Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 5 Jul 1972

Vol. 262 No. 5

Committee on Finance. - Vote 26: Local Government (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:

That the Vote be referred back for reconsideration.

—(Deputy T.J. Fitzpatrick(Cavan)).

Mr. Crotty

Before Question Time I was dealing with the question of differential rents. As I said, in my area we have not had any rent strikes or anything of that nature. The tenants are very co-operative and level-headed people. There is grave dissatisfaction with differential rents in general. There are certain problems arising in connection with differential rents which the Minister should look into. It is his duty to consult with the tenants in other areas who are protesting about these rents and at least talk to them. As I said before, you lose nothing by talking, and you give people a chance to air their views. This takes some of the urgency and dissatisfaction out of the situation.

One of the problems which arises in connection with differential rents is that a small part of the children's wages is allowed, and the rest is put on to the income of the house, whether or not the parents get a contribution from the children. Naturally they should but in many cases the contribution by the children is quite small, and sometimes it is nil. People have a grievance that their children's earnings are taken into consideration for rent purposes.

A major bone of contention is overtime. A constituent said to me last week that they do not have to pay increased rent when they are earning the overtime. A person can earn large amounts of overtime in one year. He then submits a certificate of wages and he is assessed for the coming year on his previous year's earnings. There might be no overtime the next year and in the year when he is not earning overtime he must pay increased rent. Some people do not object too much to paying on the overtime, but others feel very strongly about it. At least it should be charged when the person is earning it. It is a grave injustice to charge a person an increased rent on overtime when he is not earning it. The Minister should have a look at that matter.

Another bone of contention is that some tenants are working for State bodies or large concerns and their wages are returned to the last halfpenny. I am sure the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary are aware that incorrect statements of wages are submitted by employers in many cases. It is very difficult to get a proper assessment of wages from self-employed people, a large number of whom live in council houses. You could have one person in one house paying a large rent and the person in the house beside him, perhaps with the same income or a larger income, paying less rent. These are matters that arise. The Minister should review them because they cause unrest. He should look into them before they get out of hand.

I was very pleased when the recent amenity scheme was introduced by the Minister. The amount of money allotted is rather small, £300,000, to cover the country. At least it is a start. The Minister has taken a step in the right direction. He has covered a fairly wide area and the emphasis is on giving this money to people who help themselves. This is good because the people who get out, and stop complaining, and help themselves, deserve to be helped. I commend the Minister for this scheme and I hope that next year, if he is still in office, he will expand the scheme in his Estimate.

I should like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary how this money is allocated. In Kilkenny we were very disappointed that our share of this £300,000 was £4,500. This is a very small slice of this money. The councillors in Kilkenny have a genuine grievance because our share is so small. I learned that the allocation to the Minister's constituency is £12,500. I wonder why this should be allocated to the Minister's constituency while only £4,500 was allotted to Kilkenny. Is his constituency three times bigger than Kilkenny, or is the population three times bigger? I would be grateful if the Minister could explain that.

In Kilkenny also, there is a grievance about the size of the national primary roads grant. This grant should be increased. It was decreased for the past two years and this year it was brought back to what it was three years ago. You could not hope to do the same amount of work now as you would do three years ago with the same amount of money. Large sums of money are now coming from the rural areas into the Exchequer through motor taxation and so on, and they should get back their fair share of that money for roads.

I found on inquiry that our share of the grant for the upkeep of the national primary roads was £440 per mile. In south Tipperary it is £1,000 per mile and in Wexford it is something like £600 per mile. Like the amenity scheme, there is general concern that our area should not be downgraded. I would ask the Minister to have a look at that matter and to do something about it, and give us an increased allocation of cash for these roads.

I would also ask that he give us our allotment of money a number of years in advance and tell us what we are getting. It has happened over the past few years that we did not even have the road grants for our rates meeting. I think that under protest last year we got notification on the morning of the rates meeting of the amount of the allotment. This is not good business and I feel that it is a smart way adopted by the Department of having the local council pass the rates for road grants and then give what they like. This will not be tolerated any longer. Not alone should they have notice in time but the local surveyor should be allowed to plan ahead and get worthwhile plans for roads set up.

A matter which is very disturbing to most people now is the great number of fires taking place at present. We have almost become so used to and callous about multiple deaths in fires that we would almost want to see a situation in which a dozen people are burned in a fire before we would think about it a second time. This is a very serious situation because the number of fires is growing. The Department will have to look seriously at our fire regulations. There is one section in respect of which there is great laxity, that is, fire protection in hospitals, and most especially in county homes. I have visited all the county homes in my area over the past 12 months and have been amazed by the lack of proper fire protection. We find fire escapes from third-storey floors from which people, especially bedridden people, have no hope of getting out of and it is only through the goodness of God that we have not had a tragedy. This situation must be taken seriously and we must not wait for tragedies to occur to prod us into action. The time to do it is before a tragedy occurs. We have had many discussions at health board meetings about getting people from third floor accommodation in these county homes by means of chutes and I would hate to see a fire start in these places because they are in themselves fire-traps. They are old buildings, many of them with much timber content and, as I say, it is only by the grace of God that one of these does not go up and leave us with a major tragedy.

I complain also about many of the flats which are being used, buildings which are not fit for human habitation but are being used by young couples while waiting to be housed. These are rickety old buildings and the stairs are in such a condition that if you wanted to make fast exit, you would probably die in the attempt. These are continually being let in flats and there are people on the second, third and fourth storeys in somes cases in these houses, with no fire protection whatever. I have said before that we cannot leave people on the streets. We cannot simply ban these types of flats because these people must be housed somewhere, and but for that situation people would not be allowed into these dwellings, but if we let them in, we must put some regulation in force which will ensure safety in case of fire. I would not like to be living in one of these places if a fire broke out, as I say.

I should like also to compliment the fire services throughout the country. These men are a most dedicated and loyal band of servants and are doing a wonderful job. These part-time men throughout the country and the fulltime men in Dublin are certainly giving the ratepayers their money's worth. I cannot compliment them too highly. It strikes me that we should ask our fire chiefs to help out in making premises safer—in bringing home to people the need for fire precautions and in having buildings put in such a state that if people want to make a quick exit, this will be possible. Above all, we should have proper fire extinguishers available in places where a number of people work. This could be done from the fire stations and it may be necessary to employ a man for this purpose, but it would be a worthwhile exercise to put a man in charge of getting a fire extinguisher into every home and also to provide a service for the refilling of these extinguishers. There are many places in which there are fire extinguishers which have been used but never refilled. They might as well not have a fire extinguisher, so I think it would be a very good extension of the fire services to have these provided. I know that the local authorities will get the utmost co-operation from the fire chiefs and their staffs.

