Housing Bill, 1983: Second Stage.

Minister for the Environment (Mr. Kavanagh)

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

This is a short Bill the purpose of which is to enable a housing authority, at their discretion, in assessing housing needs to take account of persons resident outside the authority's functional area and also to build houses for and to let houses to such persons. By so empowering housing authorities it will overcome the difficulties and confusion that have arisen in relation to the letting of some local authority houses and the transfer of certain tenancies following the Supreme Court judgment in the case of McNamee versus Buncrana Urban District Council (Reference 117 — 1983) which ruled that the council are not entitled to house people who are not resident in the functional area of the council. In the case in question the plaintiffs, who were applicants for a house in a scheme provided by Buncrana UDC, sought a declaration that the council were acting ultra vires in purporting to allocate houses to persons residing outside the council's functional area. The High Court granted the declaration sought on 8 March 1983. This judgment was appealed to the Supreme Court by Buncrana UDC but the appeal was not upheld and the decision of the High Court was confirmed by the Supreme Court on 30 June 1983.

In considering the case the Supreme Court had regard, in particular, to the provisions of sections 53, 55 and 60 of the Housing Act, 1966. Section 53 places a duty on housing authorities to assess, at least every five years, the accumulated and prospective housing needs of their functional areas. Section 55 imposes a further duty on authorities to prepare a building programme having regard to the housing needs of their functional area and taking account of certain statutory objectives. Section 60 obliges authorities to make a scheme of letting priorities for the letting of houses having regard to certain statutory primary objectives. These primary objectives relate mainly to the elimination of unfitness and overcrowding and the housing of persons in need of housing who cannot afford to provide it for themselves. In delivering the judgment the Chief Justice said in relation to these provisions:

In my view, it is quite clear that these various duties and obligations so imposed on housing authorities, applied to each housing authority in relation to its own functional area, and, having regard to the housing needs of that particular area.

Concluding the judgment the Chief Justice went on to say:

I do not think the Buncrana Urban District Council are entitled to house people who are not resident in its functional area. The duty of the Buncrana Urban District Council is to allocate the houses, which they have provided, in accordance with a scheme of priorities which enables them to house suitable applicants who fit within the designated categories and who reside or are domiciled within the functional area of the council.

As interpreted by the Supreme Court, sections 53, 55 and 60 of the 1966 Act would put undesirable restrictions on individual local authorities in the execution of their functions in assessing housing needs and in the building and letting of houses. The sections would hinder housing authorities in entering into mutually advantageous arrangements between themselves for the housing of applicants in a particular locality in the most speedy, economical and convenient way possible and give undue importance to the sometimes random effects of local boundaries on the rehousing prospects of needy families. They would also cause difficulties for the inter-transfer of tenants between housing authorities, and could, in some circumstances, conceivably be construed as placing restrictions on the making by a local authority of loans for the purchase or building of houses. Furthermore, it is right and proper that comprehensive assessments of the future housing needs of any particular area should be able to take account, and provide for, any anticipated migration from outside the area.

I am, therefore, satisfied that there is an urgent need to amend the provisions of the 1966 Act which have given rise to the kind of problems and anomalies I have mentioned, especially as there are, at present, a number of new housing schemes at completion stage around the country that were specifically provided to meet the needs of particular areas straddling local boundaries.

The present Bill makes it clear that a housing authority is enabled, to such extent, if any, as they consider appropriate, to have regard to persons residing outside the area of the authority in the assessment of housing needs and in the building and letting of houses. This is being done in the most straightforward manner possible by simply providing explicit powers in the three sections concerned enabling a housing authority—

(a) to have regard to, in assessing the housing requirements of their functional area under section 53, the prospective demand for housing from persons residing outside the area who are likely for any reason to come into the area;

(b) to have as an additional objective, in preparing their building programme under section 55, the provision of houses for persons residing outside their functional area; and

(c) to have as an additional primary objective, in making a scheme of letting priorities under section 60, the provision of houses for persons residing outside their functional area who are seeking accommodation within the area and who are not in a position to provide it from their own resources.

I should stress that these are enabling provisions and that the extent, if any, to which they are used by any housing authority is entirely at the discretion of that authority. They do not compel a housing authority who decide otherwise to have regard to persons outside their functional area. Basically, this Bill seeks to do no more than restore the position to what it was widely considered to be prior to the Supreme Court judgment. These new provisions are being given retrospective effect to remove any doubts about the validity of any past actions taken in good faith by housing authorities.

On a more general note, I should say that there is now a need for a more fundamental review of Part III of the Housing Act, 1966, which relates to the provision and management of local authority dwellings and which includes the three sections now being amended. I intend to proceed as quickly as possible with this review and the formulation of legislative proposals. These proposals, which I intend to bring forward next year, will also contain measures to deal with the issue of homelessness.

However, the object of this Bill could not await the more extensive proposals I have just mentioned. I am satisfied that the problems flowing from the Supreme Court judgment are such as to require immediate amending legislation to restore the position. Action on these lines has been sought by a number of local authorities and by Deputies from all sides. I commend the Bill to the House.

Mr. Molloy

Ar dtús ba mhaith liom comhgháirdeas a dhéanamh leis an Teachta Liam Kavanagh as ucht a phost nua mar Aire Comhshaoil, agus tá súil agam go mbeidh toradh maith le feiceáil ar an obair a bheas ar siúl aige sa Roinn sin. Cinnte tabharfaimid cibé cabhair is féidir linn dó agus cuirfimid in iúl dó na heasnaimh a bheas ann de réir mar a théann an t-am thart.

I should like to avail of this opportunity to extend my personal congratulations and those of my party to Deputy Liam Kavanagh on his appointment as Minister for the Environment and to wish him success in his new Ministry. I assure him of our full co-operation in the interests of the people we both serve in this Parliament. I assure him also that we shall continue to remind him of any needs existing to which we feel he may not be giving adequate attention.

In regard to the Bill before the House I want to make it clear at the outset that we support it as we recognise the serious difficulties that would obtain if effect were to be given in each local authority area to the Supreme Court ruling that only those actually residing in a local authority's functional area were to be considered for housing. As the House knows, it has been the practice to consider also those who work in an authority's functional area. As happened in the Buncrana case, which came before the courts, others outside the functional area of a local authority have been housed where it was deemed that a genuine housing need existed.

In my view the 1966 Housing Act has worked very successfully and achieved many of the aims expressed by Deputy Blaney when introducing the Bill to the House in the mid-sixties. At that time it constituted a major advance in social legislation here, enabling local authorities to plan their housebuilding programmes to meet the housing needs of our people in an efficient and realistic way.

Having said that I believe that, after 17 years in operation now it must surely be opportune to review the operation of all housing legislation. I am pleased that the Minister referred to this in the course of his introductory remarks. But I would remind him that his predecessors also made similar references but that there has been no concrete evidence of the results of any such deliberations within this Department. I understand that his predecessor promised to publish a White Paper on housing. I urge the Minister to come forward with such a White Paper at the earliest possible opportunity. It must be remembered that we have a growing population consisting of a very high proportion of young people, that we have housing needs which will constitute an even greater problem in ensuing years unless positive action is taken now. Farsighted though it was, the Housing Bill introduced by Deputy Blaney in 1966 could not possibly be expected to cater for the housing needs of our people into the eighties and nineties. Therefore, an obligation rests on the Minister to ensure that serious thought is given to the planning of our legislation and Government action with regard to taking positive steps to meet the real housing needs obtaining at present and which will continue to be exacerbated unless positive action is taken to deal with them.

I do not believe it was the intention of the Oireachtas at the time Deputy Blaney introduced that Bill that its provisions should be interpreted in the narrow fashion of the Supreme Court ruling. The strict legal provisions of that Act which that court has now determined would greatly inhibit housing officers exercising their discretion in allocating tenancies in their local authority areas. It is my belief that practically all houses have been allocated to persons who did reside in the functional area of each local authority and that, where the opposite occurred, it was very much the exception and indeed for very good, practical reasons.

With the expansion of major urban areas there is no doubt but that we have now reached a situation in which the boundaries of each local authority which, in 1966, seemed very real, clear definable boundaries, do not now have the same significance, as was mentioned by the Minister in the course of his remarks. We cannot allow our housing authorities to be confined merely to the existence of a formal dividing line between theirs and an adjoining authority because of the spill-over of urban areas into other local authority areas. At all times there must be very close co-operation between adjoining housing authorities.

