent approach by attempting to offer constructive criticism where necessary.
I think the Minister has his priorities right in that the first matter he deals with is housing because whatever problems we have, housing is among the greatest. The Minister's figures indicate that we have built or reconstructed almost 200,000 houses which shows we have made no mean progress. At the same time there is no room for complacency. There has been much emotive and emotional thinking and talking about housing but that does not build houses. It takes a lot more than that to do it. However, without being in any way complacent, we can note our record and show appreciation of what has been done.
In the Third Programme it was suggested that housing progress should be at the rate of 17,000 per year. We are not very far from that. There are various reasons why it is very difficult to achieve that target. It may be said that we have not adequate money. No country in the world ever has had adequate finance. It is therefore necessary to examine the other component parts of the house building problem to see how we can expedite the drive and how we can bring more efficiency into it. If tomorrow morning the Government had all the money they need for house building we would still not be able to solve the problem as rapidly as we should all like.
One is very much aware of the shortage of craftsmen in the building industry. Although it gives great satisfaction to see full if not over employment in any industry, at the same time it indicates to us that there is something lacking in our educational set up. This, of course, is not the fault of the Minister but until we solve this lack we will have a lag in our housing drive which will not be easily overcome.
Representing a Dublin constituency, I perhaps tend to dwell on the problem here rather than dwell on it from the national point of view. I see from recent figures that there are roughly 8,000 applicants for houses in Dublin city. They are not all families: they include old people, single, widows and widowers. At the moment Dublin Corporation have about 2,000 dwellings under construction but they have plans for the provision of 8,000 dwellings. Therefore, it might be said, when this programme is completed the housing problem in Dublin will be solved. Nothing is further from the truth. We are a quickly expanding city and therefore the demand for houses will go on increasing all the time. We cannot therefore at any stage in the next ten or 15 years expect to see a time when we can sit back and say the housing problem has diminished to the smallest desirable margin.
Apart from this, the social outlook of the people now demands higher standards and they will go on all the time demanding better houses. The days of the tenement room in the city are finished and we do not grieve over their passing. Since the Minister took office he has laid great emphasis on the need for the provision of low cost housing and I hope his efforts will be crowned with the success they deserve.
For people in the city and throughout the country the cost of housing has become a tremendous burden and a a barrier to proper living. The Minister, in his White Paper, has invited firms and various interests to submit to him proposals for low cost housing. He has stated that he has discussed this matter with the Congress of Trade Unions and the employers' organisations. This shows that the Minister is not leaving anything to chance, that he realises the tremendous need for low cost housing and that he is trying in every way to achieve it. It must be achieved if we are to make any progress in our housing programme because a section of our people are suffering gravely because of lack of low cost housing.
Mainly this affects young people who seek SDA loans in order to buy houses. They are really up against it today trying to save the deposit for the house of their choice. The Department have given much consideration to the question of how we should overcome this, but there is no easy way out. I wonder if some section of the building trade might examine the possibility of spreading the loan period over a longer term. This of course would mean that people would pay more for their houses, but over a longer term. It might have the effect of reducing the deposit and this would case the worries of many young people who have to wait years before they can get married.
Perhaps some financial genius will think of some scheme to make money available to young couples to cover their deposits. While we are waiting for the genius to come along, I suggest we should make every effort to extend the period over which loans are repaid. I know this is not the perfect answer. It means people have got to pay for longer periods during their lives, but on the other hand it would mean they would have settled down more quickly and would not have to suffer the terrible frustration of delaying or abandoning marriage, or abandoning hope of ever getting houses of their own. The community should help such young people in their struggle to get houses.
The Minister has also emphasised the need for houses for the aged. In my constituency he has been invited to perform what will be for him a very pleasant function, the opening of another scheme of flats for elderly people, built by a voluntary body. We should record our appreciation of the voluntary bodies in this city who out of their own resources, with the help of the Government and the corporation, have provided many homes for old people. I shall mention the Catholic Housing Aid Society, the Methodist Church and the Presbyterian Church. They have come along with dwellings for old people. Other organisations, too, have done excellent work. I am very pleased to note that this type of endeavour is increasing in the city but such bodies need all the help the Government and the local authorities can give them. In all these cases help from both sources was very willingly given.
