Deputy Durkan is in possession and he has 48 minutes.
Estimates, 1983. - Vote 27: Environment (Resumed).
Debate resumed on the following motion:
That a sum not exceeding £606,009,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1983, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for the Environment, including grants in lieu or rates on agricultural land and other grants to Local Authorities, grants and other expenses in connection with housing, and miscellaneous schemes, subsidies and grants including certain grants-in-aid.
—(Minister for the Environment.)
When I was speaking on this Estimate on Thursday last I mentioned the situation pertaining to the allocation of local authority houses and the conditions under which our people are forced to exist in order to qualify for local authority housing. What I did not say, and should have said, was that the detrimental effects on the health of the people concerned are tremendous and, in particular, on the health of children. I know numerous instances where three or four children are living with their parents in cramped, overcrowded, unfit and unhealthy conditions, such as mobile homes, with no services. They have been living there for four or five years. In almost every case the children have marked respiratory problems with the result that they have to have medical cards. Other expenses are incurred at a later stage through a fault in the system, the fault being that, in order to qualify, people are forced to live in extremely severe and undesirable conditions. Perhaps the Minister would consider introducing some amendment to the Housing Act to enable people to improve their housing conditions and afford them an opportunity of being housed by local authorities. This would encourage people to improve their conditions instead of, as obtains now, going in the opposite direction.
I had mentioned roads and it was at that point that the House adjourned. This is something which has received a lot of attention in the last couple of years. Since 1977 the condition of our main and county roads — I know it applies not alone in County Kildare but in every other county as well — has deteriorated dramatically because the finance for their maintenance comes primarily from local authorities. Since the ability to raise and expend finance was taken from local authorities, or since their position was eroded, the condition of those roads has deteriorated similarly.
There are a number of ways that the problem could be tackled. I would ask the Minister to consider transferring some of the funds now allocated from central funds for the maintenance of national primary and secondary routes to these main and county roads. If that is not done in the near future a number of main and county roads in many counties will have to be closed because it will not be possible for vehicular traffic to gain access to the people living there or to provide services, some of which the local authorities themselves have endeavoured to provide, such as refuse collection and so on. There have been numerous instances of roads improved under local improvement schemes up to 20 years ago, which involved the expenditure of taxpayers' money, which have now deteriorated to such an extent that the people on whose behalf they were repaired in the first place are now seeking authority from the local authority to take them back and repair them themselves. That is a disgraceful situation: that taxpayers' money spent many years ago appears to have been wasted mainly because of the inability of the local authority to carry out routine maintenance over a long period. I implore the Minister, even at this late stage, to consider reallocating some of those funds from our national primary routes to main and county roads. The benefits would be tremendous and it would have the advantage of reinforcing the funds spent on these roads some years ago. Generally, our national primary routes are in reasonably good condition, but a common topic now is the condition of the other roads.
I might add that while the national primary and secondary routes generally are in reasonably good condition the condition of the roads in some of our towns leaves a lot to be desired, albeit that some of those towns are situated on national primary routes. I would suggest that some action be taken, because of the concentration of traffic on these roads running through our major towns, to ensure that those towns which have suffered most would receive some kind of face lift by way of road improvement within the current year. I suppose one always thinks of one's own county but I know that in Naas there is a tremendous amount of heavy traffic passing through each day and that the main street there has suffered considerably in recent years. That is one town only in that county; there are others such as Leixlip, Maynooth, Kilcock in North Kildare and others throughout the southern part of the country, Athy and others. I know a number of local authorities feel that something along those lines should be done, with perhaps a reallocation of the general national primary funds to minor roads.
The Minister referred to the fire services in his introductory remarks and I am glad to note that he has given such importance to the activities of the fire services in each county. The unfortunate Stardust disaster brought to everybody's attention the importance of ensuring that a thorough inspection service was available and enforced. When such inspections are carried out it will be found that people will be only too willing to cooperate with the authorities to ensure that the highest possible standards are maintained where large groups of people, young and old, gather. In order to avoid any repetition of the Stardust disaster and a number of others, it is essential that the fire services be extended and that the authority of the county fire officers be felt in each local authority throughout the country. If that is not the case, then we might well experience other unfortunate incidents.
One other matter requiring attention — and this is something that has been brought up continuously at local authority level and by visitors to this country — is the litter problem. Recently I travelled along a scenic route, again in my constituency, along the Grand Canal which is a tourist attraction and which takes quite an amount of traffic by native and foreign users who hire cruisers and travel along that canal. In one part of County Kildare conditions are disgraceful, with a number of abandoned cars, vans, bicycles and other refuse being dumped along that route in full view of everybody travelling along the banks of the canal or by boat on the canal itself.
In these difficult times, when we are endeavouring to encourage tourism, it is a disgrace to see such lack of civic spirit manifesting itself. Despite the fact that many local authorities have not yet employed litter wardens I would recommend that some measures be taken to ensure that every local authority has the finance to employ at least a number of litter wardens, thereby ensuring that provisions of the Litter Act are enforced. The Litter Act was passed in 1982, but its provisions will have no effect whatsoever unless there is effected some kind of policing of its provisions, unless some wardens are appointed by local authorities to ensure that people are not allowed to continue to dump indiscriminately along our main roads and other scenic routes. I notice that the Minister of State sitting in the House is a colleague of mine from County Kildare. Perhaps he would take note of this matter and use his influence with the Minister. Even at this late stage in the current year a special effort should be made to ensure that litter wardens are appointed in every county, because otherwise we might as well forget about the Litter Act.
Also in need of careful examination are the questions of planning at local, regional and national level. All of us, members of local authorities, have had experience of planning at local level. Even though it is very difficult from the point of view of the individual who wishes to extend his or her house or who is anxious to build a house for themselves, it seems that the full rigours of the Planning Act are always invoked, with each detail attended to in regard to other information sought by the local authority. Every "t" must be crossed and every "i" must be dotted, otherwise there will be long delays. I suppose that is as it should be.
It would appear, however, that the same attention to detail is not given to large-scale applications from developers for, perhaps, 2,000 or 3,000 houses. There are a number of cases of housing estates which have not been built in accordance with planning permission. In some cases houses have been built without any planning permission due to oversights by some people. An example would be a block of houses built several feet away from the intended site. Technically those houses do not have planning permission and if at a later stage the owner of one of these houses decides to dispose of it he or she will have to apply for permission to retain before title can be certified. I would urge that greater attention be given to large-scale applications or at least that the same scrutiny be given to those applications as is given to the applications of individuals who may have lived for many years in the vicinity and find it hard to believe that they should be asked to comply with such a rigorous interpretation of the regulations while large-scale developers do not seem to have the same problems.