The practice to date has been that common sense has prevailed, that there has been a very high degree of co-operation between officials of adjoining local authority areas. This case was brought forward very much to the surprise of those charged with implementing the provisions of the 1966 Act, as it had been taken as the spirit of the Act that no such restriction existed. However, this House must take heed of the deliberations of the Supreme Court and we are happy to support the provision. I am very pleased that the Minister emphasised that this Bill merely provides enabling provisions and will not place any great obligation on housing authorities — at least that is my interpretation of what the Minister said — to grant equal priority to people who reside outside their functional area. At all times the housing official charged with making the allocations must be allowed exercise his discretion and common sense in determining where the greatest need exist and in determining the greatest priorities, within the scheme of priorities as laid down and approved by his local authority.

The officials who during the years have been charged with the making of decisions on allocations have a very important and difficult role to perform. To my knowledge they have exercised their duties in a fair and just manner, displaying wisdom and practical commonsense.

If in future they are to be confined to operate within the strict terms of the Supreme Court decision I do not think it will add any improvements, because it will restrict unnecessarily the choices open to them when they come to make new tenancies.

It is a pity the Supreme Court had to become involved in a case of this kind. Probably it would have been wiser to allow the commonsense of housing officers to decide the real priorities. On balance, it has been the experience of all Deputies that these functions have been carried out in a fair and just manner by housing officers over the years.

The 1966 Housing Act provides that each local authority are obliged to carry out regular assessments of the housing needs in their area. This information is made available to the Minister when he comes to decide Government strategy in relation to housing needs. I would draw the Minister's attention to a recently published NESC report "Housing Requirements and Population Change, 1981-1991". It projects that annual housing requirements will average 30,000. It must be clear to all sides in the House that this Government are not committed to a housing programme that would meet those needs, despite the statement by the former Minister for the Environment, Deputy Spring, that it was the intention of his Government to build 30,000 houses per year. That is the figure deemed to be the required number of new house completions to meet the needs of our expanding population.

However, we see from a recent reply in the Dáil by Deputy Spring that the number of new house completions in 1983 will number only 25,600, 4,400 below the stated target and the stated housing needs. I urge the new Minister for the Environment to make greater efforts in the house building area than his predecessor did. I can go back to ten years ago and recall that when I was in office the total number of new house completions in 1973 was 24,000. It seems no great progress has been made in the intervening years if in 1983 our new house completions will number only 1,600 more than in 1973. Other Governments have been in office in the meantime, but I am very pleased that my party succeeded in reaching a new house completion programme of 28,917 in 1981.

Why has there been this dramatic drop in new house completions since 1981, at a time when there has been an escalation in the demand and the need? The Minister has an obligation under the 1966 Act, in section 53, to which he referred this morning in his speech. He and his predecessor have not fulfilled that obligation and the local authorities cannot be charged with failure to meet the housing needs of their areas if those who are responsible for funding the local authorities have not provided adequate finance to enable them to undertake those programmes. All of us know that the housing programmes undertaken by individual local authorities are determined completely by the action of the Minister for the Environment through financial allocations. It is not good enough for the Labour Party in Government, those who had been so critical when they sat in Opposition, to fail in regard to this great social need. If any area required great Labour input it is in regard to housing, but it is clear they have failed miserably to establish an adequate house building programme to meet the needs of our people.

There is no greater tragedy that could befall any family than not to have a roof over their heads and a warm comfortable house to live in, without being extravagant or expensive. Week after week Deputies in their constituencies come across tragic cases of people living in deplorable conditions, not for weeks or months but for long periods, because the local authorities have not been able to keep up with the housing demand in their areas. Local authorities are not just confined to providing housing in their functional areas. We are now extending the obligations in regard to people living outside the local authority functional areas.

There has been miserable failure in recent years to meet the housing needs, and the burden falling on local authorities in this regard will increase with the operation of this Act. At the commencement of his new duties in the Department of the Environment it would be wise for Deputy Kavanagh to examine carefully all the studies which we have been told have been carried out on housing matters in the Department. We have heard about work being done on the preparation of a White Paper. The level of this work has been fairly extensive, and I hope he will come forward in the near future with the White Paper. I hope it will be a realistic document setting out in stark terms what the needs and the costs are and what the programme will be to meet those needs and to provide finance to cater for those needs.

I would remind the Minister that in the Estimates prepared by the Government there are two important items, one dealing with the money provided for private house grants in 1984. The figure is £18.4 million——

Mr. Skelly

On a point of order, I have to agree with Deputy Molloy as to what may be discussed. Surely when we are talking about the needs of people for houses and local authorities being enabled to provide those houses it is relevant to raise those matters under this Bill. Before finally ruling would the Chair consider carefully what is mentioned in the Bill, because the Minister made reference to his plans and the need for a fundamental review of the Housing Acts? Surely this is the most appropriate Bill now to discuss local authority housing and the need for such housing and how the problem is being handled throughout the country. Deputies may have suggestions which would improve the Bill and, in doing so, it would be essential to make wider references.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair has ruled that would not be in order. There is an Adjournment Debate which will include the Estimates and in that debate there may be greater scope. The Chair has to have regard to what this Bill is all about, and it is not about housing in general. It is amending the law following a decision of the High Court concerning a net point.

Mr. Skelly

But what about local authorities building houses——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy may not argue with the Chair. I have ruled as I have ruled and that is an end of the matter.

Mr. Molloy

I would emphasise that at least £20 million must be provided for private house grants and at least £240 million for local authority housing capital.

Section 55 of the 1966 Act is also being amended. This requires each local authority to prepare a building programme. I cannot see how this could be out of order since the sections we are dealing with are the kernel of the whole housing movement. All local authority housing development is governed by these Acts and the financial allocations will determine the rate. It is also important that policy should provide for equity in the distribution of access to the financial aids for housing, a greater choice and diversity in house types and tenure, and policy in regard to the rehabilitation of older houses. I think a much more elaborate scheme of house improvement grants is required if we are to maintain the existing housing stock when one considers the high costs of building houses today. Local authority houses are costing the State by way of subsidy——

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy, that is not in order. It may be in order on an Adjournment Debate or in a debate on the Estimate but it is not in order to widen the scope of the debate to this extent on this Bill.

Mr. Molloy

We believe there are these other areas where this need exists. I have mentioned some of them. I am disappointed that the Minister is not doing something in regard to the homeless in this case.

I would hope that the Ceann Comhairle would not stop me from calling on the Minister to give the House a full explanation of the existing law which has been interpreted as excluding local authorities from having any responsibility for housing the homeless and leaving homeless persons as the responsibility of health boards who provide only institutional or hostel type accommodation, which does not meet the real personal needs of the majority of the homeless. I would urge the Minister to avail of this Bill to amend the law in this respect.

The debate has been very confined by the Ceann Comhairle. I do not wish to continue to transgress his ruling. I do not agree with ruling but I have to accept it.

Could I ask the Minister one or two questions? The first question is: will a person resident in a foreign country have the same right under this new Bill to be considered for housing as a person who is permanently resident in this country? Up to now, as the House understands and as the court ruled, the local authority could consider only persons residing in their functional area. Now the Bill extends the category of persons to persons resident outside the functional area. This extension does not seem to be confined to residents in the State. As we know, as a result of our sad history of emigration, there is a large flow of persons born in this country who have roots in this country moving from other countries to this country. Many of our people reside in England. Many of them seek to return home and often make application to local authorities in this country before they make a move to be housed by the local authority. In many cases they have been housed in England by a local authority at the time of their application. I would like the Minister to clarify whether such persons will receive equal priority with persons who have been residing permanently in this country. The practical application of the scheme of letting priorities, as I understand it, has not given very high priority to persons who are not residing in the functional area at the time they made the application. Indeed, many local authorities insisted that they would not approve an application unless the person was residing in the functional area. That restriction is now being removed. The extension does not seem to confine consideration to residents in this country. I would ask the Minister to refer to that when replying.

Naturally, in the whole area of housing there are many matters of very great interest but the Chair does not wish us to extend the debate. So I will not do so other than again to say that we will not oppose the provisions of the Bill. We regret that the Bill does not seek to cater for other great needs and we would urge the Minister to introduce as soon as possible comprehensive legislation which would be capable of dealing with all the problems that are building up in regard to housing in the major urban areas and, indeed, throughout rural Ireland.