The Minister mentioned the pilot scheme which is being carried out in Limerick. Every Member of this House is interested in housing old people and we shall look forward to hearing the results of this pilot scheme, which may help us to provide proper accommodation for our old people. If young people with all their resources and strength find it difficult to overcome their housing problems old people must find it even more difficult.
The price of land for building purposes has been discussed at great length both inside and outside the House. In the private sector the greatest influence on the cost of a house is the cost of the site. Land close to the city centre will naturally be more expensive because of the law of supply and demand. The Department of Local Government have tackled this problem by giving the corporation money to create a land bank in suburban areas. The corporation now have between 2,000 and 3,000 acres of land which they can either use to build local authority houses or sell or rent to private developers. The corporation purchased this land at reasonably low prices and this land bank will ensure that the small builders will not be crushed by the giants of the building industry. It also means that for some years to come we shall have available land on which to build. If the city continues to expand as it is at present we shall soon reach the mountains and from an environmental aspect I hope the Minister will put a stop to building on the mountains.
The Government have set up a commission under Mr. Justice Kenny to inquire into the price of building land. Pending the findings and submissions of this commission there is little we can do in the Dublin area except hope the Minister will continue to make money available to local authorities for the purchase of land which they have shown they can buy at fairly low prices.
The Minister also referred to the control of the demolition of habitable houses. In some cases the law may be circumvented and habitable houses pulled down. There is no use preserving houses which are not fit to be preserved, but there are many terraced houses in the city which are good for many years to come. Some such houses have been pulled down. In controlling the demolition of houses the local authority must examine each dwelling on its merits and decide whether or not it should be preserved. There is no use saying, "That is a run down area, clear it out." We are short of houses and I want to see pockets of old, residential property preserved and even though the houses may not conform to present-day housing standards and may not have all the modern conveniences like a bathroom, improvements can be carried out. The control of the demolition of houses is a very important part of the housing drive and I would ask the Minister to urge local authorities to use all the powers under the Act to ensure that houses which are habitable are preserved. If they are not habitable they should be pulled down and modern buildings erected on the site.
On a major issue like the preservation of houses people immediately take sides. Many people believe we should preserve every Georgian house in the city while others think this is not possible. The approach of the ordinary man in the street is that if a house is worth preserving and can be preserved it should be preserved but if it is not worth preserving it should be demolished and that is a very fair approach to the problem. On the one hand we must not let one habitable dwelling be demolished and, on the other hand, we must not allow people to continue to live in substandard housing when in fact we can offer them better accommodation.
Somebody once said that the only city without a housing problem is a dying city. Any city which has a growing population will have a housing problem. There are critics outside this House who attack the Government and the authorities for the lack of progress. These people either do not do their homework properly or else they want to make capital out of a housing shortage. Despite the housing shortage which exists we are probably as well housed as most cities and better housed than some. We are in that position because successive Governments have pressed on with the housing drive. I know that under the present Minister the housing drive will be accelerated.
Another aspect of the housing problem is the settlement of itinerants. We all believe that itinerants must be absorbed into society. It is easy for a city man to say this because he does not suffer the annoyance of itinerants camping in fields which farmers and people living in rural areas suffer from. At the same time it would be a discredit to our society if we were merely to cast them aside and carry on as we are because we have had them with us for years. This is the 20th century and those of us who are interested in bettering our society cannot pass by an itinerant camp in Dublin suburbs without seeing those itinerants, especially the children, suffering. Any Dubliner who crosses O'Connell Bridge, even at 1 o'clock in the morning, will see children begging accompanied by their parents. On one occasion I saw a couple with a child begging on O'Connell Bridge after midnight on a bitterly cold night. We all praise the voluntary societies who are trying to help itinerants, but the itinerants must help themselves. I would be prepared to support any measure in this House raising extra taxation if it helped itinerants, but at the same time those itinerants will have to join in the general drive to better themselves. I deplore the fact that the children are sent to O'Connell Bridge to beg. If they are really in need of help, surely we have enough State agencies and charitable agencies without a child being forced to beg on O'Connell Bridge. Charles Dickens deplored this type of thing but yet a century later we are still witnessing it. We have got to stop this, not just by preventing them going there but by giving the itinerants their place in society where this type of thing would be totally unnecessary, where the itinerants's children would be educated the same as the rest of our children and that they would not be second class citizens.