We have had in operation a systen of relief of rates for certain pensioners and people in great hardship. I do not think this relief has gone far enough. It covers non-contributory pensioners of all kinds and people in great hardship, but I think it could at least be extended to cover contributory pensioners because most of these people have no other means and do not apply for it because they think they are not entitled to it. I know that certain contributory pensioners are engaged at work and have fair jobs, but the majority have only the pension and there is very little difference between it and the non-contributory pension so that when this scheme is being launched again, it could be expanded to include these pensioners.

I do not agree that the cost of this scheme should be borne by the ratepayers who are being asked to carry their less well off brethren. This we would not object to at all if they were not people who are nearly on the breadline because they cannot pay their rates. Unfortunate people on fixed incomes, small business people, people with small shops should not be asked to carry this burden of subsidising the less well off people in our community. The Minister should have a look at it and decide to put the charge on central funds. It is a very laudable scheme but the cost of it should not be put on the already overburdened ratepayers.

The house purchase scheme is a failure. There was a very small number of applications last year and I expect the number in the coming year will be smaller still. When the scheme was first introduced the houses were virtually given away. Then we went from one extreme to the other and now we are being asked to charge the market value. What is the market value? Certain houses have been purchased at big prices. When there is a great demand for houses the law of supply and demand operates. If complete blocks of houses were sold, the market value would operate. The value at the moment is affected by the law of supply and demand.

Kilkenny Corporation last year were given prices by the local engineer, a very conscientious man, who placed a value on these houses to the best of his ability, being fair to all sections. In most cases the value he suggested was adopted by the corporation. In the case of a few houses situated in areas which may have been subject to flooding, or where other factors came into operation, the price was reduced by the corporation. The scheme produced by the engineer was submitted to the Department and they increased the prices. This is not being realistic. The Department are not interested in selling houses any more. Some of the tenants have been living in these houses for 50 years. The houses have been paid for ten times over. These tenants are not getting a change to purchase. They missed the first scheme when the houses were being given away. Now they have no hope of purchasing and owning their homes. I would ask the Minister to examine this matter.

A burning question is the amount of money allocated to County Kilkenny for local improvements. We get the princely sum of £4,000. I put down a question some time ago asking for the allocation in other counties. I learned that the Minister's county was getting £65,000 under the scheme. That is 16 times the allocation for Kilkenny. I cannot imagine that in the Minister's county the area is 16 times as great, the population is 16 times as great or the amount of work to be done is 16 times as great. An allocation of £4,000 to Kilkenny for local improvements is not realistic. Kilkenny is not getting a fair deal in this matter.

There is great demand in rural areas for the improvement of laneways into houses so that the occupants can drive their cars to their houses. Some of these laneways are in a dreadful condition. It is nearly impossible to walk along these lanes unless one is wearing rubber boots. School children have to wear rubber boots all the year round. Farmers living along such laneways are deprived of services. Bulk lorries cannot get to their houses. In many cases the vet and the doctor will not travel along these laneways and I would not blame them. If I thought anything of my car I would not travel along these laneways.

If we want to maintain the young men in rural Ireland, every possible facility must be provided. Progressive young men have borrowed money and have purchased modern machinery. Many of them have bulk tanks. The bulk lorry cannot get to their premises because of the condition of the laneways. In a number of cases young men who have inherited the family farm found it impossible to remain there because of the condition of the roads and the absence of any hope of any work being done on them. In many cases the people cannot afford to carry out the work out of their own resources.

There is a waiting list in Kilkenny for rural improvements covering a period of six years. The period would be 12 or 15 years if it were not for the fact that people do not apply when they learn of the six year waiting list.

Kilkenny County Council have a scheme whereby lanes are improved free of charge for some of these people but the amount we can spend in this way is limited because we cannot overburden the rates with charges of this nature. We were making good progress but for the last four years we were refused permission by the Department to raise the necessary loans. This year we have raised the money directly from the rates and have not sought permission to raise loans. In this way we can help the people concerned to some extent.

Kilkenny is not getting its fair share of the allocation for local improvement schemes. I would ask the Minister to improve the allocation as a matter of urgency and to give Kilkenny a fair share of the grants for this very necessary work.

I would ask the Minister to examine as a matter of urgency the question of the provision of houses, not alone in Kilkenny but throughout the country. This is a top priority. Some Deputies have said that the Minister is doing a fair job, building a fair number of houses. It is not a fair job in relation to the demand and the general shortage of houses. The Minister will have to do a great deal more. There must be a big increase in housing output. The least we can give people is a roof over their heads to enable them to rear their families in frugal comfort. No citizen must be deprived of this right. It is the top priority for any Minister for Local Government. If the Minister does a good job in this respect it can be said that he is making a success of his Department.

Mr. Tunney

Baineann Meastachán na Roinne Rialtais Áitiúil le gnáthshaol an duine agus, dá bhrí sin, is sothuigthe go mbeadh díospóireacht leathan air. Tá a shaol féin ag gach duine agus deineann sé a dhícheall an gad is goire dá scórnach a scaoileadh. Chuir sé áthas orm gur thagair an tAire chomh mór sin do chúrsaí tithíochta. Maidir liom féin is í ceist seo na tithíochta an gad is goire dom scórnach. Is í an cheist seo freisin an gné is tábhachtaí d'obair na Roinne seo. Molaim an tAire mar gheall ar an méid atá déanta aige ó rinneadh Aire dhe agus tá a fhios agam nach dtógfaidh sé orm é má deirim nach bhfuil mé sásta fós leis an méid atá déanta. Tá súil agam go ndéanfar níos mó.

The functions and activities of the Department of Local Government are so diverse and so wideranging that it is quite understandable that the debate here on local government should follow a very broad pattern. It is quite obvious from listening to the speakers here and to the Minister's opening statement that the Department of Local Government is concerned with extremely important matters, some of which take precedence and priority over others.

The Minister devoted a large part of his speech to housing. I commend him on the way in which he dealt with the subject. I should also like to commend him on the worthwhile work he has done since he took office. If, in the course of my remarks, I indicate certain aspects about housing which do not satisfy me, I know that the Minister will not treat what I say as adverse criticism but will accept it as an exhortation to him to continue the good work he has been doing.

It is a truism that it is the ambition of every human being not that he should live in a house but that he should own his own house. That is a natural and an understandable ambition. It should be our aim to provide every man with his own home. This is the goal towards which we should strike. We should not think in terms of renting houses; renting houses should be a last resort. Our first aim should be to assist people to own their own homes.

I have been heartened by a recent development in the Dublin city area. The city manager has a pool of land and he is offering sites to small builders, small builders who build medium-priced houses for those who normally would be housed by the local authority but who, through their own industry and thrift, have saved £500, £600 or £700 which they are anxious to invest in a house. There is at the moment a waiting list for these houses. I hope the city manager will continue this policy and make more land available to these small builders who are supplying a need in our community. I hope that the fact that there is a waiting list will not result in a sellers' market, with additions made to the price of the house, additions not always in accordance with what the house has cost. I have referred to this before.