Mrs. A. Doyle

I commend this Bill to the House. The histrionics of the Opposition spokesman amuse me yet again when the highlight of his party's contribution to the Department of the Environment's activities seems to have been the planting of trees on the eve of an election and removing them when the count was over.

Mr. Lyons

On a point of order, what is the relevance of the reference to the planting of trees?

Mrs. A. Doyle

The people of Ireland recognise that for what it is, at last.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Lyons can leave this matter to the Chair.

Mr. Lyons

I am rising on a point of order and I will be satisfied if the Chair deals with it in the same manner as he has dealt with the Bill up to now.

An Ceann Comhairle

I heard about three sentences. Trees are not in order on this Bill.

Mrs. A. Doyle

I accept your ruling; I have made my point. The Housing Bill, 1983, provides for the amendment of sections 53, 55 and 60 of the Housing Act, 1966. Section 60 has already been amended by section 16 of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1979. Section 53 of the 1966 Act imposes a statutory duty on each housing authority to make an inspection and to assess the adequacy of supply and the condition of housing in their functional area every five years, or less if the Minister directs. The 1983 Bill will widen the powers of the housing authority to enable them to consider the prospective future of persons who are residing outside their functional areas. This in itself is very desirable, but I shall return to the matter of the statutory obligation in a moment.

Section 55 of the 1966 Act imposes a statutory duty on every housing authority to prepare and adopt a building programme for at least every five years, or at shorter intervals if the Minister directs. The housing authority must have regard to a number of given objectives, for example, houses that are unfit for human habitation, the elimination of overcrowding and so on. The 1983 Bill proposes to include in this section the objective of providing housing to meet the needs of persons who are residing outside the functional area. Like the proposed amendment of section 53, this is also a desirable provision.

With regard to the general question of sections 53 and 55, I think that with the experience gained by housing authorities since the 1966 Act was passed, the absolute statutory obligations imposed by sections 53 and 55 on housing authorities could be downgraded to, say a duty to make inspections, to assess adequacy of supply of housing and to prepare building programmes at intervals as required by the Minister. This suggestion would not diminish the importance of assessments and building programmes but would rather recognise that a five-year building programme is subject to so many variables as to make it practically impossible to carry out.

Every public representative, especially every local representative, knows that regardless of the best intentions, building programmes are affected by the availability of land, the provision of services, the early preparation of plans, changes in the employment scene and, above all, the allocation of capital. The availability of land is being dealt with at the moment and we heard from Deputy Molloy this morning that it will be the end of March before the Joint Committee on Building Land report.

Since those factors can change drastically in less than five years, a programme for that period could be unrealistic after two or three years. A broad general programme is of course necessary for a local authority and this could be provided as a number of objectives of the development plan which would be either in lieu of the statutory building programme mentioned in section 5 of the 1966 Act or be declared to satisfy the obligation of making that programme.

My suggestions about sections 53 and 55 of the 1966 Act would require some changes in the 1983 Bill. I was very heartened to see what the Minister said:

...there is now a need for a more fundamental review of Part III of the Housing Act, 1966, which relates to the provision and management of local authority dwellings and which include the three sections now being amended. I intend to proceed as quickly as possible with this review and the formulation of legislative proposals. These proposals, which I intend to bring forward next year, will also contain measures to deal with the issue of homelessness.

This subject is very dear to the hearts of all involved in government at local and national level.

The other section of the 1966 Act which it is proposed to amend by means of the 1983 Bill is section 60 under which every housing authority is obliged to draw up a scheme of letting priorities. This allows discretion to members under a points system, for example, which is very popular in my part of the country where they can weigh the criteria to needs in an area. It is with regard to this question that the judgment in the case of McNamee and Another v. Buncrana Urban District Council, in the Supreme Court on 30 June 1983, has caused the greatest difficulties for housing authorities in that the law has now been interpreted as prohibiting a housing authority from housing a person residing outside the authority's functional area. In other words, it was deemed necessary to impose restrictions on members when making their schemes of letting priorities.

Housing authorities find it necessary to consider housing applicants from outside their areas for a variety of reasons. Urban authorities in particular are concerned about the needs of people living in the suburbs which extend into the adjacent rural area. All housing authorities experience demands from people who must move by reason of their employment or who wish, on retirement, to return to their native place. Representatives form rural constituencies are particularly aware of this problem. Most of the urban boundaries are very narrow and the actual functional areas of corporations and borough councils are very small. Over the years people have been rehoused from the centre of towns to suburbia in great numbers, perhaps too great numbers, and we must look at the situation now. We have denuded many of our town centres, of necessity, but the wheel has turned the full circle and it is time we looked at the situation so created. The facts are that many people live outside the boundaries of these functional areas, people who are natives of the area, who identify fully with it, who are rearing their children and, hopefully, are working there.

Leaving aside the legal question, the practice of housing applicants from outside the area can be justified and appears logical when one considers that the entire capital cost of providing local authority housing is subsidised. The effect of the judgment of the High and Supreme Courts — which we must accept — has been to create difficulties which some local authorities have tried to cope with by agreement under section 109 of the 1966 Act and section 59 of the Local Government Act, 1955. This, however, would be unsatisfactory as a permanent procedure as it would rely on a multiplicity of formal agreements between different housing authorities, and the simple amendment of the Housing Acts contained in the Housing Bill, 1983, is a far better remedy.

A recent allocation of houses by Wexford Corporation highlights the problem created by the Buncrana case. There were 320 applicants for 42 houses — 70 from people residing outside the authority's functional area. Two weeks ago these houses were allocated by Wexford Corporation by having consideration to agreements under section 109 of the 1966 Act and section 59 of the Local Government, 1955, and even then, in my view, not all places could be legally considered. The important aspect of retrospection in this Bill will be very helpful to those authorities who had difficulty in juggling the existing legislation to suit their particular needs over the past six months. Housing people who are unable to house themselves is one of the most important functions of a Government. The Government, by providing all the capital, enable local authorities to indulge in one of the few real measures of local government that still exist.

I am one of those who believe that local government has been stripped insidiously over the years and we now have only a pretence of local democracy. Local democracy and an efficient, effective local government system responding directly to the needs of the people is essential for stability and proper government. It is the cornerstone of any truly democratic country and it behoves all of us to ensure its future is in safe hands.

At this point I would like to congratulate Deputy Kavanagh on his new position as Minister for the Environment. I am very confident that the future of local government is in safe hands while he is in the driving seat. A good system of local government is the cornerstone of a truly democratic country.

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not think that arises.

Mrs. A. Doyle

I will finish in a few sentences. I will not trouble you much longer, a Cheann Comhairle. We must remove the stigma of being a rubber-stamping robot. I used that expression in this House before. We must increase the reserved functions to the thousands of Irish men and the all too few Irish women who give of their time selflessly and for no reward on our councils. Their number one duty is to house the needy. We must ensure that they are not fettered in any way in their efforts to do so. This is why I have great pleasure in commending this Bill to the House.

Mr. Fitzsimons

I welcome this Bill. I should like to take this opportunity to wish the Minister every success in his new appointment. The Department of the Environment is a very prestigious Department. This Bill relates to the letting priorities in relation to local authority housing which is a fundamental function of the Department of the Environment.

A Cheann Comhairle, I appreciate your position. This is a very confined Bill. Those of us who had hoped to broaden the debate to the whole housing area, both public and private, will not be allowed to do so under your ruling. We will have an opportunity to do so on the Estimates if we can get in to speak on Thursday or Friday. It is a little disappointing that we will not be allowed to develop our train of thought on housing, but I appreciate your position. I trust that when the Leas-Cheann Comhairle takes over he will follow the precedent, lest speakers who come after us may have an advantage over us.

The letting priorities throughout the country have been very consistent. Of course the High Court ruling has created a problem. Local authorities have always dealt with this matter in a sensible manner. The need for housing applicants who cannot house themselves has always been considered compassionately by the health inspectors, the housing inspectors and the social workers, in co-operation with the elected members of the local authorities.

Because of the growth in our population in urban areas we have a problem. Urban areas have developed so much that the land bank owned by the local authorities is generally in the county council areas. County councillors rather than urban councillors or town commissioners have the function of allocating houses. Because of this the Minister and the local authorities should look at the question of the extension of the urban boundaries. This has ramifications for the rest of the council areas.

