Vol. 293 No. 1
asked the Minister for Local Government if, in relation to his announcement in County Wexford recently that the report of An Foras Forbartha, which states that the country requires at least 186 miles of motorways plus improved national primary and national secondary roads, will be shelved means that there will be a serious cut-back in 1977 in the allocation of road grants, in real terms, to county councils for major road improvement works; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
23.
andMr. Moore asked the Minister for Local Government if the Liffey crossing and approach roads project sanctioned in January, 1974, will proceed; and when work will commence on the project.
24.
andMr. Moore asked the Minister for Local Government the plans he has for the relief of the severe traffic congestion in Dublin city.
As Questions Nos. 22, 23 and 24 are related to my recent statement on the development of motorways I propose, with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, to take them together.
The level of Road Fund grants for 1977 will be settled in due course as part of the decisions on allocations from central funds for that year for the various services for which my Department have overall responsibility. This is a separate issue from the review of the Foras Forbartha study on the needs of a particular sector of the public roads of the country.
As I indicated in my statement, the Dublin City and County Manager has been asked to review the recommendations of the Dublin Transportation Study. These recommendations included the Liffey crossing and approach roads referred to in the questions, and no doubt the city manager's review will embrace them. I do not propose to comment further on these specific proposals pending that review.
Measures to deal with traffic congestion in Dublin city are a matter for the Dublin Corporation, acting with the consent of or at the request of the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána in respect of traffic management measures. As part of my policy of devolution of responsibility to local authorities, I arranged last year that the major urban authorities including Dublin Corporation would henceforth have a very wide range of discretion in the use of the block grant now allocated to them, and in particular in the selection and implementation of schemes of traffic management financed with the aid of the block grant.
Does the parliamentary Secretary agree that the sanctioning by the Government of the Liffey crossing and the approach roads project in January, 1974, gave the clear impression to Dublin Corporation that the Minister favoured the plan including the motorways, and that this decision resulted in the wasteful expenditure of large amounts of money which could have been very usefully employed in other sectors?
The Minister was studying the implications of the recommendations for motorways to which Deputy Faulkner refers in the light of current economic circumstances and the energy crisis. When the review of the problems was completed he was in a position to announce his decision in regard to the motorways.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary agree that the circumstances to which he has alluded existed two years ago and the fact that the Minister was tardy in taking a decision has caused a very considerable amount of wasteful expenditure?
I would not so agree.
Further arising out of the reply, is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that in many instances major road improvement schemes have been phased out over the last 18 months, that there is a curtailment in road design work on national primary and secondary roads by many county councils in anticipation of the lack of finance for grants from his Department to put these schemes into operation? Will he make a statement on the effects that this policy would have on employment with councils, including the employment of persons in the maintenance and repair of machinery?
I would not so agree. As a matter of fact the very opposite is the position. In 1972-73 in relation to the overall spending on local government services the sum provided was £217.4 million. This year it is £422.33 million, a very substantial increase. We have in 1972-73 for sanitary services £8.23 million as against £25 million provided this year. For roads, for which the Deputy is now showing concern, in 1972-73 £16 million was provided as against £24 million this year.
It should be £32 million.
For local authority housing £25 million in 1972-73 as against £65 million this year and for house purchase and housing loans in 1972-73 £12 million as against £40 million this year. I cannot in the light of these facts——
I would like to thank the Parliamentary Secretary for information for which I did not ask him. Perhaps he would kindly state whether he is aware of the fact that there is a curtailment in road design work on national primary and secondary roads by many county councils in anticipation of the lack of finance to put through these schemes for 1977 and 1978, and would he give a statement on this matter?
Hear, hear. Answer that.
There is no trouble in answering that question because the Deputy is relating his query to 1977 and I state that the matter of road grants for 1977 will be settled in due course. The Deputy is ahead of himself. That allocation has not yet been made.
I want to bring in Deputy Seán Moore who has his name tabled to the question also.