I am critical of builders who offer houses to people without really indicating the price of the house. In any other sphere there is never any doubt about the price of a commodity but, in the matter of housing, a most important item in anyone's life, it is difficult at times for the buyer to ascertain exactly what the price is. Very often people do not understand about grants and so forth. They do not appreciate the difference between gross price and net price. They may place a booking fee and be told that the price is £5,500 or £6,000 and, in the course of a month or two, the builder may tell them that the house has gone up by £200 or £300.

Mr. Tully

That is what is known as gazumping.

Mr. Tunney

Whatever it is, it is not something of which I approve. This is wrong because it is sharp practice in so far as that once a client is netted it is not easy for him, if he wishes, to opt out. It should be required of anybody selling a house to indicate what will be the specific cost of that house to the purchaser. I do not deny to any builder the right to earn a reasonable profit but there is an obligation on him to make clear that the price quoted in the price at which the house will be sold. There are one or two other matters in connection with the purchasing of that type of house to which I have referred in the past and to which I shall refer again now. We should endeavour in so far as possible to accommodate anyone who is in a position to indicate that he has a sum of money which he is anxious to invest in a house which money, consequently, he is investing in the building industry. Very often because of the way in which an intending purchaser is thwarted he reaches the stage where he must withdraw that money from the building industry and invest it, perhaps, in consumer goods. He may have to go into a basement flat and wait there until such time as his situation is so bad the local authorities will offer him accommodation.

Another aspect of house purchase which concerns me is that of legal fees. It is my contention that the amount of money extracted from house purchasers by their solicitors is not in accordance with the services rendered. I see no justification for any solicitor charging legal fees of as much as £100 or £120 on a house when, perhaps, that house is one of a scheme of 100 houses, all of which are similar and which require only identical leases. A lower figure would be more appropriate and the saving to the house purchaser would be considerable especially when it is realised that, invariably, that money has to be borrowed at, perhaps, 9 or 10 per cent.

Regarding the housing situation in Dublin I would not wish to use the word "emergency" because that word is too emotive but I would say that the housing situation in Dublin is not satisfactory. In fact it is bordering on the emergency stage. Having regard to the changing circumstances in building and to the fact that craftsmen are not required to apply the same skills today as would have been required of them say, 20 years ago, the trade unions might make their contribution to the problem by studying the situation and discovering areas where semi-skilled or unskilled men might be capable of performing the duties which up to now have been classified as the work of skilled men. Perhaps I will be slated for saying this in so far as trade unionists are concerned.

Mr. Tully

What type of work could an unskilled man do?

Mr. Tunney

For instance, I am a very unskilled man but I am sure that I would make a very good job of nailing down floorboards.

Mr. Tully

Therefore, the Deputy is semi-skilled.

Mr. Tunney

In this way the trade unions could make their contribution. Invariably we are told that the main factor in the cost of a house is the price of land. I cannot accept that because the corporation can provide small fully serviced sites at a cost of £1,000 but the cost of the house to the purchaser will be about £5,300. We must assume, therefore, that £4,500 of that amount relates to materials and labour. This is an area where certain economies could be effected which would be to the advantage of the prospective buyer and to the general advantage of the community as a whole.

Deputy Crotty referred to the differential rent system. I do not intend speaking on that topic in any detail in this instance except to say that I consider the system to be an excellent one in spirit. No more than any other system it is not perfect but a system which requires the stronger members of the community to help support the weaker ones, is as near to perfection as one could get. Neither would I agree with Deputy Crotty when he says that the earnings of sons and daughters should not be taken into account when rent is being assessed. He says that these earnings may not be given to the parents. Unfortunately that may be true in some cases but surely it would be unreasonable to ask that the sons and daughters of other people would help the parents of these boys and girls who display such a lack of gratitude towards their parents that they would not make any contribution towards the payment of the rent of the houses in which they live. In all areas where there is a question of subsidy one must look to new areas from where such subsidies can be obtained if those who are contributing to the subsidy are to be released from that responsibility. However I agree that so far as overtime is concerned, there is a case to be made for increasing the amount which is disregarded. At the moment in Dublin city one-fifth of the main earner's overtime is disregarded.

One must realise that a man working overtime is required to have meals out and it is therefore not economic for his wife to cook for him the meals which he would normally share at home with his family. There are often additional transport expenses. Normally, he might come home with three or four other men who were contributing to the expenses of a car managed by some of them and he now loses that concession and has to meet new expense to travel home. Some consideration should be given to this.

Before leaving housing, the area of maintenance costs of local authority housing requires examination. I may be cutting across the interests of those employed to maintain these houses; if so, I am sorry but my first concern is the frustration arising in the home of a tenant in regard to these maintenance jobs. He can wait for months before the matter in need of attention is looked after. On the other hand, he knows, or his association will tell him that in respect of the year the average maintenance cost per house in Dublin city is about £29.50. He sees little of this in his own house. If he is carrying out any improvements in the house he is told: "You should not do this without permission from the corporation." Any man, whether he is the owner or the tenant of a house, is, I think, entitled to put his own identity or stamp on that house and should be entitled to paint or decorate it as he wishes and the corporation or local authority should only be concerned where the tenant neglects the house to such an extent that obsolescence will set in much earlier than is normal.

Housing and local government are the two points on which I normally speak on this Estimate and invariably I think of local government ideally as I see it. The very title presupposes for me proximity of the offices to the person who is paying for the service that is being administered. It presupposes familiarity of officials as far as possible with the people they serve. In this area I continue to be very critical of the situation in Dublin where, on those standards, there is practically no local government.

For those living on the perimeter of Dublin city, the so-called local office is in the heart of the city and City Quay or City Hall is as far from Phibsboro', Finglas, Cabra or Coolock as Gorey is from Wexford. There is nothing local between Finglas and City Hall and there will never be anything local between Dublin Corporation and Finglas until there is a local office in Finglas. Until such time as people in these areas who have a problem are able to go to an office where they can present their rent problem and discuss it with a Mr. Murphy or discuss their reconstruction grant problem with a Mr. Kehoe, or their water or sewerage problems with a Mr. Jackson and not have the present situation where a citizen with a problem invariably has access only to the most junior official, there will not be real local government. If the junior official is carrying out his or her work satisfactorily he or she will be promoted and the more promotion the farther the official is removed from the people he is supposed to serve.

I think at local authority level we should consider presenting not the most junior but perhaps the most senior official to deal with citizens who wish to discuss their problems with representatives of the local authority.