Recently in Navan, 24 houses were being allocated and there were 150 applicants. The land was in the county council area and the county councillors rightly allocated half of those 24 houses to people living in the urban area. The county council have the professional staff to deal with this matter. Some urban councillors are wondering whether they have any real function, especially having regard to the recent Act which gave the county managers total executive functions.

I want to refer to some needs which have been overlooked. The single parent is not normally considered as an applicant in need of housing. The single parent is usually the female of the species. Normally persons deemed to be in need of housing are married and have at least one child. It is not mentioned anywhere that the single parent should be classed as in need of housing. One of the social trends over the past decade has been that more and more single parents are living in our society. If that is their wish, they are entitled to keep the child rather than opting for fostering or adoption. The Minister should point out to the local authorities that single parents are just as much in need of housing as married parents and there should be no barriers against the housing of that type of person.

An Ceann Comhairle

I want to say that I did not think up this ruling myself. I did not look up a precedent before I made the ruling because I thought my ruling was elementary. Since then I got two rulings of distinguished precedessors of mine which confirm that what I ruled is in accordance with precedent. One ruling said the scope of a Bill is determined by its content and not by its title and, more important, that in debating a Bill to amend an Act the provisions of the Principal Act not affected by the Bill may not be debated. They are long-standing rulings.

Mr. Fitzsimons

I appreciate that. The Whips agreed to allow three hours for this debate. We could speak on the Bill for half an hour and let it through. I do not know why the Whips agreed to give it three hours. I think they suspected the subject would be developed.

An Ceann Comhairle

Three hours of relevant debate.

Mr. Fitzsimons

I will abide by your ruling, but it would be very difficult to have three hours of relevant debate on the Buncrana decision. There has been a change in social trends. Separated couples, deserted wives, unmarried mothers and single parents have to be taken into consideration when it comes to the question of housing. Senator B. Ryan and the Simon Community must be commended for pointing out to the Oireachtas the dire need to house the homeless in our society. They have been ignored down through the years by housing authorities and the Governments.

We have these people in the cities and the bigger urban areas. It is very sad that they have been overlooked. Homeless people are in need of housing as much if not more than travelling people. We need to house the travelling people and it behoves every local authority to ensure that the travelling people in their community are housed. We have a very progressive programme for the housing of travelling people. Last year we built nearly 20 houses for them and the scheme has worked out quite well in one estate, apart from our programme of housing one travelling person in every 20 applicants. I would suggest that a homeless person should be considered in that category because such a person is as much in need of a house. Travelling people should be allocated loans by the local authority to buy or build their own houses because many of them would be well able to repay these loans.

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not like intervening, believe that or believe it not, but I simply cannot sit here and allow the debate to roam over the whole area of housing when it is not in order.

Mr. Wallace

On a point of order, while it appears as a very straightforward matter, unfortunately it is not. It may solve the problem outside the jurisdiction of local authorities but it will create all sorts of problems within the jurisdiction. We have a right to tease it out and give the Minister the benefit of our experience.

An Ceann Comhairle

That would be in order.

Mr. Wallace

You are restricting us.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am not. It is not in order to argue with the Chair. I am only ruling out attempts to introduce different categories of people that are not included in the Bill. I am ruling out discussion on the homeless, single parents and all the rest. That is not within the scope of the Bill and it is not the fault of the Chair. I do not know if Deputy Wyse was here when I read the ruling. The scope of the Bill is determined by its contents and not by its title, and in debating a Bill to amend an Act provisions of the Principal Act not affected by the Bill may not be debated. That is as clear as crystal.

Mr. Fitzsimons

The Minister broadened the scope a little.

An Ceann Comhairle

He said he would deal again with the matter of the homeless. I am allowing much more than passing references.

Mr. Fitzsimons

I appreciate that you have a capacity for tolerance. The Minister said that there is now a need for a more fundamental review of Part III of the Housing Act, 1966, which relates to the provision and management of local authority dwellings and which includes the three sections now being amended. He seemed to broaden the scope of the debate but I will certainly not argue with the Chair and I fully appreciate his position.

Even the best housing inspectors and social workers can be misled and often the advice of the member of the local authority who knows best is ignored. The allocation of houses is a managerial function. The deserving applicant, the married man with a wife and child who rents the best house he can get, often loses out to another applicant who may not be as responsible and may, perhaps, use a caravan, because the latter is deemed to be in greater need of housing.

I commend the Bill to the House.

Mr. J. Doyle

I join previous speakers in wishing Deputy Kavanagh well in his new appointment as Minister for the Environment. I am pleased to note that he intends to review Part III of the Housing Act and I would ask him to consider that section which deals especially with the allocation of houses to people who cannot provide them from their own means. Some time ago it was difficult for people to get loans to buy houses and the only way they could do so was through the SDA scheme.

An Ceann Comhairle

You may make a passing reference only. A discussion on loans which would seem to relate more to the private sector than the public sector is certainly not in order.

Mr. J. Doyle

The only way people of modest means could obtain finance to buy houses was through the SDA scheme. That was changed through the setting up of the Housing Finance Agency.

An Ceann Comhairle

That is not in order.

Mr. J. Doyle

The Minister should give particular attention to this section. The Housing Act of 1966 was a major piece of legislation aimed at tackling in a planned manner the problems of inferior and inadequate housing. It provided for a planned housing programme financed by loans and grants-in-aid to local authorities, who in turn would carry out the programme and be known as housing authorities under the Act, with the approval of the Minister concerned.

An Ceann Comhairle

I must be impartial. The Deputy is now talking about housing finance for the private sector. It does not arise on this Bill and I cannot allow it.

Mr. J. Doyle

I am dealing directly with the Bill. Under Part III of the Act the housing authority have three main functions. Under section 53 of the Act they have to assess the housing needs of the area, the magnitude of the problem to be assessed by an inspection by each housing authority of all the houses in their functional area to ascertain the existing extent of poor housing and overcrowding. It would appear from the judgment in the case of McNamee versus Buncrana Urban District Council that a housing authority in assessing housing needs were not entitled to take into account the prospective future needs of persons residing outside the functional area. Under section 55 it was further required that a housing authority draw up a long-term building programme, having regard to the number of people on the housing list. These needs were to be considered in relation to the replacement of unsuitable houses and the elimination of overcrowding and the number of people who, from their own resources or income, were unable to provide housing for themselves and to take into account the size of their families.

Under the same judgment, local authorities when preparing a building programme are entitled not to consider the needs of people residing outside their functional areas. A judgment delivered on 30 June 1983 by the Chief Justice included the following:

I do not think that the Buncrana District Council are entitled to house people who are not resident in a functional area. The duty of the Buncrana Urban District Council is to allocate the houses which they have provided in accordance with a scheme of priority which enables them to house suitable applicants who fit within the designated property and who reside or are domiciled within the functional area of the council.

Dublin Corporation, of whose housing committee I am chairman, have over a number of years provided 62,000 houses — and also flats. However, due to the scarcity of land within the borough area they have to build outside their functional area and have in the last number of years built 16,000 houses outside that area.

In drawing up a scheme for the letting of housing accommodation Dublin Corporation provide a housing list and a transfer list. On the transfer list are tenants who wish to transfer from one corporation property to another. Following the Supreme Court judgment, it is not clear whether corporation tenants now living in the county area would be entitled to transfer to dwellings in the city area. Secondly, there are those sub-tenants of corporation dwellings who are the children of tenants. These would be people housed by Dublin Corporation in accordance with a scheme of letting priorities but outside their functional area. They may not have the same rights as children of tenants housed in the city area. There are approximately 500 applicants on Dublin Corporation's waiting list who reside outside the city boundary. More than half of them are sub-tenants and practically all are children of corporation tenants. As matters stand it would seem that Dublin Corporation have no option but to remove their names from the waiting list. Dublin Corporation have treated tenants and their families living inside or outside the area in the same way. It would appear, however, that the effect of the decision in the Buncrana case would be to force Dublin Corporation to act differently. In effect, there would be two classes of citizens, one with rights superior to another, because of the unavailability of sufficient building land within the city boundary. This would be a serious injustice and for that reason I welcome the Bill before the House, the purpose of which is to amend the Housing Acts of 1966 to 1979 to enable the housing authority to have regard to persons residing outside the functional area of the authority in assessing the housing needs of their area, preparing a building programme and making a scheme of letting priorities.