As a member of a regional development organisation I must refer to the absence of any worth-while regional or national planning. I remember on one occasion going abroad on the only socalled "junket" in which I ever participated and seeing how another country, Israel, has grappled with the problem of development. They have done quite a good job in introducing industry and housing in formerly rural areas and have succeeded in blending the new developments with the aesthetics of these areas.
New towns have sprung up almost overnight in this country during the past 20 years and the only criterion was that services were available. We must consider the vast social and economic implications of allowing that criterion to be used in determining where development will take place. Tallaght has already been mentioned. I wonder whether or not it would be wise to allow continuation of developments in certain areas of Kildare and to allow an imbalance of population without considering job requirements now and in the future, as well as the other environmental and social hazards which arise when large-scale development is allowed without planning controls. The time has come when central authority, if local authorities in co-operation with each other are not prepared to do it, should decide where development is to take place and where services are to be provided. They should not alow a continuation of the present system whereby whenever a main sewer is provided it is considered all right to build houses ad infinitum on either side of it. This is the wrong reason for development and future generations will condemn us for allowing that to happen. In many of these new towns the full impact has not yet been felt in relation to employment and social problems such as drug taking which seem to occur in areas which have been badly planned.
When development of an existing town is taking place it should proceed at a pace which will enable the new population to identify with the area and become part of the community. If development takes place too rapidly or in a haphazard way this identification with the locality will not be possible. Unless we come to grips with planning problems in the near future we will have more serious problems.
I would also mention environmental works. During the past couple of years funds have been made available for works of an environmental nature. Unfortunately local authorities have found that most of these works involve mechanical rather than labour-intensive activities. Any person travelling through the country and seeing all the open spaces, the rivers and canals and all the possibilities for amenities, will find it hard to believe that there are almost 200,000 unemployed. I said in the Seanad and I repeat now that some scheme should be introduced whereby those who have been unemployed for some time could be given some kind of gainful employment which would be rewarding to themselves and the community. People could be involved in an unemployment relief scheme involving works of landscaping, grass cutting and maintenance of open spaces where local authorities have not sufficient funds to undertake such works. Many people who are unemployed would be anxious to obtain some kind of part-time employment.
I would ask the Minister to give careful consideration to the introduction of some kind of programme along the lines of the youth employment scheme. The people to whom I am referring are unemployed anyway and I can see no reason why they should not be given an extra amount of money per week to be involved in schemes of the kind I have outlined which would be beneficial to themselves and the community. It would give them a sense of purpose which they do not now have. I do not think there would be conflict with trade union ethics. It could be done, as in other countries, with the approval of the trade unions and not in conflict with services already being provided by the institutions of the State.
I wish to draw attention to the small amount of money allocated to County Kildare under the heading of local improvement schemes. This could cover drainage or road improvements. In the current year we will receive between £11,000 and £12,000 but this is miniscule in comparison with the amounts allocated to other counties. I am not suggesting that other counties should not have their allocation but I am saying that a realistic amount should be allocated to counties such as Kildare that are on the route to Dublin. As I mentioned before, practically all the commercial and domestic traffic to and from the capital city goes through Kildare and adjoining counties. The Minister should take note of that and allocate a realistic sum toward road improvements. Much of the deterioration of our roads is caused by lack of drainage. Once a road becomes waterlogged it is liable to break up. Special emphasis should be placed on drainage. I am not concerned about whether this means undertaking drainage work on ground considerably away from the roads. Once water is allowed to lodge on roads the whole road system begins to break up and this is happening in many areas. I request that we be given a realistic allocation under the local improvement schemes.
The Minister referred to the travelling people. This has become an emotive issue. As a Christian people we must be prepared to ensure that travelling people are given at least the same chance as everyone else to obtain their own homes. While it is not possible to do that immediately, they should be provided with halts or interim stopping places where services could be provided for them. This would allow their children to receive some semblance of education and basic health services. It would ensure that future generations of travelling people would not be treated in the same way as their parents have been treated.
There are two types of travelling people. One is what I would call the family who are indigenous to a particular area, whose parents have lived in the place for many years and who do not cause any problem to the community. These people must receive priority and they must be facilitated and encouraged in every way to improve their position. There is also another type of travelling people whom I shall call business people. They appear to have considerable wealth, they camp on the roadside, they drive high-powered cars towing luxurious caravans or mobile homes. These people seem to create mess everywhere they go. They set up illegal trading points and cause traffic havoc. In many cases they create a health hazard in that they stay in one area for quite a long time and do not have the use of any facilities. Many of those people are in a position to house themselves if necessary. They have more cash than many of the settled community. I make the qualification that there are genuine travelling people who need to be facilitated and who must be facilitated. We profess to be a Christian people and we must do everything to help them. Part of the problem is that while everyone says the travellers should be facilitated, equally everyone says the travellers should be facilitated far away from their homes. The attitude is that it is all very well to house travellers outside someone else's door as long it is not outside one's door. I hope that Members of this House will set an example by ensuring that when they have to decide whether those unfortunate people are to be housed in an area they will have the courage to say they are citizens of this State, they they have rights and that we will give those rights to them.
The matter of malicious injuries needs attention. Claims to local authorities and to central government have been increasing dramatically over the years but in more recent times they have got ever greater. A system should be devised in co-operation with the insurance companies to ensure that the taxpayer or the State are not burdened unnecessarily with large claims. There is a sufficiently sophisticated system of insurance provided by private enterprise that should be used to ensure that taxpayers are not faced with excessive burdens. The present system should be revised and provision should be made to ensure that the burden is removed from the taxpayer. I am not certain how this can be done but it can and should be done.
I congratulate the Minister for the Environment for having the courage to introduce a system that provides for charges by local authorities for services provided. For the last few years members of local authorities have criticised governments for their inability to provide sufficient funds to the local authorities to enable them to give the services the people demand. They have cited the reason for the diminution of power in local authorities as the removal from them of responsibility regarding the raising and expenditure of revenue. The Minister is giving back to local authorities the powers they had some years ago and I say to members of such authorities that those powers should be used. If they are not used they may be removed and taken back by central government who will have to provide the services.