I know the Minister indicated to Dublin Corporation that they should, perhaps, open a local office in Ballymun. This office has been operating for some time now and I hope the results are sufficient to convince the Minister and his Department and Dublin Corporation officials of the need for similar offices throughout the city. If we had these offices we would have fewer demonstrations. Apart from lack of communication between the corporation and the citizens I think these demonstrations occur occasionally because the citizens do not bother to read the many lengthy handouts of the corporation. Their reaction to these is to get a placard with one or two words in large print on it and carry it through the city indicating their protest and dissatisfaction with their anonymity, their sense of powerlessness against the powerful organisation which has so much power over them.

I appeal to the Minister to proceed with his plans for local offices throughout Dublin city and to have a special look at the proposal to build civic offices on City Quay. The idea of centralising all the corporation offices at City Quay is one I have criticised already and I shall continue to criticise it until I am informed that having central offices at City Quay does not mean that we shall not have local offices in other areas. What I fear is that if the development of these palatial offices in City Quay takes place and if there is available there accommodation which cannot be filled in toto I will be told that this is the reason why the corporation would not be justified in opening local offices elsewhere. It is a strange type of investment by Dublin Corporation. On the one hand we have sections, officials, officers dealing with the traffic problem in Dublin city, of which we are all painfully aware. We have another section dealing with the problem of pollution. The dangers from pollution by traffic are foremost and have been accepted as being a major problem in Dublin at present. Simultaneously, we have the corporation indicating their intention to proceed with a proposal the result of which can only mean additional traffic congestion, an addition to the traffic hazard and an addition to the pollution which already exists. There is lack of communication, as I see it, between the officials and the department heads in Dublin Corporation. One cannot relate the problems that exist at present with the intention to pursue a project which must have the effect of adding to the problems that already exist.

I wish to re-echo as best I can, and much more succinctly, the case made by Deputy Dowling in the matter of houses owned by Associated Properties. We have some of these houses in the Wadelai estate. We have all the problems indicated by Deputy Dowling and we have one to which he did not refer. Last week in the estate we had a tenant anxious to decorate his house in the fashion which he thought appropriate, anxious to make alterations in windows and doors, spending his money on it and having his work and investment undone by Associated Properties. I am not opposed in any way to, indeed I am an admirer of, private enterprise but I experience the same difficulty as other Deputies in trying to make inquiries on behalf of my constituents. Invariably it is impossible to speak with anybody who will speak on behalf of Associated Properties. This company enjoy certain State grants. They enjoy certain expenditure made on behalf of the citizens of Dublin by way of improving open spaces, repairing footpaths, improving roads in the area where they constructed these houses. Yet they deny their tenants the right of association. They tell their tenants that they will not deal with any association or with any public representative speaking on behalf of an association. They will only deal with the individual tenant.

Deputy Dowling mentioned the situation that arises where an ambulance or a fire brigade may have occasion to visit a house in this estate. He mentioned that these people will not allow tenants to accommodate a car in the garden, which is a very simple request for any tenant to make to his landlord. With a view to allowing for the passage of traffic on the road the landlord is asked to give permission to the tenant to accommodate his car in the front garden and the landlord will not give that permission. The reason must be that the landlord is concerned not to hold a tenant but to get him out. Having got him out he can let the house to some tenant from whom he can extract a higher rent. Citizens are entitled to be protected from any company operating on that basis.

Mr. Enright

Are these tenants on differential rents?

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Local Government (Mr. Cunningham)

These are private houses. They are not corporation dwellings.

Mr. Tunney

I thought I had established that they were a commercial firm called Associated Properties. They are a well-known commercial firm. This firm may look upon a tenant as a unit of property but I do not think they are entitled to do that especially when the health of the tenant and his right to have a car are in question. The stock answer to the case made that they should permit a tenant to accommodate a car in his garden is that the houses were built for people with bicycles. That is an indication of the attitude of these people towards the tenant. While I know the Minister for Local Government is not responsible for the misdeeds of any commercial firm, the rate-paying people who live there contribute to the pool into which the corporation and the Minister dip and I think they are entitled to the interest, the concern and the protection of the Minister. I have faith enough in the Minister to hope that in this matter he will look after the people living under Associated Properties.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

Although I am a country Deputy I propose to say a few words about Dublin. All of us are concerned with what happens in this city because we have to stay here for several days a week. I noticed this morning that the whole of George's Street was rooted up. George's Street is perhaps one of the more difficult traffic lanes in the city. If we had elected local representatives functioning in Dublin they would be able to raise matters like this. At the moment everything done in Dublin is decided by officials in the name of Dublin Corporation which does not exist, and does not seem to be likely to exist, if Fianna Fáil have their way, until after the next local elections, whenever that may be.

It seems extraordinary that one of the major traffic lanes in Dublin should be rooted up almost in its entirety, leaving virtually only one-way traffic right in the middle of the tourist season. This may not be the best tourist season we ever had but, at this time of the year, and in July in particular, there are more cars in Dublin than at other times of the year. This seems to me to be a senseless act committed by whoever is responsible for the administration of local government in Dublin. I spent about ten minutes in a traffic jam fairly recently somewhere else in the city and, when I eventually got through, I discovered that half the street had been rooted up there also.

These are matters which would be highlighted if we had elected representatives, but we have not got elected representatives and we are not likely to have them. It is a disgrace that the capital city has been without elected representatives for about three years, due to the intransigence of my colleague across the floor. NATO, not to be confused with the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, a tenants' organisation, has come into existence in Dublin because there is no buffer between the general public and the officials of Dublin Corporation. The absence of elected local representatives can be noted here too. If there were grievances they could be put publicly. If grievances are put publicly they get recognition. If they are put behind closed doors they do not get recognition. The person who makes the representations gets a polite letter saying that it is not in the public interest to do so and so.

Fianna Fáil did a grave disservice to this country when they refused to accept an amendment to the Local Elections Bill last week asking for elections in Dublin. The sooner they do a little quiet thinking on this matter the better. It is also worthy of note that, despite the long diatribe from the Minister when he was introducing this Estimate about the houses that were built and the improving housing situation in the country, nobody can get a house in Dublin unless he has four children. Apart from a few lucky people who win in the draw, people have to wait an interminable time for a house. They are probably married for six years before they can get a house. That is a shocking state of affairs in this day and age in the capital city of Ireland. Things are bad everywhere else, but they are particularly bad here.

Mr. Cunningham

More houses are being built.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

What is the use in saying more houses are being built? More people are not housed.

Mr. Cunningham

It is a physical fact that more houses are being built than ever before.

Mr. Creed

Could the Parliamentary Secretary tell us the number who are waiting for houses? That is the important thing.

Mr. Cunningham

People were waiting for houses when fewer houses were being built.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

I am afraid the Parliamentary Secretary is getting cross. If he would listen to what I am saying some of it might sink in and somebody might get a house. I have listened to Fianna Fáil saying that more houses are being built for years since I came to the House. Of course more houses are being built. The average life of a house is in the neighbourhood of 50 years. There is a fallout of houses always. The population of Dublin has gone up considerably.