Mr. Wyse

At the outset, I congratulate the Minister on his recent promotion to the Department of the Environment. It is somewhat a pity that the opportunity was not given to Members of the House to lend him their experience and tell him their views on many aspects of housing. For some reason it is difficult for any Member of the House to make a fair contribution towards the debate without being told that he or she is moving outside the various sections of the Bill. What we are really talking about here is local authorities housing people outside their own functional areas and the qualification of the applicants for free housing.

The Minister could look around the city of Dublin and see how the many derelict sites are being used by vandals, drug addicts and the like. We should be talking about in-fill housing in cities. The Minister must be given the views of the Members on this subject. Members of my own party discussed this at length and were hoping to have an opportunity at least to make reference to a number of matters causing difficulties for local authorities. These difficulties are not experienced by Cork Corporation and County Council, who have had an understanding down through the years. The two authorities work together and house people even though they are not living within their functional areas. People who have had to emigrate can make application to the local authorities in Cork and are given the same concession as those living within the functional area. I congratulate those two authorities for cooperating with one another in ensuring the provision of the best facilities for housing our people.

There is a category of people — the physically handicapped — who are not provided with housing by any local authority in their own functional area. Certain facilities must be provided for these people, otherwise they could be housed. They are people who because of their incapacity are deprived of housing, due to non-provision of the necessary facilities. I hope that the Minister might consider setting aside 1 per cent of all housing schemes specifically for the physically handicapped, these houses to be specially designed to meet their needs. This is a very important aspect which has not been raised by any local authority I know of, and these are people within the functional area.

Itinerants live in different functional areas, moving from place to place. Many are not itinerants at all, but travelling people who have homes in other parts of the country and who come to do a quick deal in trading, occupying what we now call derelect sites within the cities and towns. These sites should be used to house people living within the functional area for a number of years. I have no objection whatsoever to an itinerant family being housed — we can house and educate them and ensure that they become part of the community. However, we have the traders who are just moving from city to town and occupying——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I am sorry to have to interrupt the Deputy. We are dealing with problems under three specific sections of the Housing Bill and, while I am fully aware of the Deputy's concern regarding those whom he has mentioned, I would ask, if at all possible and for the benefit of all, that he confine himself to those three sections of the Bill and our efforts to resolve the difficulties connected with them.

Mr. Wyse

I accept that, I am glad you have given me the opportunity to at least make a case for those physically handicapped people who are not being catered for by housing authorities. I want to mention another thing, and if I am out of order I accept your ruling. There are families living in the functional area of one local authority and because they are living in unsuitable accommodation they move to another functional area. They may have lived in very poor housing conditions for two or three years and are considered eligible for rehousing by one local authority. However, when they move to another area they are told they must fill in a fresh application form and wait for another three or four years living in very poor housing conditions. Local authorities should accept that when people move from one area to another the date they made their original application for housing should be considered when they are being listed. Surely they should not lose their place in the queue because they had to move from one local authority area to another when they were living in such poor conditions.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That is all right because that is what the Bill is about.

Mr. Wyse

I have seen unfortunate families moving from a city into a county because they were living under appalling conditions, many of them rat-infested. They may have the opportunity to move into another functional area where some slightly better housing conditions are available to them. Unfortunately, they are then struck off the list by one authority and they are asked by the other authority to make a fresh application, which means enduring a further two or three years in poor housing conditions. Local authorities should be more progressive and work as one rather than two functional areas for the betterment of all the people. Under the Constitution we all have that right, irrespective of what area a person lives in. Managers can get together on many aspects of local authority administration. It is time they sat down and considered the whole aspect of housing for our people.

While the Minister was absent from the House I complimented him on his new appointment and wished him every success in his office. I assured him of our fullest co-operation in the onerous task he is talking on. I said I hoped that the Members of the House would extend to the Minister not only their compliments but their experience in the housing field in working with local authorities so that this will be a help to him in the near future when he brings in a more progressive Bill in relation to housing. We have to take the ruling of the Chair that we may be stepping outside the contents of the Bill in raising this matter. I hope I have made a case for the physically handicapped people and that local authorities will look at their case and at least provide that 1 per cent of every housing scheme will be specially designed to cater for the needs of such people.

Mr. Dowling

I would like to take this opportunity to extend my sincere congratulations to Deputy Kavanagh on his appointment to the portfolio of Environment. It is a very significant promotion for him and I am quite confident he is more than capable of discharging the onerous duties associated with his new position. It is an important Ministry and a lot of important things have to be done. I would also like to congratulate the Minister's assistant, Deputy Fergus O'Brien, and wish both of them every success in the Department of the Environment.

I, like many Members of the House, was very concerned at the ruling of the Supreme Court in relation to the housing of people outside the functional area. As a member of a local authority and associated with housing allocations for a number of years I was always very concerned at the manner in which people may or may not get a tenancy. I sometimes questioned why people could be brought from outside a functional area and be given a house before a person who had made application and was on a housing list in that particular authority.

I believe that the Bill before us is an exteremely important one. Every county manager and members of all local authorities were extremely conscious that something should be done very quickly to amend the law in relation to consideration of people in serious housing need who may reside outside the functional area. The Bill, therefore, is purely an enabling Bill. I am conscious of the ruling of the Chair this morning in relation to confining Members to the exact terms of the Bill. I believe if that policy were pursued in relation to a number of other Bills going through the House there would not be any great need to consider reform. I sometimes feel that debates in this House are an anachronism because people can range over wide areas which do not pertain at all to the Bill in question.

The Housing Bill, 1983, amends sections 53, 55 and 60 of the Housing Act, 1966, which was a very comprehensive Act but I do not think that an interpretation such as that in the judgment on the Buncrana Urban Council case was ever envisaged in that Act. Local authorities have acted with compassion in relation to housing needs whether within or outside their functional areas. A number of housing programmes are designed and the needs are assessed based on information that straddles local authority boundaries. It would be extremely difficult not to take account of people, particularly with the growth of suburbia. It would be impossible to arrive at a fair and accurate assessment of housing needs and then to allocate houses from that point of view unless this legislation is passed by this House.

The 1983 Bill will widen the powers of the housing authority to enable them to consider the prospective future demand from persons residing outside their functional area. This is very desirable, but I shall examine further the matter of statutory obligation. Section 55 of the Housing Act, 1966, imposes a statutory duty on every housing authority to prepare and adopt a building programme at least every five years or at shorter intervals if the Minister so directs. The housing authority must have regard to a number of given objectives. They must consider houses which are unfit for human habitation, and considerable progress has been made in that area in most urban centres, not before its time. One aim is the elimination of over-crowding. Reference has been made here this morning to consideration of housing the homeless and that is appropriate to the section in question. I do not wish to dwell on that. I do not want to detain the passage of this Bill for longer than necessary. The power to provide for the housing of people from outside the functional area is essential to county managers and I hope they will use it with discretion. People come into areas in caravans or are in other totally unfit housing situations when a housing scheme is about to be allocated and they make use of the situation that arises. The points system which is in operation in a number of authorities, particularly in the Dublin area, is highly commendable. The case brought against Buncrana Urban Council might never have arisen were it not for the fact that the person in question felt wronged. That person must have had a serious grievance. The case was brought to the High Court because of failure to get a housing tenancy to which the person was entitled and he must have felt so entitled.

Since the 1966 Act came into effect local authorities have been carrying out extensive housing developments in their areas and assessing housing needs, and all of us in this House who are local authority members are associated with this. There are severe constraints in relation to it. I do not wish to deviate from the Bill but I want to make a point which really comes into another section. I refer to the cost of the provision of local authority houses. It costs a local authority today almost £60 per week of taxpayers' money to provide a house in certain cases. I know, Sir, that you will attempt to rule me out of order if I mention——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I will do more than attempt.

Mr. Dowling

I accept your ruling. Housing need is considered in the light of what people can do for themselves. Therefore, facilities to enable people to cater for their own needs in this respect must be encouraged. I have section 55 of the Housing Act, 1966, in mind when I speak of housing needs and the assessment of them. The need would be far greater were it not for the availability of the Housing Finance Agency loan system. Irrespective of criticisms against that system at its initiation, it has brought home security to thousands of people who otherwise could never secure a home for themselves and would be putting further pressure on the local authorities to provide homes for them.

I want to talk about legal interpretation. I am sure that the rulings of the High Court and the Supreme Court were taken in accordance with the Act of 1966 as they interpreted it. We accept that it was necessary for them to give that ruling at the time. I do not know whether the person was housed subsequently. The effect of the judgment of the High Court and the Supreme Court has been to create difficulties. I assume that the difficulties which have been created will be overcome by the enactment of this legislation.