Nobody wants to pay more in taxation but if people see that they will get value for money they will support the people who give them that value. Despite the present stringent times, the people will give support and encouragement to the Minister and to the Government for reintroducing a system that gives to local authorities the power to raise and spend revenue in their areas. Any revenue collected by way of farm taxation should be collected by the local authorities and it should be spent in the administrative areas concerned. Perhaps next year allowance might be given to taxpayers who claim for charges paid to local authorities. That is the one way we can return power to local areas. Deputy Mervyn Taylor said that urban councils were the answer to a lot of our problems and that some local council would resolve many of the problems in our new towns. I do not accept that. I believe the only thing which will resolve a lot of the problems which local authorities have faced over the last few years is local power. That is not about new councils but about money, the power to raise that money and to spend it. Nobody should criticise the Minister for the Environment or the Government for making it possible for local authorities to raise money themselves. Perhaps the central Exchequer might not like an allowance being made for income tax purposes in relation to fees paid to local authorities but once the people see the money being spent they are satisfied.
Deputy Molloy spoke about the possibility of house improvement grants being administered by local authorities. That would be a good idea. The management of local authorities have told us over the last few years that a number of Bills have been introduced which have put further burdens in relation to administration on local authorities but an increase in funds has not been given to them in order to help them run the extra services and accept the extra responsibilities. I already mentioned the Litter Bill but there are many others. We should not hive off further responsibilities to local authorities without providing some way for them to finance those services.
One of the things which a number of other Deputies and I have mentioned on many occasions is the condition of our roads and the need to provide autonomy. Autonomy as far as local authorities are concerned means money. This money must come from the taxpayers. It is not true to say that by removing charges and giving relief to local tax payers you will have the same service. You will not. That was found out when the rates were removed. I am not a supporter of the rating system which did not take account of people's ability to pay and was unfair. Everybody forgot when that system was removed the same amount of taxation was collected by the central Exchequer but it did not seem to get back down to the areas it came from. I hope, during the term of office of the Minister for the Environment and this Government, that situation will be reversed and the services which local authorities have provided successfully over a long number of years, although they are now under strain in providing them, will continue.
We often criticise our administrators. The administrative staff of all our local authorities have done tremendous work over the years. We should not forget the long hours they work, their dedication to their jobs and their local knowledge. If you do not have local knowledge you have not the ability to address yourself to the problems which arise in a particular area. When you have financing from the central Exchequer you do not have the benefit of local knowledge. You have that when you are dealing with your own officials in your own county council. We must encourage any attempt to improve the powers of local authorities. If that means raising extra revenue we must support it.
Many of the items I am interested in have already been mentioned in the debate. Deputy Molloy spoke about the need to give local authorities more authority in carrying out their work and I fully agree with him. He also made the point that when local authorities are faced with estimates it is almost a fait accompli. When my local authority were faced with a budget this year of £220 million we only met five times to discuss those estimates. That is not a very satisfactory way to deal with finances of that magnitude. More time should be given to dealing with such a large budget.
Several speakers spoke about An Bord Pleanála. I urge the Minister, in view of the serious problem in relation to the construction industry, to try to alleviate the backlog which An Bord Pleanála have in order to give more employment in that industry. I have made representations to the Minister in relation to this and I hope he will give it deep consideration.
I would like to refer to our road construction programme. I am very disappointed at the slow progress made in the implementation of projects under the Road Development Plan for the Eighties published in May 1979. There has been a considerable shortfall in the funds allocated to roads in 1980, 1981, 1982 and 1983. I realise the difficulty in public financing and I know that all items in the capital expenditure programme must be subjected to vigorous cost-benefit analysis. Independent economists claim that new roads will give an immediate and significant economic return. I understand that job creation in the road construction industry is high. I also understand that there is very little import content in new road construction. This distinguishes it from house building which has a very high import content.
All the projects for new roads have been identified in the Road Development plan. It is now a matter of ensuring that finance is available to complete these projects on time. If money cannot be raised on the public capital programme, then I suggest we make greater efforts to attract private sector participation in financing, design and construction of roads. One suggestion is that a national road agency should be established to own, develop and maintain the national primary routes. This agency would be funded partly by the State and partly by private enterprise. That is what happens in Italy and Spain. I suggest we give serious consideration to this as a joint public-private enterprise under the National Development Corporation.
The company which operates a similar agency in Italy has permission under Italian law to own a shareholding in a similar foreign enterprise. Perhaps we could invite the Italian authorities to take a shareholding in our national road agency and so benefit from their expertise in this matter.
Another matter which has caused me great problems as a member of a local authority is the question of waste disposal. At present the responsibility for the provision of waste disposal facilities rests with local authorities. There are legal obligations placed on the shoulders of elected councillors. They are obliged to make a decision on the selection of sites for the dumping of all kinds of waste. They must also approve private disposal sites. This must be changed and I ask the Minister to consider it. It is unfair for councillors to be landed with this responsibility. Members of local authorities are obliged to look after the interests of the people who elect them. Those interests may be very narrow when set against the requirements of the nation for a network of industrial waste disposal sites. No-one wants a site located near them but jobs can be lost if such sites are not provided. The only answer is to organise a network of industrial waste disposal sites on a national basis. What I have in mind is to adopt the same approach to the provision of industrial waste infrastructure as was adopted for the provision of national primary roads and the provision of telecommunications.
I do not exaggerate when I say that the infrastructure for industrial waste disposal is as important as roads and telecommunications. The Government must take action in the matter through the Department of the Environment. It is not good enough to insist on placing full legal responsibilities on local authorities. The Department of the Environment must educate the public about the importance of industrial waste disposal. The relationship between jobs and the provision of waste disposal facilities must be made clear. One specific case where education of the community is essential is the provision of the proposed national centre for hazardous waste. I have heard this referred to as a dump. My understanding is that the facilities would be more acceptable. It is the sorting, testing and bulking of waste mainly for export. The intention is to provide recycling and incineration facilities at a later date if this is justified. The operation would be more along the lines of a laboratory and is not and was never intended to be a dump. People should be told what the position is. This requires good, positive public relations if we are to obtain their co-operation.
I am chairman of one of the largest local authorities. Dublin Corporation have a proud record as regards house-building. Great credit is due to successive Governments since 1977 for financing this programme. Since 1977 in the inner city the local authority built 960 houses. These are the delightful red brick houses which are praised by all. At present 615 houses are under construction in the inner city. What saddens me is that it seems to be only the local authority which is interested in developing the inner city. There is little input from the private sector. The establishment of the Housing Finance Agency was of great benefit to the people. Any politician who attends clinics knows that there are people who are very anxious to buy their own houses. This kind of initiative should be encouraged.
I was very pleased when the Housing Finance Agency was set up by the Government during their last term of office to provide people with finance to buy their own home. There is also the other side of the coin where people are rehoused in local authority houses and do not fully understand the value of their house. The time has come for us to review the operation of all local authority subsidy schemes including housing subsidies. I know this will be an emotional issue but we should pursue the question of equity right across the board for all public expenditure schemes. If people see that what we are doing is fair and if we explain it properly to them I am confident it will be accepted. We must remember that every subsidy or other transfer of payment represents a redistribution of resources from one citizen to another. Taxation and redistribution are essential so that public services can be provided and so that we can move towards a more socially just society.