There is another anomaly in this city. Some constituents of mine own a big house in this city which they wanted to reconstruct. They had let friends live in it pro tem while they were waiting to get a house. They discovered that their friends could not get a house unless they took them to court. Apparently if you sue your best friends they have some chance of getting a house. That is the Gilbertian situation which exists. There is no use in the Parliamentary Secretary saying they are building more houses. The Fianna Fáil Party are not building enough houses. Since they came back into office 15 or 16 years ago the number of people waiting for houses has been growing all the time. Instead of talking about building more houses and producing idiotic statistics, they should say how many people are waiting for houses and what reduction there has been in the number of people on the waiting list. If you ask that type of Parliamentary question you cannot get a straight answer. You get a lot of “blah-blah” about the number of houses that are being built.

It is quite obvious that pollution is a world problem. We are rather fortunate in Ireland in that pollution has not reached the stage which it has reached in other countries. Other countries have learned to their cost, by doing nothing about it, what the final overall cost of dealing with pollution is likely to be. In Switzerland they have had to spend literally millions on reconstructing waterways and cleaning lakes. I am not an expert and I have not seen the maps, but I understand that the major portion of the sewage in Dublin goes into the Liffey. That has been going on for years and years. The Liffey has now reached the stage where it cannot take any more. It is now positively unhealthy. The fumes from the Liffey are responsible for bad health in Dublin.

This applies to every waterway in Ireland. Every waterway is the recipient of sewage. In some areas where the population is small, this condition is not so noticeable yet. It is time the Minister for Local Government tried to deal with this problem. If the Parliamentary Secretary has time on his hands when he is not dealing with planning appeals—and I will have a few words to say about that matter in a moment—it might be no harm if this problem were handed over to him and he did something to ensure that every lake and every river is not polluted within the next ten years.

It is a known fact that Dublin Bay is badly polluted and that marine life and vegetation are being destroyed. The pollution position is getting worse and worse throughout the country. Some time ago I was going through Clonmel and I saw that the River Suir, which was one of the best trout rivers in Ireland at one time, was grossly polluted. I understand that something was done about that recently. It has been cleaned to a certain extent to enable some trout to live in it. They were dying in considerable numbers. Practically every river and lake is the same. If experience has shown in other countries the magnitude of the cost of bringing back polluted waterways to normal, it amazes me why we do not do something about it while it could be done at the minimum cost.

We were told by the Minister that he is introducing a Bill to deal with pollution. The Fine Gael Party have a Bill before the House dealing with pollution. It is in abeyance at the moment because there has not been any Private Members' Time for about six months. Why wait to introduce a Bill on pollution? It seems to me that we have our priorities entirely wrong. Why not introduce such a Bill straight away under which a legal obligation is imposed on people to stop causing pollution? The advantage and gain to the nation would be considerable.

I mention a sewerage policy. It seems to me that if a river is being polluted because of sewage from a town, what is there to stop the setting up of a treatment works, a septic tank or several of them? This is something which stops it. I had the experience in my own area, in Enniscorthy, of trying to get a treatment works set up there. We had to wait two years while letters were exchanged between the Department and the local authority about getting those works going. In the meantime these people had no sewerage facilities whatever and could not use toilets or bathrooms. This is a matter which should have the active consideration of the Department. Plans should be drawn up and local authorities should be asked to draw up plans in relation to sewerage and protection from pollution as a result. These plans should be submitted to the Department where they should be dealt with with expedition. If a local authority send up a request for the setting up of treatment works in a certain town or area, it is to be assumed that they have the plans, the blueprint and the site. Why has it to be sat on for months and then sent back with some fiddling query which holds it up for another six months? That is pure and undiluted bureaucracy, bureaucracy which is growing up and is rotting everything in Irish life and getting worse as time goes on.

I want to say a word about motor insurance which is becoming a very serious problem, a problem which any Deputy here will agree is put up to him nearly every day. Over the years, for some reason or other, insurance companies always refused to settle accident claims. My experience when practising as a doctor, quite a few years ago now, and giving evidence in these cases was that although people were seriously injured and the case was obviously one which the insurance company would have to settle they would never settle anything. They went to court and had two senior counsel and a junior—why, I do not know; I believe that across the channel these cases are conducted by a junior counsel, but I suppose that lawyers have to live, which is probably the answer —and went to the greatest expense and then they finally went in at the last moment, having created all this extra expense, and paid the bill of costs. That went on and insurance companies were glad to insure anybody, but as time went on, the roads became more crowded and accidents more frequent and the companies began to lose money. Premiums have now reached the stage at which in many cases it is not possible for people to pay them.

Twenty years ago, a third party policy could be got for £8 or £9 and it is now a minimum of about £30, that is, with a no claim bonus. The cost of comprehensive insurance which I have had myself over the years— I have not killed anybody yet on the roads and I hope I do not, but I have a no claim bonus—has risen out of all proportion to what it was. It so happens that I am able to pay but I constantly have people coming to me who have had an accident and once they have had an accident, even though in many cases it was not their fault but that of somebody bashing in to the back of their car, they are refused insurance, with the result that quite a lot of people are not on the roads. If they are, they are there illegally because they are not insured, not because of any fault of theirs but because they cannot get insurance.

It may seem curious that I, who have always advocated the cause of private enterprise in this House, should advocate—it is a matter for consideration by the Government or the Department—that there should be some sort of insurance available for people. How they do it is a matter for themselves. They must have the available statistics and must be in a position to know what is the best way to do it, but I believe that some form of State subsidisation will probably be necessary to ensure that motor insurance is carried on in this country. I suppose there is no legal obligation on insurance companies to provide insurance and when they find that they are no longer making any money out of it, they will probably give it up. It is therefore, something which the Minister and his officials should consider seriously, that is, what contribution they can make towards insurance, and by making such a contribution, how they can lessen the burden on the person concerned. I know of people who have been asked to pay something in the neighbourhood of £125 for comprehensive insurance. These are people who have been insured for years and who have never had an accident but who are a very good mark for the cheque for the insurance company and their premium is put up above those of others.

For that reason I think the State should come into it, whether they subsidise, control or take over insurance, as they did when they took over national health insurance. Accident insurance was taken over by the Department of Social Welfare and it greatly reduced the cost of industrial insurance, for the simple reason that they never pay anything, unless they have to. It is only with the greatest difficulty that one get it and it is paid only for six months whereas the insurance companies paid for a considerable period. Some rational thinking must be done on these lines.