Mr. S. Walsh

I congratulate the Minister, Deputy Kavanagh, on his appointment to the Department of the Environment and wish him every success in that Department. I really welcome this Bill. The decision of the Supreme Court in the Buncrana case has affected every housing authority throughout the country. However, I would say that the two areas most affected by it were Dublin County Council and Dublin Corporation. The movement of people from city to county and from county to city seeking housing accommodation is considerable. Last June, Dublin County Council had an allocation for the Tallaght area of between 200 and 300 houses. A couple of weeks later the Circuit Court announced its decision and that decision would have affected between 12 and 20 housing applicants who were recommended for accommodation and some of those people were very worried about the court decision then. The policy pursued by the Dublin County Council housing authority was and still is that a person who is a native of the housing area, irrespective of what other housing area he moves to, will be considered for housing accommodation. On the other hand, if he is resident in the housing area for four years and has the necessary qualifications he will be considered for housing.

The people who were affected by the decision were living in the housing area and had sufficient points to be allocated accommodation. When the news broke these people were very disturbed and, regardless of their political affiliations, sought the help of every possible public representative. When one is in need of housing one enlists the help of members of any party. In this case those people were on the road day and night seeking the help of Members of this House or of Dublin County Council. At a meeting held subsequently, the public representatives for the area affected, including myself, requested the county manager to seek senior counsel opinion as to how the decision in the Buncrana case affected these applicants. I am happy to say that three or four weeks ago the advice received was that those people who had been recommended for housing would be housed when the accommodation became available.

I applaud the Minister for introducing this Bill. It puts beyond any doubt the eligibility for housing of those applicants who qualify under the terms of reference. Throughout the country in the past few years the numbers on the housing lists have increased greatly. All of us in public life would regret very much anything that would upset the system of the allocation of housing. It is good to know that housing authorities are anxious to help anybody in need of housing but it was regrettable that the court decision should have affected so many people.

There are many problems both for Dublin County Council and Dublin Corporation in regard to housing. The corporation are building a large number of houses in the county area. When I speak of housing accommodation I am speaking within the terms of reference. Some time ago Deputy O'Brien, who has been transferred now to the Department of the Environment was present here when the question of transfers was raised. I do not know if he is still a member of Dublin Corporation. I should like to refer to the problems that we as members of Dublin County Council have, particularly those who represent a constituency in which there is local authority housing by both the corporation and the county council. I refer to the situation in which people are allocated flats in the county area. There is no proper relationship or understanding between the two authorities in regard to transfers. This is an area I should like the Minister to consider. The only way in which a transfer can be sanctioned is by way of agreement on the part of the two authorities. I wish to put in on record that Dublin Corporation are rather difficult to deal with in these situations. This, too, is an aspect to which the Minister should give attention. I appeal to him to have the situation investigated with a view to bringing about more flexibility in this area. The problem is one that arises very often.

I shall not delay the House because there are many other Members who wish to contribute on this Bill but I am confident that the passage of the legislation will result in putting right the problems that arose from the court decision. The legislation will help me as a member of Dublin County Council in dealing with the many problems in regard to those applicants who had been recommended for housing.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

This Bill can be described briefly as a tidying up Bill but before dealing with it I should like to wish the Minister every success in his new Department. He will have in the Custom House the back-up and support of a group of people who are perhaps the most dedicated of all civil servants. The Minister may rely on the devotion and loyalty of the staff in that Department. They are extremely efficient and competent.

The Bill arises as a result of problems that ensued from the court proceedings. Regardless of whether a person is living outside a functional area or inside it, he is deserving of housing. I wish to pay tribute also to the county managers and the housing officers who have responsibility for the very difficult job of the allocation of housing. In both Counties Offaly and Laois, the county managers have been extremely sympathetic in their dealings with applicants, regardless of whether they are from urban or rural districts. The types of problems that have arisen in other areas have not been experienced in that constituency — problems, for instance, in relation to qualification or to the ability of an applicant to pay.

During the Cosgrave Government the then Minister for Local Government had frequent discussions with county managers in relation to all aspects of the Department but particularly in relation to housing. The Minister in his consultations with county managers should make a special case for people living in overcrowded conditions whether they are within the functional area or not. A special case should be made for couples who because of lack of proper housing accommodation must live apart. Such separations cause serious domestic problems. Those living in overcrowded conditions or who produce a medical certificate in support of their application should be given priority on the housing list. I accept that the allocations cannot be made unless the houses are built and in that regard I wish the Minister well in his effort to reach a target of 25,000 local authority houses per year. It is important he achieves that target to help younger people who are experiencing great difficulty in getting proper accommodation.

The points systems seems to work well in urban areas.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I appreciate the Deputy's concern about the points system and the problem of housing but he must remember that we are confined in the debate on the Bill which amount to a tidying up measure. I should be grateful if the Deputy would keep to the terms of the Bill.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

I accept the ruling of the Chair. I had not intended making a contribution but having read the terms of the Bill I decided to make a special plea to the Minister to ask county managers to give priority to separated couples. I hope all local authorities will make an effort to house such people so that families can live together. The Minister should see to it that the letting regulations permit county managers to do that.

I welcome the measure, which seeks to comply with the law. Regrettably I do not have an opportunity to deal fully with all housing problems but that will arise within the next few months. The terms of the Bill are desirable and it is important that the measure is given a speedy passage through the House. When it is passed applicants will know where they stand and county managers will be complying with the law. I should like to associate myself with the good wishes to the Minister. I hope he enjoys his term of office in the Custom House. I hope he will have a longer stay there than I had, but I should like to assure him that he will see a great standard of efficiency.

Mr. Barrett

(Dublin North-West): I should like to congratulate the new Minister on his appointment to the Department of the Environment. I am confident he will do a good job because in making representations to him in the Department of Labour I found him efficient and courteous. He responded to those representations promptly. Indeed, other members of the Cabinet could take a leaf from his book. I should like to convey my congratulations to the new Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Deputy Fergus O'Brien. I am glad that a Dublin Deputy has been appointed to that Department. Deputy O'Brien has experience from his work on the country's largest local authority, Dublin Corporation, of all local authority problems. The Bill is welcome in that it will enable local authorities accept applications from those who live in other local authority areas. We have all experienced great difficulty in this regard. Tenants seeking transfers for genuine reasons to another local authority area have experienced great difficulties. In some cases people are anxious to transfer to be close to their place of employment while old people seek a move to be nearer their relations. Old people have great difficulty in getting a transfer because of the lack of suitable accommodation for them.

I am aware of the problem in regard to finance in the Department and this has led to a shortage of proper accommodation. I should like to remind the Minister that in England local authorities purchase large houses and convert them to apartments suitable for old people or newly-married couples. The Minister should examine those schemes. Irish people who have worked for many years outside the State always have great difficulty in getting housing accommodation when they return home. I received a letter yesterday from an old couple who have lived for many years in England and are anxious to return to live in my constituency. Under the existing regulations they will have to live here for approximately three months before they will be considered. We should not subject such people to long delays or red tape. I would have had a similar problem when I returned home some years ago had I been looking for local authority accommodation. Had I applied I have no doubt I would not have been considered. A provision in regard to that should be included in the Bill. Like Deputy Molloy, I am also concerned about unmarried mothers who have difficulty in getting a transfer.

I am concerned about the number of people who illegally occupy local authority houses. Such people squat in an effort to be placed high on the housing list. Local authorities have to resort to the courts to have such people removed. That is a long drawn out procedure but at the end of the day squatters are always placed high on the priority list. That is unfair to the other people on the housing list. I have no doubt that many Dublin Corporation houses are occupied by squatters and I hope the Minister will deal with this problem.