Sometimes we do not clearly establish what we want to do and as a result we end up making indiscriminate transfer payments to those who do not need them. I was rather surprised to learn that the average equivalent weekly subsidy for a local authority house in Dublin is £100 per week. This represents housing at a level which could not possibly be afforded even by people with reasonably high incomes. What is involved should be explained clearly to taxpayers. We should make a start by ensuring that an economic rent is set for a local authority house and see that those in need are given appropriate reductions. By doing that we will give the people who get local authority houses an appreciation of what the State is doing for them. They will show great respect for what they have inherited.
Since the Minister for the Environment has joined us, I would like finally to make a plea to him to consider as soon as possible Dublin Corporation's scheme for the sale of flats which has been prepared by the corporation and passed on to the Minister for his sanction. We have made tremendous progress in the sale of houses to local authority tenants, and that is good because those people then take a greater interest in their houses. We hope to extend that to the flats complex. We have a certain problem there at present in the inner city. All areas have that problem. Nevertheless, if we can get permission from the Minister for the Environment to sell flats to people who live in the inner city we will create a better atmosphere. People will have a better understanding of the situation in that at least they will own their flats. Thereby a better environment will be created and some of the problems facing the inner city at present will be eliminated. The Department of the Environment is one which affects very many people. I congratulate the Minister for increasing the housing subsidy this year by 11 per cent. I wish him well in his office as Minister for the Environment.
As a member of a local authority representing an area which is now part of my constituency, Tallaght, I am concerned about the very high unemployment there. I have listened with interest to some of the speakers, particularly Deputy Durkan from Kildare, talking about local authorities providing more employment, the question of open spaces and so on. I hope that local authorities will be encouraged to provide more employment. We have so many people on the dole and everybody is anxious that something will be done to provide gainful employment. The local authorities could help here in, for instance, the care and maintenance of open spaces, rural laneways and so on.
Still in relation to employment, I hope that the Minister for the Environment will encourage the local authorities to take on more apprentices. Great scope should be given to the local authorities in this. Here I am speaking not so much about Dublin Corporation but about Dublin County Council, of which I am a member. The provision of apprenticeships would encourage young people to take an interest in trades and so on.
Speaking as representing a constituency which is part rural and part urban, I ask the Minister to have a look at the situation from the point of view of planning. Part of my constituency is known as the hill area and it is virtually impossible for local people there to get planning permission to provide houses for themselves or their sons and daughters. This is because of a reservoir in the Dublin mountains which is essential for the supply of water to Dublin. Because of the nature of the environment, with small rivers and feeder streams, it is virtually impossible to obtain planning permission there. As a result sons and daughters of the local people are forced to go on the local authority housing list, thus increasing the burden on the local authority. At this stage the granting of planning permission, which would allow for the occasional draining of septic tanks, should be possible rather than the application of the usual by-law conditions. If by any chance a person is lucky enough to get planning permission — which I have no hesitation in saying may be possible at times by use of section 4 — Dublin Corporation will then appeal to An Bord Pleanála, the appeal probably will be upheld and in the end the applicant still will not have planning permission. I ask the Minister to look at this area and see if he can help such people.
We have still the old problem, the old sore, of the taking in charge of estates. Developers display tremendous enthusiasm and beautiful layouts when seeking planning permission, but when the houses are built the problem of taking the estates in charge arises. People who have purchased the houses are forced to live there in a very difficult situation with roads unfinished, grass verges and open spaces not properly laid out and the estate not taken in charge. This is causing tremendous problems in the city and county of Dublin. I hope that through the initiative of the Minister a greater effort will be made to expedite a remedy to this problem.
We should consider the question of the provision of materials for the building industry. It is a pity that so many of our building materials must be imported. For instance, could our native timber industry be developed to a greater extent? Could we use our natural resources for the production of cement? Could we thus help to reduce our imports?
My constituency includes half the new town of Tallaght, which has a population of between 60,000 and 70,000, and the projected population is in the region of 150,000. Again I ask the Minister to consider the question of the encouragment of greater employment through the local authorities. I ask him to consider also requesting the local authorities to take on more apprentices, who are now becoming far more difficult to obtain. The Minister mentioned that it was very difficult to find suitable personnel. I have a reasonable knowledge of the building trade; I am aware that this situation existed for some time and there is a possibility that it could arise again. This is one way in which it could be helped and I ask the Minister to consider this.
I will confine my speech to several proposals which I should like to put to the Minister for his consideration. (1) Anyone now living in a county council cottage who qualifies for a free telephone would automatically qualify for exemption from payment of water rates. (2) That local authorities who are now obliged to build expensive modern houses for tenants would be empowered, under amended legislation, to purchase existing county council cottages, refurbish and relet or sell them at current values. (3) That in city areas, people living in corporation or local authority housing schemes and who have been paying rent for a minimum of a specified number of years, say 50 years, in the same family, would automatically qualify for those houses and would not be expected to pay any more. We have a ludicrous situation at present where people in Killeely and St. Mary's Park, Limerick, have been paying rent for 40 years and if they want to buy their houses they have to go into another scheme for 25 years. (4) On the question of local financing of authorities, the Minister should look at the idea of lotteries as a means of generating extra local capital to enable local authorities to meet the demands of their various regions. Some cities, like Limerick, have been crucified under the present arrangement whereby we are given a specified amount each year from the Department, following the abolition of the domestic rate in 1977. Other counties do not suffer as badly as Limerick in this respect and some help should be given in that regard.
Incineration is one of the greatest resources created by man. It is as valuable as coal, oil or any other minerals because it will be there as long as people are on earth, because they create litter and waste. In the city of Aarhus, Denmark, which is twice the size of Cork, they installed a public incineration plant four years ago. They heated the whole city and the cost of the installation was paid back within two years. Last year they made a profit from incineration of 12 million Kroner, which is about £2 million, having heated and cleaned the whole city and guaranteed worth-while employment to local authority workers.
I have a booklet here issued by the Department of Industry and Energy on the subject of energy conservation but there is no reference to the idea of incineration of public waste as an energy resource. It is the only one you can ultimately rely on. When coal and oil are gone we will still have waste and it is a terrible reflection on whoever prepared the document.
Something should be done with regard to the provision of money for the repair of houses. A massive con job is being done by local authorities. People are buying houses under the tenant purchase scheme and they are being told they will be repaired within a number of years. However, there is no money available to do this and people have been waiting ten, 12 or even 15 years to have repairs done. I ask the Minister to do something about this problem.