The question of pollution is very much in the minds of everybody today. With the expansion of industry and the affluent society in which we live, pollution has become the curse of this society, whether it be from motor cars, factories or just merely the fact that people despoil the countryside and the air of that countryside by their own actions. The Minister stated that quite a lot has been done as regards water pollution and air pollution. A lot of this pollution is due to sheer carelessness, because there is no place in the country where one passes through that one does not see it littered with rubbish. People dump rubbish on the roadside. I even saw in one of the loveliest parts of Donegal where some builder had renovated a house and had thrown a load of rubbish in one of the most beautiful glens there. You see the same thing all over Ireland. It is a terrible tragedy that people by their own carelessness and criminal acts are making life more difficult for us.
The Minister and his Department in the future will be faced with the question of the disposal of rubbish in this city. This is a problem which the affluent society has created for itself. When we were younger we bought sweets and toffee bars which were unwrapped so we did not have to dispose of the papers from them. If one looks outside any sweetshop in the suburbs today, where children congregate, one will see pieces of paper thrown on the roadside. We are defeating the purpose of trying to be hygienic. The sweet manufacturer today wraps up sweets so when the children get them they just throw the papers on the pavement. We also have the problem of plastic and polythene containers which will not rot when thrown away.
The space left in the dumps which we have been using for years is rapidly running out and the Department will have to face the possibility of providing incineration at a very high cost. There will be no place left on the outskirts of the city in a few years time in which to dump rubbish. We will then have to do what other cities have done, although not so successfully, that is, we will have to provide incineration plants at very high cost. We are warned that incineration is not the total answer because it leaves a 10 per cent residue which must be got rid of. It is a puzzle for the Minister, his Department and the local authorities as to how they will overcome this great problem which faces twentieth century society and which will increase rapidly until such time as we are forced to take very strong measures.
The traffic problem is discussed by 800,000 Dubliners every morning. The people in Cork, Galway, Waterford, Limerick and many other places also have this problem. I am glad to see that Dublin Corporation have set up their own special section with a traffic officer. The Minister and his Department helped out here by making proposals to Dublin Corporation as to how they could ease the traffic problem. While the traffic problem is big I feel also it is not as big a problem as it is in other cities in Britain or the Continent. It is very easy to solve your traffic problem if you have sufficient money to build fly-overs and underpasses. Of course, we will eventually have to build these but in the meantime there are one or two simple things which might help with this problem. I suggest we might have a clearway operating on bus routes within a half-mile of the city centre, that is there would be no parking on those bus routes. The clearway time is about 1½ hours in the morning. There is no parking allowed during that time but the buses do not run on clearways all the time. The buses can be held up by parked cars on narrow streets.
Anybody who was in Glendalough last Sunday could have seen the chaos which can be caused by stupid parking. Some people parked in places which were clearly marked "No parking" so the roadway was jammed with cars. A CIE bus driver could not get out and about 200 cars were held up. Eventually this driver, who was a very conscientious man, got out of the bus, walked along with an inspector, and appealed to each car in front of him to move a little so that he could get his bus out. This hold-up of over an hour was caused by three or four people. My informant tells me that some of those people said they did not cause the traffic jam, that they were already parked there. They did not appear when the traffic jam was caused but later when they came to take their cars away. Bad parking in the city is the cause of holding up traffic. I would prefer not to fine the person who spends five minutes over the time at a parking meter. But if a person parks where he should not park and in a manner in which he should not park and holds up other traffic the traffic warden should go after him. He just does not care for anybody else so long as he is all right himself.
The expansion of the school warden service is something on which the Minister and his Department are to be congratulated. Since the introduction of school wardens in the 1950s in Dublin I do not think any child has been killed at crossings. I speak subject to correction but I have watched out for this. I was a member of the Dublin Corporation which introduced this service which I am glad to see has now been extended to the whole country.
As well as school wardens we now have traffic wardens and soon we will have, I hope, the new corps of wardens who will deal only with traffic problems so that the gardaí can do the job they should be doing in crime detection and prevention.