Mr. Durkan

I should like to congratulate the Minister on his appointment to the Department of the Environment. I have no doubt the Minister will find it very rewarding although he will have to cope with financial stringencies. I welcome the measure before the House which seeks to remove a difficulty that arose following a court decision. When the Minister is putting the legislation into effect by order he should see to it that its interpretation by officialdom is not extreme or contrary to the spirit of it. I should like to give a quick example of that. In my constituency in County Kildare we have approximately 2,500 people on the housing lists. Geographically it is a rather spread-out area. This means that, in a large housing authority area, a situation could arise in which a person, say, 50, 60 or 70 miles away could put an individual, or group of individuals, under pressure in a local authority housing allocation if officialdom were to interpret the regulations exactly as they appear to be set out. This arose previously. Simply it means this: there could be the case of a husband, wife and perhaps four children at one extreme end of a local authority housing area eligible in every sense of the word for re-housing at any given time. But they could easily be placed further down that list by somebody appealing from 50, 60 or 70 miles away on the same list at the same time, placing the former in jeopardy. This can create considerable disharmony within local communities by virtue of the fact that the local people in the area in which the local authority houses were being allocated would see themselves being upstaged by somebody whom they would describe as an outsider. I know it would not be intentional or anything like that, but it should be pointed out——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I presume it is not the Deputy's intention to go outside the ambit of the Bill either. We are dealing with three sections of this Housing Bill. The Deputy is discussing a question within a functional area that has no bearing on the three sections we are discussing.

Mr. Durkan

I beg your pardon, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I would suggest that it does. It is purely in relation to how the directions relating to the Bill, when passed, will be operated by officialdom. It is for that reason I mention that prior to the introduction of this Bill a difficulty had arisen.

In interpreting the regulations the officials concerned would be able to use their discretion rather than operate as per the written word, as it were. I would contend that that comes within the ambit of the matter under discussion and would have serious consequences in constituencies with large geographical spreads.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I should like to remind the Deputy that the purpose of this Bill is to enable a housing authority, at their discretion in assessing housing needs, to take account of persons resident outside their functional area and to build for and let houses to such persons. Those are the bones of the provisions of the Bill so if the Deputy would keep within them I would be grateful.

Mr. Durkan

I should have explained that, in my constituency, there are three housing authorities; there is the local authority, which is the county council, the urban council with two other areas as well. That is the point I was endeavouring to illustrate.

Until this Bill was introduced, and having regard to a decision taken in the courts, a situation could arise in which a person in one area would not qualify for housing in another. The point I was endeavouring to make was that, as a result of this Bill, I should not like to see the complete reverse arise whereby an individual who would be eligible for rehousing in one section of a county could be completely rubbed off the list, as it were, by virtue of the strict interpretation of the provisions of the Bill by somebody perhaps 60 or 70 miles away. It is very important, and I have had numerous experiences in the past where a person would be beyond an administrative boundary by perhaps two or three hundred yards and would not be considered eligible because they were deemed to be outside the functional area of that particular housing authority. Previously the administrators had powers to interpret the regulations favourably in such cases; in all cases they did not, in some they did. But, by virtue of a court decision, it was imperative that this Bill be introduced to ensure that each and every individual had their constitutional rights adhered to in the consideration of the allocation of local authority houses.

I welcome the Bill. As somebody said earlier, I hope that, regardless of where we house our people, there will be sufficient houses for them which is the most important aspect at the end of the day.

Mr. Wallace

I should like to avail of this opportunity to congratulate the Minister on his appointment and wish him every success in his new portfolio which I believe to be one of the most important within government. It stretches right across the community and I wish the Minister every success in his difficult task ahead.

It was a pity that the Supreme Court had to become involved in this social area in which, in my experience, local authorities had been doing a good job in very difficult circumstances. Their main problem always is that they have more applicants for houses than they have houses, which causes immediate problems for them.

I welcome the Bill but I am somewhat concerned that we are not endeavouring to realise fully the responsibility we are placing on local authorities. There have been many new problems created for local authorities which are wide-ranging, such as people returning home from England, emigrants returning from various parts to an area in which there is considerable development. Straight away any potential oil find off the south-west coast could draw an influx of outside people seeking housing, in which area there may have been people awaiting housing three or four years who would then find themselves waiting another two or three years, that just because of a sudden influx of, let us say, outside people because of the attraction of that local authority area. We must be careful and ensure that we spell out exactly what the provisions of this Bill mean. It is easy for the courts to determine the Buncrana case and maintain that a local authority was wrong in giving a house to an outsider but I consider that the local authority were right in their decision. It is easy for the courts to take a straightforward line in making a decision but, in taking such a decision, the local authority had to take into consideration many other factors.

Is there any point in passing on responsibility to local authorities under the provisions of this Bill without taking into consideration the resultant problems? As has been said already, we have insufficient houses for the needs of our people, this being the main point of my argument. At present in Cork there are approximately 1,500 applicants for housing, which has been the trend there in recent years. With the implementation of these provisions I can see that trend increasing. Unless we examine other aspects such as the provision of additional finance to allow local authorities tackle this problem in the way they see best, the Cork housing lists anyway will only increase.

It must be remembered that today new problems have arisen with marital breakdown, separated parents, some with families divided between them, single parent families, young people not remaining at home, who have left home, are sleeping rough, who could be described as homeless. What will be the interpretation of such cases by local authorities under these provisions? The Minister, in the course of his remarks, referred to homeless people and said he would be elaborating on them later. Passing this Bill may be unfairly putting the onus on local authorities. We are not identifying nearly all of the problems, and certainly not new ones that will be created for them by the passage of this Bill. We have not gone into the whole issue in a proper or thorough fashion. We are not being fair to local authorities in identifying the problems that will be created for them by these provisions.

Perhaps an important factor which should be borne in mind and which might help local authorities in this area would be an examination of the system of loans. It must be remembered that there are now people coming on to the housing lists because any loans available to them are totally inadequate. The problem becomes more severe with more and more people coming on housing lists and local authorities being unable to cater for new people coming into areas. The Minister should look quickly at the overall financial position of local authorities visá-vis housing. I realise that money is needed for other matters but more seriour consideration should be given to housing. Otherwise we will be passing legislation to create bigger problems than those already there.

Mr. E. O'Keeffe

I will not delay the House because I understand the urgency of the matter and delaying the Bill might deprive people of housing. I welcome the Bill and congratulate the Minister on his appointment. I wish him well in that efficient Department from whose officials I have always got the best help and advice possible in regard to local authority matters.

I should like to deal especially with the problem of the homeless. We should stop the buck being passed from health boards to county councils in this regard because somebody must be made responsible and the loophole must be closed.

The Bill is necessary particularly in relation to Fermoy, which has urban and rural houses. Recently we had 200 applicants for houses some of whom were rural and some urban. There were 90 applicants for rural houses and the situation seemed insoluble until the county manager found a way around it. Applications are being examined and assessments being made and I hope there will be a solution. It was decided to have 24 rural houses and a fixed number of applicants.

I should like to see the necessary funds being made available to build houses in that general area, going as far as Mallow, for special category people, childless couples, for instance, who have always been neglected by local authorities. Many such couples have worked hard all their lives but had not the necessary money to build their own homes or the necessary security to borrow from local authorities or building societies. I hope this problem will be sorted out without delay.

Local authorities have been rather slow in regard to rural housing. Their planners are inclined to set up large growth centres and neglect rural areas——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We are dealing with three sections of the Housing Act only and the Deputy is departing from these. He is beginning to wander further afield now. Rather than dealing with rural housing I should be obliged if you would return to the three sections concerned. This is an urgent Bill and you should confine yourself to the three sections.

Mr. E. O'Keeffe

There are many derelict sites throughout the country that could be developed so that people in town centres could be housed. Returned emigrants and single parents should be catered for and I hope that will be looked at. Many people come back after years in the UK and they need rehousing. I should like to see the system of assessment changed. I regret the system has not been standardised in relation to both urban and rural areas. Politicians promised people houses ——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

You made a promise that you would confine yourself to the Bill.

Mr. E. O'Keeffe

We should give more grant aid to people who could build their own houses. As I said, I welcome the Bill and I hope it will serve to house the many people who need housing.

Mr. Lyons

Ar dtús, ba mhaith liom comhgháirdeas a dhéanamh leis an Aire nua. Os rud é go bhfuil Aire nua ann, tá súil agam go dtiocfaidh feabhas sa Roinn as seo amach, ní hé amháin sa rud atá dá phlé againn anois, títhe, ach ar chuile rud a bhaineann leis an Roinn. Tá a fhios againn go léir go raibh moill ar obair na Roinne ar feadh na bliana seo caite agus tá súil agam go mbeidh an feabhas atá ag teastáil uainn agus ón tír ar fad ag teacht go luath.