Before I go into my replies in relation to many suggestions made in this debate, I should like to refer to a certain matter which might not strictly be within the Estimates but which has been referred to this week in Dáil Éireann. It refers to my own resignation from local authorities within the Department. Certain allegations were made as to conflict of interests etc. but I do not see that any conflict of interest has taken place by virtue of the fact that I remained on as a member of Kerry County Council for a number of months. When I was not present in the House, the Leader of the Opposition used that topic to fuel the rumour which is rampant, even in my own constituency, that I might be looking for a constituency in the metropolis. This rumour, which had no bearing on the question, is unfounded. It was used by Fianna Fáil during the last election campaign in public and in private. I heard it on many occasions. I have been elected by the people of North Kerry. They were not misled during the election campaign and I trust they will not be misled by this rumour. I am prepared to put up with the travelling and inconveniences and I have no intention of leaving the people who elected me in North Kerry.
Deputy Molloy's contribution in relation to the building industry was a grossly inaccurate one and — what is even more important — a grossly irresponsible one. He made wild allegations about the Government's policy in regard to the industry which were pathetic in their absurdity and patently unfounded. I fully accept that the building industry is going through a difficult period but I am also certain that Deputy Molloy's intemperate and destructive contribution to this debate will do absolutely nothing to help the industry and that it could indeed be very damaging to the industry if it were not for the fact that nobody is likely to pay much heed to what the Deputy said or place any credence on the extreme views that he put forward. One could indeed be forgiven for thinking that these views were, in fact, calculated to talk the industry into a crisis.
Everyone knows that, by virtue of the nature of the building industry, confidence in the industry is always a delicate thing and that dire and unfounded projections of the future are likely only to compound its problems. Deputy Molloy knows that as well as anyone else. Surely then, even he must see that he was doing the industry as a whole, the many thousands who work in it, and indeed the country generally, a grave disservice when he made the totally unjustifiable and extraordinary accusation that the Government are "deliberately setting out to destroy the construction industry".
This to me is simply playing cheap politics with the industry. The industry deserves better than that from this House. As far as I am concerned, it deserves to have its problems examined in a rational and constructive manner and in a manner free of emotive and unfounded assertions. That is the basis of my approach to the industry and I would suggest that Deputy Molloy should think again before making similar unhelpful outbursts in the future.
Surely too, Deputy Molloy realises that we have gone past the stage at which it is sufficient to talk as though the solution to the industry's problems is simply to throw more and more public money at it. When he sheds crocodile tears over the level of expenditure devoted to the industry in the public capital programme, surely there is an obligation on him to say where he thinks the additional expenditure should come from. For the Deputy's information, I should say that I have met both sides of the industry — together and separately — and I have found a considerable measure of agreement for the view that there are unavoidable constraints on the amounts that can be allocated from the public purse for construction work and that it is simply not possible for the State to deploy resources on a scale that would completely offset the decline that has taken place in private investment as a result of the recession.
Surely too, Deputy Molloy is aware of the simple fact that it is just not possible to insulate the building industry from what is happening in the rest of the economy. But the Deputy nonetheless talks as though the industry existed in a vacuum, completely untouched by all that is happening around it. Is it necessary to emphasise that for a large part of its output, the industry inevitably has to rely on the level of demand for its services coming from the private sector? Does the Deputy think that it is within the competence of any Government in this country to dream up this kind of demand, or generate it artificially, whenever it does not exist to the extent desired? If he does, he is either living in cloud cuckoo-land, which has many residents nowadays, or he has created some marvellous new economic system but he has not told anybody else about it.
I do not want to dwell too long on Deputy Molloy's remarks since, essentially, they were too simplistic and too obviously destructive in their approach to be taken seriously. I would, however, like to make a few further points.
First of all, there is a clear implication running through his remarks that it is the Government's job to pour money into the building industry regardless of the need for, or the quality of, the investment that would result. This kind of approach may have served as an investment policy when Fianna Fáil were in office but it is also one of the main reasons that the country is now saddled with the burden of repaying vast borrowings which did not give a proper return in either economic or social terms. That kind of thoughtless investment policy is also one of the reasons for the industry's present difficulties. Everyone connected with the building industry knows that its best interests are served if it can maintain an even rate of development and avoid steep fluctuations in output, either upwards or downwards. In fact, as recently as yesterday I met a deputation from the building industry in my own part of the country and they accepted that the peaks are as dangerous to this industry as the valley periods because the effect on the industry when it is overheated does not provide any solution to their problems. The events of 1979 are now seen in retrospect as having been an unfortunate development and one from which the industry subsequently suffered.
The facts of the matter are that the building industry here was grossly overheated, for political reasons, during the period from 1977 to 1979; that the rate of growth then experienced simply could not be maintained without causing disruption in other sectors; and that — as experience here and in other counties has shown — periods of undue growth and overheating in the industry almost inevitably culminate in a period of declining output.
We may never be able to plan a precise level of output for the industry — because, as I have said, the industry's output inevitably depends in large part on what is happening in other sectors of the economy — but I have no doubt that the proper course is to maintain constructive liaison and dialogue with the industry and to seek through mutual co-operation to keep it on an even keel and prevent as far as we can the swings in output that have so bedevilled it in the past. It is on this basis that I intend to deal with the industry — accepting, as I do, its central importance in the context of both economic and social development.
Reference was made by Deputy Molloy to the famous £120 million global contingency fund which, according to the previous Government's public capital programme, was to be allocated "in the light of the budgetary outlook". In retrospect it is impossible to know what exactly those words, "in the light of the budgetary outlook", were intended to mean but I can tell the Deputy that when we came into office the budgetary outlook was very stark and, so far as we could see, the £120 million was just a book figure and simply did not exist.
In so far as the services for which my Department have direct responsibility are concerned, I should just like to make a few final points. The total amount provided this year comes to £208 million for local authority housing. Initial allocations to meet commitments on on-going schemes and provide for some new work have already been made and a further £63 million for new schemes will be allocated very soon. In the meantime, we are not holding up any projected schemes for want of money. I should also emphasise that the proportion of the total local authority housing allocation that is available this year for new schemes is higher than it has been for some time past. Incidentally, returns furnished to my Department by local authorities show that the number employed on housing schemes at the end of February was about 1,000 above the number at the corresponding date in 1982.
In relation to roads, the position is that total investment this year in road works is estimated to amount to £185 million which represents an increase of about £20 over the figure for 1982. Taken in conjunction with the steps that we have taken to improve the financing of local authorities, the increased investment available should ensure that there will be no need for local authorities to lay off workers or put them on short-time working.
