asked the Minister for Local Government if he is aware of the grave public disquiet resulting from his recent change of policy on housing subsidies.
7.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Housing Subsidies Policy.
6.
asked the Minister for Local Government if funds will be made available for housing maintenance and management to those local authorities who had already struck a rate before he announced the change in policy; and if will make a statement on the matter.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 and 7 together.
The number of local authority areas in which the recent change in housing subsidy arrangements will give rise to rate increases of any appreciable magnitude is very small. Indeed, in many areas in which the local authority have maintained a reasonable and responsible attitude towards expenditure on the maintenance and management of their housing estates, substantial reductions in the anticipated rates estimates for 1977 have resulted from the revision in the subsidy system.
As regards the question of finance for the coming year, I would point out that in 1977, local authorities generally can use all rents, miscellaneous receipts, and 60 per cent of the proceeds of sales of their rented housing operations for the purpose of maintaining and managing their housing estates. Many local authorities have already welcomed this arrangement. A detailed circular letter on the new subsidy arrangements will be issued to local authorities very shortly.
Is the Minister aware that by his action he has now broken about the only pre-election Coalition promise left unbroken? Is he further aware of the severe hardship which this enormous increase in rates will impose on ratepayers, especially in Dublin city?
Would Deputy Faulkner like to talk about County Louth, Drogheda and Dundalk where there is no increase at all because they carried out the repairs in an orderly way? I want to make one thing very clear. While the Opposition are making a lot of noise now about only 60 per cent being given, the average until last year was 50 per cent. This year was the first year in which 75 per cent was allowed, so Deputy Faulkner has not his facts correct.
Is the Minister aware that a number of county councils have already struck the rate—Louth County Council for one—and find now that if they are to carry out the repairs so as to continue the purchase scheme for houses they would have to add 21p which they have not authority to add because they have struck the rate?
I am aware that some local authorities have struck the rate. I am also aware that most local authorities can live within the estimates of the rate which they have struck. A circular letter will be sent to them within the next week pointing out the way the matter will be dealt with.
In regard to Question No. 7, which was put down by Deputy Molloy, there is something that I want to clear with the Minister. When the county councils were striking the rates they assumed this would be a Government responsibility as it had been last year. They did not include in the estimates any sum for the repairs of these houses and the maintenance of them, and they cannot carry on the purchase scheme unless they carry out repairs.
We are having repetition.
Through the Chair, I am trying to point out to the Minister the serious position of the county councils who have already struck the rates and cannot come back and strike a further rate.
The Deputy has already made that point.
I feel that Louth County Council, along with other local authorities, did not take everything into consideration when they fixed whatever figure it was going to be. The matter was made clear to them during the week.
Might I ask the Minister if the promised letter will reach Dublin Corporation before next Monday night when they meet to review the new estimates? I am sure the letter will have a great bearing on what they decide.
I will try to arrange that.
Would it be impolite to ask what is in the letter?
It would.
Dublin Corporation have acted in the most exemplary manner according to the present economics of the Government. They have got rid of 70 men from the housing maintenance department since last year. They cannot cut back any further.
We are having a statement, Deputy. A question, please.
I tell the Minister we cannot get rid of any more men.
This is Question Time, Deputy.
Dublin Corporation were talking about dismissing 450 men some months ago. Deputy Moore now says it is 70 men. I am not sure what the figure is. I am quite sure there is no desire to have men laid off. I am sure Dublin Corporation when they come to strike the rate will take the necessary steps.
We did not accede to getting rid of 400 men. We used our brains and we brought the number down to 70.
The Deputy used his tongue first and got a lot of publicity for it and then was laughed at.
(Interruptions.)
Would the Minister agree that it is far from normal procedure for a Minister for Local Government or any Minister to issue a Press release and later a circular, which has not been issued yet, at a time when some local authorities had already struck the rate for the coming year and when all local authorities had decided on the new rate, unless he was forced to do so? Would he further agree that it was pressure from the Taoiseach and from the Minister for Finance that was responsible for this capitulation and that this decision underlines the subservient role of the Labour Party in this Coalition?
Everybody knows that is so.
I do not know how Fianna Fáil carried on at the Cabinet table, but I am sure, going on what Deputy Faulkner had to say about this incident, he has got it wrong. Deputy Wilson would not know. He has never been in Cabinet and he never will be.
(Interruptions.)
Order.
Could the Minister say what was the saving to the Dublin ratepayer with the removal of the health and housing charges from the rates?
£5.68p in the £.
(Interruptions.)
Order. We have had a series of questions on this. I am passing to another question.
Would the Minister agree, and this arises from the supplementary by Deputy O'Brien, that the Coalition pre-election promise was that rates would be reduced by transferring housing subsidies to the Exchequer and that there was no qualification to this transfer or to this statement; and that he has now gone back on the Coalition's promise as has happened in relation to every other promise made prior to the election?
As a result of the change of Government the ratepayers of Dublin city are paying £5.68 in the £ less this year than they would be if the Fianna Fáil Government had remained in power. No matter how Fianna Fáil try to get around it they will not get out from under that one.
They will be very much better off after the next change of Government.
They will not.
Question No. 6 was being taken. That is the only one indicated on the monitor. I thought Question No. 7 was included.
Nos. 6 and 7 together.
The Minister said he would be sending out a circular. Is there any reply in answer to Question No. 7?
The circular will give particulars about the matter.
Does the Minister accept that the legal position with Galway County Council is that having struck the rate they cannot now interfere with the rate unless the Minister introduces some legislation to enable them to do so? Unless such a move is made there is no way in which Galway County Council can meet maintenance and management charges for houses.
All matters such as this will be taken into consideration when the circular is being prepared.
Could I ask the Minister when the circular will be available, as the council struck the rate four weeks ago?
If it was struck four weeks ago there is no question of delay affecting them. The delay will affect Dublin Corporation and we will make every effort to see that Dublin Corporation will have it in time.