We have been looking for a swimming pool in the town of Wexford, a town which is close to Wales and close to Rosslare Harbour and which gets a considerable influx of tourists every year. The Minister very nicely received a deputation from us. He did not make any promises but I understood from him at the time that a swimming pool comes under the amenity grant scheme, in respect of which the total sum for the whole of Ireland is £300,000. I do not think we were looking for a great lot—we were very easy to please— about £5,000. We got nothing and we have no swimming pool, although we got vague promises that we were to get something. We had got to the stage at which we had created an amenity area there in which everything was available for the tourist except a swimming pool.

Mr. Cunningham

Swimming pools do not come under the amenities grant scheme at all.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

What does it come under?

Mr. Cunningham

It is a special scheme. It comes under water and sewerage and not under the amenity heading.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

I thought there was a special grant.

Mr. Cunningham

It is a capital loan.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will not forget that we have been awaiting a swimming pool for a long time. We never get anything down there because our political representation has not changed over the years and is not likely to change. Fianna Fáil would not gain anything by giving us a swimming pool. If they do change their attitude and do consider giving us something, I would ask that a swimming pool for Wexford be considered.

I want to say a word or two on group water schemes. Is there any reason why it should take so long to put group water schemes into effect? The money is collected; everything is arranged; the grants due to the parties concerned are to be paid by the Department. Why is there such delay in the payment? Why is that when one goes to the Department the official concerned seems to have gone to America or somewhere else?

Mr. Cunningham

That is very unfair.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

Is there some other reason for the delay? I cannot understand it.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): There is considerable delay.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

I went to the Department in regard to a group water scheme a few months ago. I was told the official concerned was in America. I asked what he was doing there and was told that he was on holiday. I said that it was well for him that he could go to America, that I wished I could afford to go there. I am sure that official has returned. We have not got the scheme yet. I am told the matter is under active consideration, or immediate consideration, or whatever the phrase is. We are still waiting.

Mr. Cunningham

What is the name of it?

Sir Anthony Esmonde

Kilmuckridge. That is the one I can think of at the moment. There is one in Bree. There are several. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to have this matter expedited. Even though the political representation has not changed over a considerable period, we are entitled to our due. We want group water schemes as well as a swimming pool.

Planning has become a farce. Under the Planning Act notice is required of planning applications, such as a notice in the paper or some other way of informing the local authority. If at the end of a month there is no objection, the work can proceed.

There is a case which I do not want to mention publicly but which I will give to the Parliamentary Secretary privately, where an official arrived in a motor car one minute before the month had expired to hand in a refusal. It was not in my constituency.

Mr. Cunningham

I am afraid the Deputy is mistaken. You cannot get permission before a month. In other words, the application must be in a month before anything is done.

Mr. J. Lenehan

I am sorry. You are entirely wrong in making that statement. It is not correct. You can get it within a week.

Mr. P. Barry

You must get a decision before two months are up.

Mr. Cunningham

You cannot get it before a month and you must get it before two months.

Mr. Creed

Not necessarily before two months. If there is a query after two months they can defer it and all that the authority have to do is to send out a simple query.

Mr. P. Barry

I wonder is the Parliamentary Secretary right about not being able to get a decision before a month.

Mr. Cunningham

There is a month allowed for objectors and you may have an objector on the last day of the month.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): The Parliamentary Secretary is mixing it up. After a decision has been given there are three weeks or a month to object.

Mr. Cunningham

From the date of application.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

The local authority cannot hold the thing up beyond a month. Is not that right?

Mr. Cunningham

That is right.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

Then there is another month. They give planning permission and you have to wait a month for an objection. Is that not right?

Mr. Cunningham

It is not right but we will not argue about it now.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

If I am looking for planning permission is there anything to stop the local authority giving me permission before a month?

Mr. Cunningham

There is. From the date of application they cannot give it to you before the month.

Mr. J. Lenehan

They can give it to you provisionally.

Mr. Cunningham

No.

Mr. J. Lenehan

I have got it 100 times. Nobody in this House deals with more planning cases than I do.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Esmonde.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Would to God that Deputy Lenehan were Parliamentary Secretary in charge of planning. Then we might get something done.

Mr. J. Lenehan

I am an expert on planning, which is more than can be said for most of the people in this House.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

The local authority cannot give planning permission before a month. Is that right?

Mr. Cunningham

That is right.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

And even if they give planning permission at the end of a month the applicant cannot do anything for two months in case somebody further objects. That is too much altogether. It does not make any difference in County Wexford because everything that we look for is turned down. There is a planning official, the most dedicated man in Ireland. I gather that he will be leaving us in the near future. I have not known him to pass anything yet. He turns everything down on principle. I will give the Parliamentary Secretary a case that was turned down the other day. I understand that there is a new regulation that houses cannot be built on main arterial roads.

Mr. Cunningham

National primary roads, yes.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

This was an application to build a house 400 yards up a by-road, back the requisite distance from the by-road itself. The application was turned down on the basis that it would be a hazard to the main road. I do not see how that creates a hazard. You have to get on to the main road in some way. Surely you are not asked to live on the top of a mountain and walk down to the main road and start your car from there. The type of case that I have mentioned is being turned down in County Wexford.

With regard to delays, I do not want to enlarge on what I have said because I am not au fait with the Act. I still maintain that nobody gets planning permission within two months. People do not get it until the last moment. If a query is raised at the end of two months the matter goes back for an indefinite period again.

Mr. Cunningham

Two months.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

When one has been refused planning permission, if one appeals to the Department of Local Government, would the Parliamentary Secretary inform me what is the average period for dealing with an appeal?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Twelve to 15 months.

Mr. Cunningham

It can be quite long.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

Why should it be?

Mr. Cunningham

For a number of reasons.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

Why should a person be held up indefinitely?

Mr. Cunningham

In the first place, the numbers of appeals have gone up in the last two years from 2,000 to over 3,000 per annum. This in itself creates a problem.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

Employ a bigger staff. Instead of having people employed in changing constituencies, put them on to this work.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Accept the Fine Gael policy and you will get rid of planning appeals in the Department.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

I have given planning up in absolute despair. We were bad enough before planning but, since planning, it has been nothing but confusion worse confounded.

Mr. J. Lenehan

I certainly do not approve of the present system of local government. It is a system which was imposed on us by an alien government and we have quite failed to rid ourselves of it, just as we have failed to do a great many other things that we should have done long since. The setup in Connacht is absurd. There are five county councils and two health boards operating over the same territory. The whole thing is a joke. Even the IRA have a better idea about things than we have. They have decided to set up provincial governments. What they propose could not be any worse than what we have at present under the county managers. I am one of the oldest county councillors in this House. I have been 25 years a member of my county council. The whole situation is nonsensical. It is time it was changed. I do not know why some Minister does not use his commonsense and give us a proper system of local government. There are a great many people, urban councillors, demi-gods, who want to hold on to their demi-popularity. Some of them get only 40 votes, but they are elected. I get 7,000, or something like that. It is absurd to have a man who commands only 40 or 50 votes ruling a community. He is supposed to represent the community. How could that be representation? It is not representation. If these people want to test their popularity then they should do it before the public in the whole county. It is ridiculous to see a town of 2,500 or 3,000 people ruled by an urban council.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is being critical of legislation now.

