I thank the Chair for allowing me to raise this important matter on the Adjournment. It was one of the questions I had on today's Order Paper and I was totally dissatisfied with the answer given by the Minister. I asked the Minister for the Environment if he would consider withdrawing the memorandum dated 21 April which was issued to local authorities in relation to the procedure to be followed with regard to the building of local authority houses because of the unnecessary delays that would be caused as a result of the implementation of the memorandum.
In his reply the Minister stated he had no intention of withdrawing the memorandum. He stated he had examined it and approved it before it was issued to the local authorities. I regret that very much. He said he had no objection from any local authority in regard to the memorandum. The local authority of which I am a member wrote to the Minister objecting to some of the aspects of it, matters which we felt would retard and delay unnecessarily our housing programme. In the course of a letter I sent to the Minister I referred to parts of the memorandum. The first matter I find objectionable in that memorandum is the fact that the Department must be consulted about the acquisition of all sites. For instance, a family living in a remote are and earning their living from agriculture and who are in need of proper housing must have an application for the acquisition of a site on their behalf approved by the Department. Such a family would not have any option but to continue to live in a rural area and adjacent to their farm. The decision to insist on consultation with the Department before the acquisition of sites is agreed is a delaying tactic. We have never experienced that before at local authority level.
I view this directive as a vote of no confidence in local authorities and their staff. We are all aware that the staff and members of local authorities are responsible people who spend the money allocated by the Department in a responsible manner. I have been a member of a local authority for seven years and my complaint has always been that we do not get sufficient money for housing and not that that money is spent inefficiently by officials. If local authorities are obliged to comply with this memorandum it may lead to a delay of between 12 and 18 months in regard to the acquisition of sites. We must bear in mind that after sites are acquired, assuming approval is obtained from the Department, permission must be obtained from the Department to accept a tender to build a house. This is another erosion of the powers of local authorities. I am surprised that the Minister of State, who is a member of a local authority, approved of that directive. For too long and too often the powers of local authorities have been eroded. They have been treated with contempt by the Department of the Environment. We are all aware that it can take between two years and five years for some schemes sent by local authorities to be approved by the Department. Do we have any guarantee that a request from a local authority to the Department to acquire a site for a dwelling will not be held up for two or three years?
When we reach the tender stage sanction must also be obtained from the Department. Very often contractors submit tenders based on the assumption that, if they are successful, they will be given the go ahead within two or three months. However, after the tender is submitted to the Department and the inspector is consulted it can take between 12 months and two years before the tender is approved. By that time the contractor may not be prepared to build the house for the price he tendered and, in some cases, the people for whom the house was intended may have died or left the district mainly due to the fact that they had to live in diabolical conditions for some years. The memorandum amounts to a complete disregard for local authorities, and their staff. It amounts to an indication by the Department that they are not competent to handle, allocate or utilise the money allocated for housing.
As a result of the action of a former Minister for Local Government, Mr. Tully, a lot of red tape was done away with and now local authorities can acquire sites, advertise and build anything up to 60 houses without sanction. All local authorities welcomed that move because it cancelled delays and committed local authorities to build houses for those who are living in deplorable conditions. We are all aware of the report which assessed housing needs up to 1985, published in 1980. According to that report we need to build three times the number of houses we are building at present to cope with the expected demand. We have to cater for a fast growing population and bear in mind that people are getting married at a younger age. Due to the poor economic climate that exists and the appalling unemployment situation more people depend on local authorities to provide houses for them. More local authority houses will have to be provided in the future. The Minister should be ensuring that local authorities are given additional finance to enable local authorities to build more houses rather than putting a barrier in their way and preventing proper development. The Department are delaying the process.
This is a delaying tactic by the Government and an effort to find a convenient excuse not to give local authorities the money they need for housing. Rural areas are being hit by this directive but sites are being acquired in urban areas and sewerage schemes carried out. It really hits at rural counties. It is one of the ways the present Government have for avoiding channelling money to those local authorities and channelling it instead into the city of Dublin to meet the requirements of the Gregory deal. I will be delighted if the Minister can tell me that is not the situation and that he and his Department are prepared to allow the normal procedure which existed for the last five years to continue with regard to the building of individual rural houses or of up to 30 houses without consultation with the Department. These houses could fit into the programme drawn up by the local authority provided they stayed within the financial allocation by the Department of the Environment. It appears that the intention of the Department is to stick rigidly to their guidelines. This directive as it now stands is detrimental to the building of local authority housing in rural areas. I appeal to the Minister to ensure that the ordinary people living in rural areas are not prevented from having as good a home as those who live in Dublin.
