As I was saying last night, we can all see the effects this Bill would have on the constitutional rights of the people, and were it to become law every section would be tediously dragged through the courts by various property owners. If we look back at the recent Supreme Court decision on the Rent Act we can see there is unlimited scope for landlords and property owners to take this Bill through the courts section by section. If this Bill became law I wonder what effect it would have on the financing of these proposals by local authorities. I have grave doubts about the problems that would arise about the agreement on the figure reached for the purchase of land. I could see continual court proceedings by people who would feel their constitutional right to private property was being seriously affected.
The suggestion that the local authortites should decide the boundaries would give the local authorities a power they do not want. I do not think they would like to make the decision where a boundary fence should be drawn. A farmer could find that his land on the outskirts of a town or city was being divided. In that case who could decide what was adequate compensation? Only the public market can decide the actual value of property. That has been demonstrated very clearly in the past few weeks when we saw what happened to property speculators.
If this Bill were to become law it would be very detrimental to the environment of this city and every town, big or small. I can see Deputy Quinn's reason for bringing in this legislation, but he knows this type of legislation would not bring about the sort of movement with regard to planning and development that would be for the benefit of the ordinary citizen who wishes to acquire his own house. I often wonder if the Kenny Report, which is now almost ten years old, would be sufficient to deal with the problems facing us at present.
I can see problems arising because of class distinction in housing development. This is very sad. A site in one part of the city can be ten times the value of a similar site in another part of the city. I often wonder if a major housing development, having a mixture of working class, middle class and possibly corporation houses, would be successful. This class distinction has led to certain problems for young people coming from various parts of the city when they were seeking employment, because it has been proved that it is much harder to get employment in some corporations or institutions if you have the wrong address. That is why a long and hard look must be taken at all housing developments in the State, especially in Dublin and other major growth centres.
Many Opposition speakers, especially in the Labour Party, tried to persuade us that Deputy Quinn's proposals would be for the betterment of the country, particularly when it comes to reasonably priced houses for young people. If the Deputy looks at the land market he will see there is a reasonable amount of land available at reasonable prices. Land prices have slipped back in real terms in comparison to what they were three of four years ago. Various properties adjacent to the city were bought because the owners hoped for huge profits when the land was needed for development. Many of those properties are still lying undeveloped because at present it would not be financially beneficial for the owners to place the land on the market.
If we should look at the prospects of redesignating certain areas which should be acquired under this Bill we will see major problems. We will have to decide which land should be used for residential purposes or industrial development and see how best both can be blended. The disorderly development which has occurred around the city throughout the years has led to tremendous problems especially for people trying to get in or out of the city. The development allowed along our main link roads will pose great problems for road development in the future. The lack of an orderly road development programme will have to be taken into account in any further development plans. Deputy Quinn did not mention that in his proposals.
It is worth quoting again from paragraph 101 of the report since the Labour Party have been so obdurate in this debate. The Kenny majority advises:
... that the jurisdiction to designate an area must be conferred on a court established under the Constitution if it is to be valid,
and recommended that the jurisdiction should be conferred on the High Court. Many reservations about this advice have been made, based on considerations of the costs involved, the time involved and the potentially unwieldy nature of such a scheme. Nevertheless, it is the basic precondition for constitutionality, even in the view of the Kenny Committee, whose work has been superseded by more recent constitutional interpretation. The Labour Party speakers have not provided, perhaps because they could not, any satisfactory explanation of their reasoning on the question of area designation and I cannot understand how they envisage placing such an extraordinary burden on our local councils. I say that for the second or third time.
We have all heard enough about the rezoning of land in and around this city during the last six months to leave local authority members beginning to wonder if they are doing something that is totally wrong, even if they believe it must be done for the development of the area. The amount of land rezoned in and around the city especially in the past few months would lead one to believe that at the moment enough land has been earmarked for development to serve the needs of this city for the next ten to 15 years. Every section of Deputy Quinn's Bill would be questioned when it came to the courts. He mentions that the Minister for the Environment would have the decision on what land would be acquired and that the last appeal by people whose land was being taken under this Bill would be to him. That would place an undue burden on the Minister. I believe that the Minister was glad to be no longer the last person to be appealed to under An Bord Pleanála. Our courts would not be in a position to decide where the boundary line should be drawn.
Various Deputies have referred to local authorities calling for the implementation of the Kenny Report. The people who called for that action are those who did not examine the consequent repercussions. Many, especially on the Opposition benches here, see it only to be used where land is a must as far as the development of an area is concerned. The local authority of which I am a member could never see a need for implementation of the proposals in the Kenny Report. That may be due to the fact that it is one of our least populated areas. In rural areas and on the outskirts of our small towns there is on occasions need for compulsory purchase orders. In using those powers we have always found that the opposition came, not alone from the owner of the property, but from the people living in the adjoining area, who felt that the compulsory acquisition might have an undue effect on their environment and on that of the surrounding area. With reference to the pricing structure, Deputy Quinn's Bill proposes to give 25 per cent on top of the market value for any property. However it is hard to decide the market value of property when someone is being forced to sell and forced out of business. It is hard to estimate the total loss with regard to future earnings especially in connection with farms which could be fully developed and might be a greater asset to the community if left to be worked by the farmer concerned.
There are many other issues which Deputy Quinn's Bill fails to recognise. The Bill would result in very real difficulties for local authorities and their officials. I could forsee a major staffing problem, with local authorities having to put a large number of skilled senior officials on this type of work. We all know that it takes a long time to train local authority senior officials. We have seen the difficulty when new sections were established within the local authorities, needing a top official to spearhead the active work. How many people would the Deputy hope that it would take to run a section with responsibility for the implementation of the proposals of this Bill? Even within the Dublin city area, with Dublin Corporation and Dublin County Council, how many officials would it take to carry out a proper survey of the land available, or to become available, if this Bill were allowed through this House?
There is a known, definite need for re-examination of the position with regard to property for development around the country. Perhaps some of our banking institutions should be asked to provide some of the funds which they provide for speculative purposes to enable local authorities to build up a land bank for future development. We talk about their excess profits, but if some of these were put into proposals such as this, the banks would be justified in holding their excess profits.
We are all in agreement that there should be a restructuring of our policies for land development. The long-term holding of land by local authorities is a burden which they are not at present in a position to carry. They have a serious shortage of funds and, if we implemented Deputy Quinn's proposed Bill, we would only bring further hardship on them in the shape of the finance which would have to be found for this purpose.