Mr. J. Lenehan

There was quite a bit of it before I got up.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is critical of something that would require legislation. Here we are dealing with administration.

Mr. J. Lenehan

All this costs money and we are dealing with money here. It costs a good deal of money to keep these little demi-gods in their position. However, I will pass on from that. There will be no local elections this year. I hope the Government will not hold these elections for another four or five years. They may as well go on postponing them.

One Deputy talked about Associated Properties here in Dublin. If what he said is true, then it is time that people were made aware of the identity of these people, whosoever they happen to be. It is very hard for a man to stand idly by and not challenge Deputy Tunney. I presume that what he said is true.

County councils are more or less a joke. We have the same road running through five counties and there are five different standards of maintenance. I take it the Department of Local Government will be taking over the maintenance of these national highways. They should take over a lot of other things as well. However, in the west, Galway, Clare and Mayo should be grouped together under a regional council. I do not care who loses his soft job as a result of that. I will not lose mine anyway. I have one of the safest seats in Ireland, but I may not go forward again. We have not got proper administration. Roscommon, Sligo and Donegal should also be grouped together. It is time the system was changed and bigger groups were formed. We must rid ourselves of this system imposed on us by the British Government, a system we have accepted for the sake of appointing the chairman of the county council. What does he do?

The whole thing is a cod. I would never dream of wanting to maintain a county council just for the sake of keeping myself at the head of the poll every five years or so. Local administration must be spread broadly and not on the basis merely of county councils.

One of the big problems in my constituency is that of roads. Of course those people who make the laws in respect of roads are those who travel in State cars and who probably do not see the bridges let alone the roads as they travel. It is strange that only those roads on which State cars travel are maintained properly. Nothing is done to improve other roads but at election time some gombeen is sent in and expected to use the back roads. Instead of wasting money on the removal of bends I would suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that money be spent instead of improving the bad roads in this country.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Does not the County Engineer prepare a plan?

Mr. J. Lenehan

Sure the one we have is a lunatic.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy knows that he must not criticise people who are not here to defend themselves.

Mr. J. Lenehan

I did not keep him out of this House.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy should not use the privilege of the House to attack people who are outside.

Mr. J. Lenehan

We are entitled to have our lesser roads improved. After this has been done there should then be money for the further improvement of the main roads over which these geniuses travel in their State cars at 100 miles per hour. I suppose most of the time they are asleep. Apparently in my county there is nobody who can build a bridge. There are three bridges on the route over which I travel regularly to attend county council meetings but to cross them one must travel at a snail's pace and they will not accommodate vehicles of more than two tons in weight. These are our main roads. Those people who sit in the Custom House or in the Department's offices at O'Connell Bridge do not come to our part of the country. Should they come to visit us they would get what was coming to them. It is odd that our people who are working in Britain can build bridges for the British while it seems that those at home cannot do the same type of work. If the Parliamentary Secretary checks with the Mayo County Manager he will find that no bridge has been built in Mayo for many years.

I draw the attention of the House also to the situation in relation to grants. The level of grants has changed very little since I came here many years ago. If the Parliamentary Secretary knows anything at all about the cost of materials, he must realise that the maximum grant of £900 would not be sufficient to buy roofing for a house not to mention all the other materials that are required. It is high time that the grant was increased. What amuses me is, that bad as is the situation in my county, it is worse in the Parliamentary Secretary's part of the country, so that if only in the interest of his own people, he should insist on a change in the grant to bring it up to a realistic figure. A sum of £900 would not buy a decent engagement ring nowadays. Certainly, it would not cover the cost of a wedding of the type we have in our part of the country. There is a limit, too, in respect of a loan.

Perhaps the Chair is not aware of this but I can tell him that if a man applies for a housing loan he will, in order to qualify, be forced to state on the application form that he is earning at least £1,500 per year. As soon as the application form is received in the Department, they write to the income tax people to find out what returns that man made for the year.

Mr. Cunningham

That is not true. It is doing no good to the people who intend to apply for loans.

Mr. J. Lenehan

The position is as I said it and I challenge anyone to contradict me. I have 10 of those forms in my house at present which have been returned requesting information as to the income tax returns of the people concerned.

Mr. Cunningham

The Deputy is suggesting that county councillors advise the income tax people in matters of this kind. That is not correct.

Mr. J. Lenehan

It is correct. The Parliamentary Secretary must know that. He comes from as backward a part of the country as that from which I come.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy should not indulge in personalities.

Mr. J. Lenehan

That is a fact. There is no question of there being personalities involved.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

As far as the Chair is concerned there is an inference in what the Deputy says.

Mr. J. Lenehan

Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary is more backward in coming forward than I am.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy should proceed with the administration of the Estimate.

Mr. J. Lenehan

The Parliamentary Secretary may write to the Mayo County Manager to ascertain if one word of what I have said is incorrect. We have the famous differential rents system, one of the daftest ever introduced in any country. I do not know how many Ministers or Parliamentary Secretaries have sons or daughters working. Some of my children are working but if I got a penny from them I would faint. Yet if I had a house under that scheme I would have to disclose my sons' and daughters' incomes and the rent would be based not only on what I get but also on what they earn. Does anybody think they would give me a penny for that? Surely, it is an absolutely unfair method of assessing rents? On the face of it, I admit it seems fair provided we lived in a Christian community where everybody supported everybody else. But we live in a Catholic community and there is a tremendous difference between a Christian community and a Catholic community.

I do not know how many Deputies have ever got a penny from any members of their families—there are not many Deputies here at present anyway. I do not believe they did; I did not get it in any case. I think the Minister is not married himself and I do not know what advice the Parliamentary Secretary would give him but if any of them got a penny from a member of their families it would be a miracle.

Many county councils at present have all kinds of glorified schemes, water schemes, sewerage schemes and so on. They seem to have money to burn but they have not the price of their breakfast. In Mayo I think they have about £10 million worth of water schemes but they have not ten pence in the kitty. The Minister will keep silly, stupid documents in the Custom House, perhaps for months and months instead of sending them back immediately. He knows well these things cannot be paid for and we cannot pay for them and that they will never be carried out. Why he should hold these stupid documents, sent up from county councils, in his office before eventually—perhaps after two years deciding—to let the matter drop, just as the boys on the Castlebar Committee decided to let the matter drop, I cannot imagine. He must know it is daft and he should cut out the codology and waste because it is a waste of time.