Another aspect of the traffic problem is the driving test. I speak as somebody who did not pass the test at the first attempt. Having passed eventually, I can see both sides of the question. I would say that the examiners are of a very high standard. When a person fails the test he does not, perhaps, feel that way but looking back, if one is honest with himself, he will realise this. However, when a person does a 20-minute test with a tester and passes, he then goes out to drive in the city or in the country. I would suggest to the Minister that we should take a tip from our friends in the North. There they have a restricted driving licence. After passing the test, one cannot drive at more than 40 miles an hour and the driver must display an R badge on the car for a certain period. I think it would be a good idea to give this restricted licence and then, after 12 months, issue a full licence provided the driver has incurred no black mark against him. This would take a big strain off the driver who is being tested and off the tester because at the moment the tester must decide that a person is fit to drive through the thickest city traffic and many testers, having the proper outlook, may feel they just cannot do this.
The Minister mentioned fire protection and the fact that there was about £8 million worth of fire damage sustained in the last year or so. This city has suffered in the past year from some major fires. Apart from the actual loss of buildings and materials, very often there is loss of employment. I am a member of a body called the Fire Protection Association which tries, by publications, to educate people, particularly industrialists, hoteliers and so on, to take the necessary fire precautions. Our economy, or any economy, just cannot afford to bear tremendous fire losses and a simple piece of education may avert great loss and possibly tragedy. The Fire Protection Association have put certain proposals before the Minister for the streamlining of this organisation. I think the Minister will find the proposals interesting and I hope helpful enough to be adopted. While losses from fire are no greater in Dublin than elsewhere they are too great for our resources and apart from financial loss there is often loss of life.
Rates today are a crushing burden on most families in the country. From time to time suggestions and proposals are put forward as to how the rates system can be changed. I believe, and I am sure most public representatives believe, that any reduction in the rates cannot be effected under the present system. If the Government were to pour more money into the reduction of the rates it would fall to taxation anyway. In regard to the Dublin rate the inter-Departmental committee should try to finish their report and give it to the Government because there are such obvious ways of reducing rates in this city that it is a great pity there is any delay about doing it. I would point again to the bodies which enjoy concessions, some of them under ancient charters given to the then members of the Establishment, who looked after themselves pretty well. There are buildings in this city which have the right, under some ancient charter, to pay only two-fifths or one-fifth of the rates.
Today, with education so much on our minds, I should like to point to the two universities in this city, both of which enjoy great rates remissions from Dublin Corporation. I am all in favour of subsidising education to a very great degree but it should be a national charge. Dublin city should not have to meet, perhaps, two-thirds of the rates to be paid on either TCD or UCD. By all means subsidise both universities but let it be a national charge. The same thing may apply in Galway and Cork and in Kildare in the case of Maynooth—I do not know—but I do know that the two Dublin universities enjoy this rates remission as well as various other bodies. The ESB, for instance, do not pay rates on a new power station. If they acquire from a local authority, as in the case of the old Pigeon House station in Dublin, they pay rates and they pay rates on their offices but they do not pay rates on their new stations. About two miles from here, in my own area, there is a station being built which will cost £50 million. Dublin Corporation will not draw a penny in rates from that. This is unfair to the city.
I know I am preaching to the converted when I speak to the inter-Departmental committee who are examining the rates because they agree that these concessions should be abolished but the question now is when will they be abolished. When will these bodies have to pay rates to Dublin Corporation? Let the Government disburse money if they want to be helpful but that should be a national charge. The inter-Departmental committee have sat for many years and judging by the interim reports they have issued they are doing a good job but the best job they could do now would be to finalise their report so that the Government could introduce whatever legislation is necessary in order to give teeth to the recommendation, and reduce the rates.
There are many rates concessions with which we agree, for instance, the remission given to young persons to buy a house. In that case the remission is for ten years. It is a form of subsidy to young families. I see nothing wrong in that. I would support such subsidy. On the other hand, the large semi-State bodies should be made pay their rates in full. Of course in the case of the ESB when it was first established there was rates remission in order to help the "struggling baby" but that organisation is no longer a struggling baby; it is a huge monopoly which should be able to pay full rates on all its installations. I am not unaware of the fact that the rates represent a hefty bill at the moment. The fact that such large organisations paid their full rates would encourage the poorer ratepayers, particularly the widow whose husband, thinking he was making provision for her in the event of his death, left her a nice house in a Dublin suburb. She has to try to meet the rates and the ground rent on the house and finds herself in a state of almost penury in doing so. The State has introduced some measure of rates remission to help such people and this measure has been helpful but it could be extended to cover the widow on a fixed income, perhaps an annuity left by her husband, and who must face the ever-increasing burden of rates. These people deserve our help. It is ironical that while some colossus of a State body can obtain rates remission, many old persons living on their own are not given any such concession. This is altogether wrong and must be corrected.