The capital allocation this year for the sanitary services programme has been increased by about 17 per cent over the 1982 level and the level of employment on the programme is projected to grow more or less correspondingly. Recently, I announced the release of a total of 59 new schemes with an estimated total value of £75 million. This release of schemes is, I understand, unprecedented and it should give a significant boost to the civil engineering sector of the building industry.
On the private housing side, Deputy Molloy is apparently concerned that the Housing Finance Agency will not have enough money to meet its commitments. Let me assure him that the reduction of the agency's allocation did not represent a cut-back in its activities but resulted simply from a revised estimate of its requirements. The agency is now in full business and will have sufficient funds to meet the demands arising this year. I must say that I was surprised at the Deputy's concern for the agency in view of the attitude that his party took when the relevant Bill was going through this House. I should also say that the agency is accepted now by those involved in industry as providing valuable support for the private housing sector and helping to maintain employment.
Another bright feature in the industry at present is the effects of the tax incentives for rented housing available under sections 23 and 24 of the Finance Act, 1981. Deputies will have seen from the Finance Bill that these incentives are being extended for a further three years to 31 March 1987 and that the limit on the size of apartments that may qualify under the section is being increased. I understand that the continuation of the concession is likely to result in about £25 million worth of new apartment work going ahead in the near future.
I am sure the remarks made by Deputy Molloy about the fact that the housing grants schemes are administered by the Department rather than by local authorities come as a surprise to many Deputies, even in his own party, who are familiar with Fianna Fáil policy in this matter over the years. Whether the administration of these grants should be devolved to local authorities is something on which I have an open mind at this stage — particularly in the case of house improvement grants.
In the case of new house grants it must be remembered that the first-time owner-occupier condition requires that check to establish eligibility be made on a national basis. The Department keep a central index of all grant payments against which new applications are checked. Any changes in administration would have to guard against any weakening of these controls with consequent risk of payments being made to unqualified persons. It is also fair to say that the extent to which these grants have been chopped and changed over recent years would not have lent itself to easy devolution. The possibility of increased costs of administration and problems about the deployment of staff will also have to be taken into account in any review of the existing situation. A complaint has also been made in the debate that the level of housing grants has not kept pace with inflation. It is difficult to accept this from a Deputy whose party has over the years never had a policy of linking grant levels to inflation and that committed the monumental blunder of abolishing, to all intents and purposes, the whole range of home improvement grants. The previous Coalition Government had to remedy this situation by restoring a scheme of house improvement grants in October 1981. This year a total of £9.5 million is being provided for these grants compared with expenditure of £4.4 million last year.
There has also been a substantial increase in the amounts being made available under the new house grants and mortgage subsidy schemes. In 1982, expenditure under these was £16.8 million whereas we have allocated £22.8 million this year. It is encouraging to note that the level of applications for grants and subsidy continues to be very high. The number of approvals in the first three months of this year was over 35 per cent of the total approved last year showing a substantial increase in demand over past year.
Deputy Molloy raised the general question of the NBA stating in particular that nobody had ever looked at it to see if there was any need for its continuation. I would remind the Deputy that the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Statesponsored Bodies examined the operations of the agency and their findings are given in their January 1981 report. The committee, who were assisted by independent technical and administrative assessors, commented favourably on the agency's activities.
Having examined criticisms of the NBA the Committee stated at paragraph 27:
As the generally favourable comments received by the Committee from local authorities indicate, the balance of opinion is now strongly with the NBA. Shortcomings of both a technical and organisational nature that may have been encountered in the past appear to the Joint Committee to have been largely eliminated.
Far from recommending the abolition of the agency, the committee stated that it had "no objection to the expansion and diversification of the NBA into a State building agency" and it goes on to say that "there could be overall savings to the State if the building management expertise of the NBA and its widespread knowledge of building contractors in different parts of the country were availed of by, for example, the Departments of Health, Posts and Telegraphs, Education, the Office of Public Works and the IDA". This was at paragraph 14 of the report.
I would also make the point that the services of the NBA are not forced on any local authority. It offers a comprehensive package deal to local authorities for the construction of houses. In this it must compete with the cost of the alternatives open to the local authorities and this competitive element goes a long way towards ensuring that its operations are both efficient and economic. The agency had 1,514 houses under construction at 31 December last.
Comments were made that the Local Government (Financial Provisions) (No. 2) Bill, 1983, which contains new charging powers for local authorities, represents a downgrading of the role of the elected members. This Bill will be before the House shortly. I do not see that as being the case. Indeed, the arrangements which will apply under the Bill are exactly the same as those which apply in relation to charges made under existing legislation and are, in my view, the correct ones.
It should be borne in mind that the amount of money to be raised by a local authority by way of charges is governed by the estimate which is adopted by that authority. The adoption of the estimate is, of course, a reserved function and through the exercise of that function the elected members can dictate the policy the manager will have to follow in relation to charges.
In any event, there is a long tradition in our local government system of managers consulting councils, and vice versa, in the exercise of their respective functions. I have no reason to believe this will change. I have every confidence that the existing good relationship and common sense between managers and councillors will continue to apply to the application of charges for services.
Certain remarks were made on the level of control which local authority members exercise over expenditure and it was suggested that even the estimates meetings have become less meaningful. One has to accept that, over the past five years, estimates meetings had become less meaningful because of the limiting of increases in rate poundage levels by succesive Ministers since 1977. The very tight control exercised at central level must have been very frustrating and, in practice, left the local authorities with little or no scope for discretionary spending. This has now been changed.
As I indicated in my opening speech, this year I departed from the practice of limiting rate poundage increases, and local authorities have been free to strike whatever rate they wished. They will also be able to raise additional revenue as they deem appropriate from charges under the Local Government (Financial Provisions) (No. 2) Bill, 1983. This means that they will again be in the position of making positive discretionary decisions at local level in relation to projects and of deciding on the levels of revenue to be raised.
The question of local government structures in the Dublin area was raised by Deputy Taylor and Deputy Walsh this morning. Since 1971 various reports and studies have been published and, particularly in the case of Dublin, dissatisfaction has been expressed in relation to existing structures. It is my wish to make the local government system stronger, more effective and more democratic. I am having this whole area of local government structures examined with these aims in mind. I can assure Deputies that I am approaching this matter with an open mind and with the intention of improving the local government system.
We can all see for ourselves that the development of the city of Dublin and the surrounding areas has taken place without corresponding development in local government structures. The whole matter is being examined and I should like to think we will be putting forward proposals within the lifetime of this Government for local government reform.