Some of the sewerage schemes are just as bad as the Moy Drainage Scheme. Once it was flowing down but now it is flowing up since they drained it. They decided to give grants for derelict sites. I wonder if anybody was ever paid such a grant. I once got a letter and I was advised that if the person concerned decided to accept the word of whoever wrote the letter the grant would eventually possibly be paid. That was about two or three years ago; it has not been paid yet. Then they produced amenity grants. I do not know what an amenity is; it could mean anything. It could mean opening a dump or closing a dump.

It is a nice word and it reminds me of some of the letters I get. I got one yesterday in which 12 words were misspelled. I returned it telling the writer to carry out the necessary corrections.

I hope that when the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary replies to the debate he will explain what an amenity is. The dumping grounds in the country are a public disgrace and it is a pity some kind of grant would not be given for them. We also have the group water schemes, a handy way for the Department to get out of its own troubles circuitously. To some extent, they may have achieved that but they have certainly got many people into trouble. To get payment for those schemes is pretty difficult. I do not say it is the Minister's fault; it is often the fault of the local people. The real fault is in the fact that the people appointed to deal with these schemes are inept or not capable of dealing with such matters. That is a pity because these schemes would be very useful and would bring tremendous benefit to many people if properly operated but in many cases this is not so. Before schemes of that kind go into operation it is necessary to ensure that a reliable supply of water will be available.

There is the perennial question of pollution. A good deal of bull goes out of this House and it is no wonder many places are polluted but in many cases pollution is a grossly exaggerated problem. I am not surprised that Dublin Bay is polluted when one thinks of what flows out of this House. I shall not say what it is; I said it before and the wife nearly killed me. There are not many here who do not know what I am talking about. I suppose there is pollution. We have not got it around my place. We are a very clean-living people. I do not think any local authority can do a tremendous lot about pollution. If you want to pollute you can pollute. You can pollute your own house and if you want to keep going you can pollute anything you like. I think to a great extent this is grossly exaggerated. I think my pal, the chief pollution agent, is here at the moment. It is exaggerated and is used more for propaganda than for any other purpose.

The Planning Act has been misinterpreted and misused by local authorities. Some local authorities use it just to show their autocratic attitude to the public. If the present Planning Act, as now operated by Mayo County Council, operated in 1918 there would be no houses in Erris or in Achill, or very few. The builders would all have been shot down. Why people can be so stupid in this day and age as to stop a man from building a good house is beyond me. After all he can build a hayrick twice as big as the house or a stack of turf three times as big as the house and the local authority would not be asked for permission. How many Deputies realise that? He could leave his hayrick there until the cows came home to eat it, if they ever came home, and he could leave the turf there until his wife brought it in to burn it but if he builds a good decent looking house he is shot down. This is going on in Galway and Mayo. I do not know about other counties. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to have a look at this. The way the Planning Act is being operated in these two counties is nothing better than a fraud. It is being used against unfortunate people who wish to progress and who are prevented from doing so.

Somebody mentioned Dublin Corporation. I often wonder whether half the organisations we have could not be got rid of. I think we would be better off. We have urban councils and all kinds of funny councils. What they do I do not know. If we rid ourselves of them we would be doing no injury to anybody but we would be saving the public from a good many of the expenses they have to bear. I do not know how anyone can justify the appointment of an urban council in a town of 2,500 or 3,000. I do not hold with it. Any town with a population of less than 10,000 to 12,000 should in no circumstances have a crowd of these little demi-gods ruling it. If they went up for the county council, every one of them would forfeit his deposit even if it is only £10. If they went up for the Dáil, sin deireadh leis an gcás. We could get rid of a good many of these silly, stupid organisations. I understand there are Ministers in this House who have it at the back of their minds to set up more organisations. What they are setting them up for I do not know. It is like the health organisation. I know this is a little off the mark but it will illustrate what I mean. We are on the health board and then we set up a consultative organisation. We are then back again on the consultative organisation so we have appointed ourselves to advise ourselves on what to do. This looks funny but it is true. I am on the health board and I am on the county council. Then I am appointed to a new organisation to advise myself on what to do. Is it not a very sensible type of organisation?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): It is like the agricultural advisory council with the Minister as chairman to advise the Minister.

Mr. J. Lenehan

This is true. I am glad the twelfth apostle has arrived at last. We appoint a committee of ourselves to advise ourselves. I do not know whether the Leas-Cheann Comhairle believes this or knows about it but this is the type of thing that goes on across the land today. I do not know where it will halt. I am sorry the Minister was not here when I was praising him.

Mr. Molloy

I hope it was all praise. We did not build the big bridge in Belmullet yet, you know.

Mr. J. Lenehan

It has not been built yet.

The local authority are the motor taxation authority for some reason which is beyond me. Hundreds of Mayo people tax their cars in Dublin. I do not know what happens to that money. I do not know whether it goes back to Mayo. If people tax their cars in Dublin, or in any other county, does the place where they tax their cars get the benefit of that money? I think it does. I would imagine that about 20 per cent of the Mayo cars are taxed in Dublin. Who gets that money? Do Mayo County Council get it? On one occasion I asked for a driving licence in Dublin and I was told to get it in my own county. I went out the door and then came back and wrote down "in care" of such a place and I got the licence. Who gets that money? I wish the Minister would answer that question. It is a very interesting point. I do not agree with the local government administrative set up. I should like the Minister to answer that question about motor taxation.

Mr. Molloy

I suggest that the Deputy should not delve too far into that one. I suggest that he should not go too far into that question.

Mr. J. Lenehan

I will go into it as far as I want to.

Mr. Molloy

Mayo might not come out best in the end.

Mr. J. Lenehan

Do not worry about Mayo. We are well able to look after ourselves. I am sure other Deputies want to speak so I will not delay the House.

Mr. Creed

I agree wholeheartedly that planning is necessary. I do not think the Planning Act, 1963, was introduced in time because, before that, many beauty spots particularly in the south of Ireland were being destroyed and, but for the introduction of that Act, the situation would have been very serious. There seems to be a lot of confusion about the Act and quite a lot of opposition to it. When it was first introduced the local authorities were not capable of administering it.

When young married people apply for permission to build a house—and a considerable time elapses before a decision is reached—and when their application is refused, the local authority or the planning authority should be able to offer them an alternative site. Around every village and town the local authorities should have land suitable for building development. When they refuse an application they should be able to say: "We have here a fully serviced site and, even though we cannot allow you to build on the site you applied for, we can give you an alternative site." This is not the case and I believe this is why the local authorities were not ready to administer the Act when it was introduced.

I want to deal now with something which is worrying many people and particularly public representatives and members of local authorities. In the event of an application for planning being refused, whether it is an application to build a house or a factory or anything else, have I the right to go into the planning offices and examine the file in detail to find out why the application was refused?

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 6th July, 1972.