I am sure that the inter-Departmental committee which is examining the whole position of the rates will make some very interesting recommendations. Those in the city and county and urban areas would be most interested in a proposal to reduce the rates this year. This would be the best news that thousands of families could receive.
At the same time, the service given by a local authority cannot be reduced. Indeed, the whole trend is towards increasing the service. We are back to square one. It may be said that if the rates are reduced the service must be reduced. I say that this is not necessarily so if there is an equitable rating system in which one paid according to one's resources. That would be a good system. I submit that the existing system is somewhat lopsided and is in need of overhaul. That is why I want to record our appreciation of the work being done by this committee to which I have referred and I would ask them to expedite their final report so that we could have whatever legislation is necessary to put into effect the proposal made to reduce the tremendous burden of rates on many people.
We are now entering what we call the summer season. Again, there will be the annual toll of accidents at bathing places and in the sea. I notice that the Department of Local Government is coming more into the picture in urging persons to take care when swimming or boating. There are maritime local authorities whose duty it is to provide lifeguards but there are many simple ways in which life could be saved. If one is foolish enough to dive into a river to have a swim he may find himself in difficulty. Wicklow County Council and other county councils have erected warning signs indicating that it is dangerous to swim at certain spots. This is a very good thing. The cost is very small. All local authorities should be urged to indicate danger spots on rivers. Unless precautions are taken there will be drownings in the rivers and in the sea. The tragedy is that these accidents could be prevented by the exercise of a little care.
The Minister, speaking on road deaths before the weekend, asked if we would be as happy on Tuesday morning, meaning would cars be driven properly over the weekend and would accidents be avoided. I do not think the Minister can over-emphasise the need for care on the roads, on rivers and in the sea. Last year about 500 persons died on the roads and thousands were injured. This is a great reflection on our society which can send men to the moon and fly aeroplanes at thousands of miles per hour while a journey a few miles on the road may result in a terrible tragedy. One cannot specify where the total fault lies, there are so many components of an accident. If the toll of the roads is to be prevented or even reduced the first essential is that the drivers of vehicles will take every possible care, will act courteously and sensibly. The local authorities must eliminate dangerous spots on the roads, must ensure that the roads are properly lighted and that all possible signposting is carried out. Everything humanly possible should be done to reduce the toll of the roads.
We must face the fact that the number of vehicles on the road increases by roughly 10 per cent per annum. The volume of traffic on the roads will increase this year, next year and the following year, which will mean more accidents unless we appeal to people to act reasonably on the roads, to exercise care and consideration for other people. After that, I am all in favour of the full rigour of the law being applied to those who violate the road code. A person is prosecuted not for the sake of prosecuting him but in order to bring home to him the seriousness of his offence and the fact that it affects not only himself but other people and could cause death.
We must spend a great deal more money on the provision of proper roads and on traffic control. Each year the estimate rises but we will have to spend more money whether from the Road Fund or from the local authorities or from some State source. We must face the fact that for some years to come we shall be faced with the great problem of trying to provide a proper road network, one that would allow for the utmost degree of safety. It is easy to evaluate a motor car but nobody can evaluate a human life. We must do everything in our power to ensure that human life is safe-guarded on our roads. At the same time, the best possible way of ensuring safety on the roads would be by showing courtesy and consideration to fellow travellers.
This year the Minister's White Paper on Local Government was produced. Judging from the various comments I have heard it would seem to me that either people have not read the White Paper fully or else I have misread it. I regard it as a document putting forward suggestions for discussion as a result of which submissions would be made to the Department in an effort to evolve a better pattern of local government. However, some people have said that this is merely an attempt to impose a new form of bureaucracy on the people. This reference to bureaucracy is interesting. I do not know what we would do without a bureau or a bureaucrat—they are an essential part of our lives. At any rate, this White Paper affords us the opportunity of improving our system of local government. At the same time, there are many suggestions contained in it that many would not support. For instance, there are some members of local authorities in the Dublin area who are opposed to establishing a form of common council.