Deputy Molloy spoke at length about An Bord Pleanála and the proposal to reconstitute it. I will not take up too much of the time of the House by dealing with this matter in detail because there will be an opportunity of debating all aspects of it when the legislation which is now at an advanced stage comes before the House in a few weeks. I feel I must set the record straight in relation to a number of points.
A Fianna Fáil spokesman on the Environment should be the last person in this House to make allegations about the constitution of the board or to bring up the subject of ulterior political motives, as Deputy Molloy did. Let me remind the Deputy that on virtually the last day of the Fianna Fáil Government's term of office in June 1981 three new appointments were made to the board, increasing its membership to eight. In December 1982, just a few days before the last Fianna Fáil Government went out of office, two further additional members were added, bringing the overall total to ten.
It was this carry-on that reduced the standing and credibility of the board in the public view to such an extent that new legislation was made imperative. I have no intention of debating the credentials of the members of the board or of casting any doubts on their integrity but it is incredible against this background, to find myself being lectured by Deputy Molloy about appointing one's friends to be members of the board, and so on. Any allegations about appointments I might make are unfounded.
I do not propose to disclose details of the legislation which will be presented shortly, but I can assure the House — and this is important — that one of the objectives will be to establish a system of appointment which will ensure that justice is seen to be done and will preclude actions of the kind taken by my predecessors in 1981 and 1982.
I give credit to Deputy Molloy for recognising the importance of an adequate inspectorate within An Bord Pleanála. Unfortunately, his Fianna Fáil colleague in Government seemed to think it more important to add to the board membership than to the inspectorate. The former Minister announced in December 1982 that he was arranging to have two additional inspectors appointed, but it was left to me to give effect to this, and I am now attempting to have two additional posts filled in the inspectorate. As for Deputy Molloy's allegation that I was being unfair to the staff of the planning inspectorate, may I remind him that I made no allegations whatsoever at any time about the staff and, in particular, did not suggest that the present unsatisfactory arrears situation is attributable to them. In fact, the output of inspectors' reports in recent times has far exceeded the output of decisions by the board.
Because of his selective use of statistics, I find it difficult to pin down Deputy Molloy's real concern about the arrears situation. The relevant facts are simple enough. In the past two years, the number of appeals on hands has virtually doubled and, at 30 April last, was 3,582. The average number of decisions made by the board each month has been falling and the time taken to deal with particular appeals has been increasing. In 1982, only 3,662 appeals were disposed of, as against 4,059 in 1981 and 4,271 in 1980. The number of professional staff available was 15 in each of those years, so the professional staffing position cannot explain the drop in output of over 600 appeal decisions between 1980 and 1982.
Reconstitution of the board will not bring about an immediate solution of the arrears problem. Unfortunately, the reality is that the arrears situation deteriorated during the past 18 months and that other action is needed if the backlog is to be reduced to an acceptable level. My Department have had extensive consultation with the chairman of the board and, as a result, I have arranged for additional administrative and professional staff to be made available, on a temporary basis, by my Department, in an effort to reduce the arrears to a level with which the normal staff complement can cope. I am hopeful that this action will bring about some improvement in the position in the short term. Ultimately, however, it is the board who are responsible for securing that the organisation operates efficiently, that staff resources available are used to best advantage, that systems and procedures are revised and refined and, generally, that direction and leadership are provided. I shall continue to press the existing board to improve its performance and shall take whatever steps are open to me to assist them in this regard.
The question of travelling people was raised in the course of this debate by Deputy Taylor. The Deputy suggested that I should set up a task force to deal, on a central basis, with the question of traveller settlement. In the short number of months I have been in office in the Department of the Environment I have come to understand the serious situation, particularly in the Dublin area, which I think prompted the Deputy's suggestion. I am aware also of Dublin County Council's plans for settlement, that two groups of bungalows are being erected, that five locations have been approved for serviced sites and that sustained consultations are taking place between local officials and residents' groups in connection with further plans for sites which have met with widespread opposition.
As I said in my opening address on Thursday last, I wrote to managers when I received the result of the count of travellers taken by the local authorities in November 1982 and I emphasised the importance of giving the travellers full assistance and recognition under the housing code as well as providing the necessary sites for those who are not seeking to be housed. In his reply to me dated 4 May, the Dublin City and County Manager indicated his view that it would not solve all the problems to take the problem away from the local authority as had been suggested from time to time. His view was that the best way to make progress must be to house many more families in individual houses or in group housing. Personally, I also would like to see the local authority make a conscious drive on this aspect, with full assistance from their social workers, in determining the kind of accommodation suited to each case.
There will obviously still be a need for sites but a need which would be reduced in extent. In this regard, I think the local authority must complete suitable consultations with the local interests concerned about proposed locations before making rational decisions, availing of the technical and administrative advice available to them as to suitability and availability of particular sites.
The Travelling People Review Body also considered the question of responsibility for sites and, on balance, recommended that it should be left with the local authorities. As I said on Thursday last, a group of Ministers will be identifying those recommendations which can be implemented in the current financial situation.
The question of lead content in petrol was also raised by Deputies Taylor and Molloy. The statement of Deputy Molloy that, first, Ireland has a permissible lead level in petrol of 0.64 grammes per litre and, secondly, that we stand alone in exceeding the maximum limit permitted by the EEC — 0.40 grammes per litre — are both incorrect. Initially Ireland was allowed a five year derogation with effect from 1 January 1981 from the requirements of the relevant EEC Directive because of the technical and economic problems which immediate implementation posed for the Whitegate Refinery. The derogation enabled petrol with a lead content of 0.64 grammes per litre to continue to be marketed here for 5 years. Following the acquisition by the Irish National Petroleum Company of the Whitegate Refinery on behalf of the State the Government decided that petrol from the refinery would not have a lead content in excess of 0.40 grammes per litre and the European Communities (Lead Content of Petrol) (Amendment) Regulations, 1982 which came into operation on 1 September 1982 gave effect to this decision. Irish standards are therefore in line with the requirements of the 1978 EEC Directive.
The British Government recently announced the acceptance of the recommendations of a Royal Commission Report which has recommended total elimination of lead from petrol by 1990. They have undertaken to discuss the matter with other member states at the Council of Ministers meeting next month. At present the EEC Directive of 1978 sets 0.15 as the lower limit for lead content and the Irish National Petroleum Company has recently engaged consultants (the Finnish State Oil Company) to advise on the capital and operating cost implications for Whitegate of lowering the lead content from 0.40 to 0.15 grammes per litre.
The question of air pollution in the Dublin area was raised by Deputy Taylor also. I should say that we are constantly monitoring the smoke and sulphur dioxide levels in the Dublin area. While there was a general decline in the level of both pollutants through the 1970s it became clear, towards the end of the decade, that this downward trend was coming to an end. In general the readings obtained have been well within the air quality standards laid down in an EEC Directive of 15 July 1980.