In regard to Question No. 23, may I ask the Parliamentary Secretary if the Government would consider compensating Dublin Corporation for the amount of property they acquired after the Minister had sanctioned the river crossing and the approach roads mentioned, and if he will further compensate Dublin Corporation arising out of claims under the 1963 Planning and Development Act from firms who may well claim that they have been wrongly refused planning permission on these routes and therefore they may seek, as they are entitled to do, compensation under the Act; or does the Minister intend to leave matters as they are without any suggestion of compensation for these firms who have been very wrongly done by because of the atrocious handling of this matter by the Minister?
I do not think that Deputy Moore has carefully considered exactly what the Minister said on that occasion, and I will refresh his memory. The Minister went on to say:
I must point out, that of course, roads will continue to attract substantial grants from central funds both for new works and maintenance, and that substantial provision will also continue to be made from rates, this made possible by the Government's decision to relieve the rates of extensive burdens in respect of health and local authority housing. In the current year the combined allocations for roads from central funds and the rates came to around £50 million, no small achievement for a country of our size and circumstances.
Question No. 25.
I did not ask for that information. I want to put the question again.
This would not be in order, Deputy Moore. We cannot have repetition. Order.
For the amount of compensation required, because the Minister had given the go-ahead, for the motorway by reason of the fact that he sanctioned a river crossing and approach road. It is a simple question I put to the Parliamentary Secretary.
It is a simple question. Deputy Moore is concerned with what?
Getting a simple answer.Mr. O.J. Flanagan: As far as Deputy Moore is concerned——
——he knows quite well that the Government must take into consideration their priorities in relation to the amount of money available for allocation for local government services. The housing of the people of the city of Dublin must be considered——
That does not arise here.
——sanitary services, water works and sewerage schemes must be considered, but whether Deputy Moore is anxious to consider motorways more important than sanitary services and more important than water works——
——or more important than the housing of the people of this city——
This is not the chapel gate.
Order. I am calling on Deputy Faulkner. A final supplementary.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that there was a 20 per cent reduction in real terms in the amount of money made available in grants to the local authorities between 1974 and 1975 and an 18½ per cent reduction in real terms in the money made available in grants for roads to local authorities between 1975 and 1976, and are we to assume there will be another cut-back in 1977 if this trend is to be continued? May I ask the Parliamentary Secretary in relation to Question No. 24 what plans he has for the relief of the severe traffic congestion in Dublin city?
The latter part of the Deputy's supplementary question is a matter for Dublin Corporation. I repeat that the level of road grants for 1977 has not as yet been settled and will be settled in due course.
Arising out of the Parliamentary Secretary's reply, if, as he states, the plans for the relief of traffic congestion in Dublin city is a matter for the Dublin City Council, can the Dublin City Council be assured that they will be allowed to proceed with whatever plans they may make in this matter and not have them interfered with as happened recently in relation to the Dublin development plan when the Minister for Local Government took the responsibility away from Dublin City Council?
I have no doubt that the Minister for Local Government will at all times be in close touch with Dublin City Council.
Order. Question No. 25.
I would like to ask a supplementary question.
I will facilitate the Deputy.
Arising out of the supplementary question asked by Deputy J. O'Leary, it is a well-known fact that county councils did not get the money and there is a slow-down in the improvement of the national primary roads. Seeing that the basic roadway is shelved, whether rightly or wrongly, will the Minister take into consideration the 1977 allocations? There is a terribly dangerous road between here and the west of Ireland. Part of it is in my own county. There is also the shocking condition of the roads coming into Kilcock. Will extra money be allocated to the county councils for improving primary roads in 1977 on account of the fact that the basic road has been shelved? Will the Minister take that into consideration when making his allocations for 1977?
I repeat for the third time, the level of road grants for 1977 will be settled in due course. Further, may I assure Deputy Callanan that in 1972-73, when his party were in office, the allocation was £16 million for roads as against £24 million in 1976.
Question No. 25.
The Minister for Local Government has provided more money for roads than has been provided at any time under Fianna Fáil.