In dealing with the Housing Bill, I consider the Title, the Housing Bill, 1983, to be unreal because the debate is confined. If the Title was correct we could not debate it in two hours. It was decided this morning by order of the House that we are expected to make our contributions to this important Bill in a few hours. We cannot indicate where we are and where we have been in regard to housing in that short time. I appreciate that the Bill arose from a Supreme Court decision. It is a pity our discussion is being limited in this way. Why are we being so limited? Is it simply to get this measure through because it is necessary?

I agree it is necessary because the Buncrana decision affected every local authority. I represent a constituency that has two local authorities, and the Buncrana decision has seriously affected local authorities within local authorities, urban areas within county council areas. I do not want to be parochial, because the Bill deals with the entire country, but I must talk about my own constituency in Cork North-Central where threequarters of the constituency is in the county borough of Cork and a quarter in the county. I am aware of the need for the Bill but I regret that we are being precluded from discussing the housing situation throughout the country. We are confined to three sections of a Bill to correct something that needed correcting. I hope the Minister will take into account the fact that this Bill deals with the functional area of each local authority. That is the phrase used. There is no reference in this Bill to what is known as joint enterprise between two local authorities and joint enterprise is something which should be considered.

There is an aspect I must mention even at the risk of being called to order. I know someone this morning talked about trees and of course trees are not relevant to this measure. The fact is temporary accommodation is not available. Young married people are not in an economic situation in which they can buy houses. Taxation is hitting them and in the future there will be even fewer in a position to buy their own homes. It then falls on the local authority to house these people. We are behind in the provision of housing. Demand far exceeds supply. In the current budget we had no less than £220 million taken out of the capital programme. That certainly affected the building of houses.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Perhaps the Deputy now would confine himself to the Bill.

Mr. Lyons

When people fail to get accommodation from one local authority they move into an adjacent local authority area. A Housing Bill should deal with capital programmes and the number of houses that should be built, but here we are precluded from talking about the most important aspects of housing. If people living in Cork city cannot get houses they move into Cork county. Houses are not being built because the money to build them is not being provided. Why are we confined now to one small issue when we should be talking about the general housing situation? To call this a Housing Bill is hypocrisy. More money should be provided for housing.

Again, local authorities are running out of sites. Cork Corporation are now moving out into the county in a search for building land.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

There will be two days for a debate on Estimates, and housing generally can be debated on that. I would be grateful if you would now confine yourself to the Bill. The Deputy is well aware of the importance of passing this Bill.

Mr. Lyons

We are all in agreement with the Bill which is designed to correct an anomaly. I understand that and I am not trying to obstruct the passage of the Bill. But there is a problem inherent in local authority housing, a problem which is giving quite a number of people a bad headache. As I said, Cork Corporation are moving out into the county in a search for building land but there is no reference in this Bill to joint enterprise. There should be no impediment to joint enterprise between local authorities and between local authorities and private enterprise. There is no reference to that in this Bill. The position should be safeguarded.

Mr. Carey

I would like to be associated with the expression of congratulation to the new Minister for the Environment. In particular, I compliment his predecessor for the speed with which he took this matter up. The difficulties highlighted have been experienced in Clare and, more particularly, in the town of Ennis where 77 houses are awaiting occupation. I thank the Minister for the expedition with which he has introduced this Bill and I wish his successor well in his appointment.

Mr. Kirk

I also take this opportunity to wish the Minister well in his new appointment. I also welcome the Bill. The decision of the court created many difficulties in constituencies. Problems in regard to the rehousing of applicants have been acute in County Louth, particularly in Dundalk and Drogheda, to which people have gravitated in search of jobs. Consequently, rehousing needs will follow shortly afterwards. The passage of this Bill will help to restore flexibility in the consideration of rehousing applications by various authorities. We have been particularly fortunate in that Dundalk UDC have had a far-sighted policy of buying sufficient land well in advance of need. The town of Drogheda has been in much the same situation. Unfortunately, employment opportunities are not sufficient to facilitate the growing population but job opportunities have been well checked and projected and documented.

In the development of the nation people tend to gravitate towards the eastern seaboard, towards, Dublin, Dundalk, Drogheda and Belfast. Centres such as Dundalk and Drogheda have attracted people from Cavan, Monaghan and the midlands. Persons with a capacity for hard work and honest endeavour have considerably enriched these centres of population. They acquire employment and, in due course, settle down and set up home in their new area of residence. Over the last 15 years or so there has been a considerable influx from Northern Ireland to places like Dundalk and Drogheda. Inevitably this has created its own problems in connection with the already overcrowded rehousing list. I suppose "the troubles"— an all-embracing phrase in the context of Northern Ireland — have seen people discommoded in the Six Counties and forced to seek accommodation in Border towns like Dundalk, Castleblayney and Drogheda, which is not very far removed from the Border. All the factors I have outlined, taken in conjunction with the natural growth in population as a result of the industrial development of the sixties, has meant that Dundalk and Drogheda have become major centres to which people of diversified environments come. It takes time for people to settle down. Commentators and politicians have tended to select towns like Dundalk and Drogheda for adverse comment. I say that in the context of the movement of people towards these areas from the North. This adverse comment has had a damaging effect on the investment prospects of the area. Certainly, industrial growth has been damaged as a result.

I am sorry if I have slightly digressed from the line we have been on in the debate so far, but I did think it necessary to highlight the particular problems that exist as a result of the movement of population from the midlands and across the Border because of the troubles in the North.

I would also say in passing that the urban council in Dundalk and the corporation of Drogheda have done commendable work down the year in rehousing persons. Louth County Council has not been so successful in the provision of much-needed new houses. I would hope that when the new Minister settles into his Department he will review the amount being provided for new housing schemes, the purchase of land and the various infrastructural developments, such as the provision of water and sewage to facilitate the development of housing and that he will provide sufficient money to allow local authorities to get on with the job. Certainly, money is required for the purchase of land, which is the first essential before any housing programme can be undertaken by any local authority.

Perhaps in the context of this Bill we might consider for a moment the rehousing policies of local authorities and their role as agents for the Department of the Environment. This is an appropriate time to ask is there sufficient coordination between local authorities on the one hand and between the Industrial Development Authority, the Department of Education and other State agencies concerned with the provision of infrastructure.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We will have to try to get back to the Bill and away from the Department of Education, with the Deputy's co-operation.

Mr. Kirk

My co-operation will be forthcoming and I just mention that in passing.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy has dwelt on that matter for a long time.

Mr. Kirk

For one reason, that I do think the time has arrived when there must be a co-ordinated and integrated approach by the Department of the Environment and the local authorities, the local authorities working in conjunction with one another. In a situation where urban district councils and county councils such as in Louth, a relatively small county, where people tend to gravitate towards the centres of population for their job opportunities, it is absolutely essential to have co-ordination and co-operation between authorities. We were certainly in a very anomalous situation as a result of the court case in that persons in the county area were precluded from consideration by Dundalk UDC and the Corporation of Drogheda. Hopefully, with the passage of the Bill that situation will be rectified. It is a situation that has existed for a relatively short time but the rehousing prospects of quite a few applicants throughout the country have been blighted by that decision. It might be a case of democracy in action. Any person is entitled to take his case to court if he feels he has been ill done by by the local authority or the State. The difficulties that decisions like this can create for many people have been highlighted. I hope that when the Bill has been enacted all will be well again and that a sense of flexibility between the functional areas of various authorities will be restored.

There are many other things that I would wish to say in regard to rehousing needs but I know that the Chair has not been too happy about the line some previous speakers have taken. However, it is obvious that it is very difficult to have a debate on a housing Bill confined to the very narrow range to which the Ceann Comhairle and the Leas-Cheann Comhairle have been trying to confine this debate.

Having regard to the close relationship that should obtain between various local authorities, it is difficult to continue a debate on this Bill for three hours if we are restricted to the very narrow subject of the legislation that must be enacted as a result of the case of McNamee v. Buncrana UDC in June last. That case has highlighted the changes that the passage of time has brought in rehousing needs in the country generally. We have come a long way from the time when we were a rural-based area. We have come to the stage where there are large centres of population.

I move the adjournment of the debate.

Mr. Molloy

I wish to give notice that I propose to raise with the Committee on Procedure and Privileges a ruling of the Ceann Comhairle in seeking to restrict discussion in this debate to matters contained in the Bill solely. We dispute that ruling and will pursue it through proper channels.

Debate adjourned.

Business suspended at 1.30 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.

Dáil Éireann debate - Wednesday, 14 Dec 1983

Housing Bill, 1983: Second Stage.

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 14 Dec 1983