The Dublin air quality situation is the subject of continuous review and discussions with various interests are currently taking place with a view to formulating an effective strategy to promote clean fuel usage in both the industrial and domestic sectors. The recent arrival of piped natural gas in the Dublin area will certainly be a significant factor.
Deputy Taylor referred to the possible introduction of smokeless zones. This would require legislation, as well as considerable investment in suitable types of fuel burners and new kinds of restriction of fuel use in the areas concerned. It is, however, the intention that legislation relating to environmental protection generally should be improved, strengthened and developed here as the need arises, and the law and regulations are being kept under review in this connection.
The provision of vehicle insurance by Motor Taxation Offices and questions relating to the Motor Insurers' Bureau in the case of hit-and-run victims was raised by Deputy Taylor. On the provision by Motor Taxation Officers of information relating to the insurance of a vehicle I would point out that article 23 of the Road Vehicle (Registration and Licensing) Regulations, 1982, which came into effect on 1 February 1983, empowers a licensing authority to supply to any person who satisfies the licensing authority that he has reasonable cause there for such particulars, including insurance, of any vehicle registered with that licensing authority as are available in the vehicle register. The charge for the supply of such particulars is £3. Obviously, as this has been in operation for the past two months only, we will be monitoring it in practice to ensure that it has the effect we set out to achieve and, if necessary, we will make any alterations so that this information will be readily available where necessary.
Deputy Taylor also mentioned the question of compensation for victims of accidents involving hit-and-run drivers. The present position is that the Motor Insurers' Bureau of Ireland have undertaken to give sympathetic consideration to the making of ex gratia payments in respect of serious and permanent disablement or death caused by such a driver. The question of compensation for personal injuries caused by untraced drivers is at present under discussion within the framework of a directive regarding motor insurance generally which is being considered by the EEC. I can only agree with the Deputy's remarks as to the unfortunate consequences of hit-and-run accidents which are not part of the Motor Insurers' Bureau agreement. Certainly we can examine the possibility of updating this agreement.
With regard to Deputy Durkan's comments on the whole question of litter, I support what he had to say about the importance of the enforcement of the Litter Act and call on all local authorities to make full use of the wide powers conferred on them by that Act. These powers include power to deal with abandoned cars and other scrap as well as to operate an on-the-spot fine system and to prosecute in the courts. I cannot accept that scarcity of funds is a problem as great funds are not needed. The easing of local authorities' revenue position by additional rates suport provision in the current year, plus the substantial grants for environmental works, means that limited costs are involved in giving proper effect to the provisions of the Act. They should not present any real difficulty for any authority. The way has been provided; it is a matter of having the will, if the will is there, to cope with the serious litter problem we have in this country and to raise the level of consciousness not only at local authority level but throughout the community.
The question of planning problems in his area was raised by Deputy Durkan also. In my opening remarks I did say that there are special planning problems in the eastern region. The Eastern Regional Development Organisation have undertaken a major study aimed at identifying the best strategy for the development of this region. Work of this type is also being undertaken in a number of other regions. The findings of these investigations will be of importance.
The question of unfinished estates — something we all see in our respective areas — was referred to by a number of Deputies. I should say that, apart from the immediate proposals to introduce a Bill to reconstitute An Bord Pleanála, there are proposals to make some amendments also to planning appeals and have a general review carried out of planning law, to include examination of any changes which might improve the existing situation regarding the enforcement of planning control, particularly in the case of housing estates. Deputy Taylor's suggestion regarding the possibility of making company directors personally liable for the completion of estates will be considered in this connection.
Deputy Walsh referred to the possible provision of additional employment through local authorities. I would point out that £8 million has already been allocated for environmental works in 1983 and a further £2 million is on offer to local authorities for particular schemes to be submitted by them. A certain number of submissions have been made. The provision of £10 million essentially for youth employment will have a significant effect on the employment level to be maintained by local authorities in 1983.
A number of Deputies from the Dublin area have referred to the development of Tallaght and the problem of unfinished estates in Tallaght and other expanding areas. I am aware that Dublin County Council are actively pursuing defaulting developers to ensure that estates are completed to a suitable standard which enables the local authorities to take their maintenance in charge. In an area such as Tallaght, which is experiencing rapid development, problems will arise in the provision of facilities and amenities to keep pace with the massive housing development. Delays can be experienced in the provision of shopping and other commercial facilities. The county council in their development plan have made spatial provision for shopping and commercial activities and at present there are district-type shopping provisions at Tallaght village, Kilnamanagh and Firhouse as well as neighbourhood centres at Dodder, Springfield, Castletymon, Tymon North and Aylesbury. I would hope that when the county council have fully implemented their development plan the town of Tallaght and other expanding areas on the periphery of Dublin will provide for their predominantly young population a satisfactory environment in which to live, complete with all the amenities comparable to those of other towns of similar size throughout the country which developed over a longer period and have agreater community structure than is possible in newer areas. The Department of the Environment will give every assistance to local authorities in this area to cope with the problems of expansion in order to have a controlled growth which will add to the quality of life in developing towns.
I have given Deputy Daly permission to ask a question. I would emphasise that it should be a question, not a contribution.
The Minister stated in his opening speech that a review of the roads plan was taking place in the Department. When is it likely that the review will be completed and will any special attention be given to the county roads and the byroads? The Minister will be aware that in the western counties especially there has been a serious deterioration of the structure of the county roads, mainly due to climatic and other conditions during the past year or two. Local communities are agitated and frustrated about the condition of these roads. I would ask that special attention be given to the county roads in the review.
I said in my opening speech that a review is taking place of the road development plan and I would hope that we could present it to Government in the next session of the Dáil and certainly before the end of the year. The road development plan is concerned more with major routes and national primaries. Being a rural Deputy myself and having every intention of staying a rural Deputy, I have discussed the matter of county roads with local authorities including, as recently as yesterday, Roscommon County Council. There is an obvious deterioration in the quality of county roads and I have during the past few months tried to accumulate and assimilate statistics and facts on the level of deterioration. It has not been permissible in the past to allow for improvements of county roads from specific allocations but it may be worth while to hold off some developments or improvements on major road structures so that we can at least maintain our county roads at a level which will allow people to travel in some comfort. Every rural Deputy is aware of the almost total collapse of the county road structure. A major effort was made in the sixties and early seventies but since then these roads have been neglected and I am examining the matter to see if in 1984 funds can be diverted to county roads so that we can maintain a reasonable level of road surface.
Vote put and agreed to.