Deputy Tunney has been given permission to raise on the Adjournment the failure of Dublin Corporation to provide public lighting in relation to attacks being made on old people in the Dublin area.
Adjournment Debate. - Dublin Public Lighting.
A Cheann Comhairle, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to raise this matter on the Adjournment. I will not take the 20 minutes to which I am entitled. I do not want to be emotive about this but there are areas in Dublin city — I cannot speak for the Minister's constituency — which are without public lighting. I made representations to the corporation alerting them to the facts.
One does not need to have any great imagination in the times in which we are living to realise the consequences of not having public lighting. I have to say this in his absence but I would also say it in his presence, that the engineer in charge of public lighting is one of the most outstanding officials of Dublin Corporation. Everybody who has had any dealings with him over the years knows that he is always patient and considerate. He has gone out of his way to ensure that this service is provided. He wrote to me very bluntly saying that he has no money to provide this service. I have copies of two letters referring to Poppintree in Ballymun and another area in south Finglas.
Those areas are no different from any other place. The people who live there are normal, law abiding people. They are entitled to the protection which is afforded in any urban area of public lighting. We all know about the spate of attacks on people. There is an increase in rapes and robberies. People are being exhorted to live in villages. I heard people saying on the radio in the past couple of days that the problems of old people throughout the country could be solved if they all lived together in villages. I presume it is envisaged that they would have the benefit of that great invention which turns darkness into light and the protection of public lighting.
It is very annoying and frustrating that I or any public representative should have to come in here and take up the time of this House with a matter like this which should be dealt with as a matter of form. It is amazing that, in the times in which we live, the engineer charged with the provision of this vital service has to admit to a public representative that he has run out of money. The staff and the machinery are constant factors. It must be that he has not got the price of bulbs to provide public lighting. Because of a lack of imagination on the part of people who design housing schemes, young people can remove covers fitted to the bottom of standard lamps and put the service out of action.
Vandalism is a feature of present day living and in all areas there is a need for certain replacements. He has admitted that he is not in a position to provide this service. Without dwelling on the dangers for people living in the area, young and old, but treating the matter from an economic point of view, suppose some people suffer personal injuries, they will be sent to hospital; there will be a court case; money will be spent; there will be claims for malicious damages. Even from the economic point of view, the best value for money would be to provide the engineer with whatever bulbs he wants or whatever equipment is necessary to provide public lighting in Barnamore in south Finglas and in Poppintree in Ballymun. At one time it would not be tolerated that people should attack and rob others. Freedom was respected. Now apparently tyranny is the norm. The need for public lighting was always accepted as a sine qua non of modern living. Now at the height of all our problems and frustrations, people living in the city of Dublin must go without the vital service of public lighting.
I know the Minister of State. He and I have the pleasure and honour of serving on Dublin Corporation. He will not give me any bureaucratic spoof in his reply. The facts are as I have given them to him. I have the letters from the corporation confirming that there is no money to provide public lighting in these two areas. I am not saying it was not provided initially, but it is not there now. It has always been accepted that public lighting must be provided and maintained. Mr. Pickett has been efficient and sympathetic in every case about which I or any other public representative made representations to him.
I do not intend to stretch this point any further. I will not go on to give a litany of the other areas in which the Government have failed. I will forego whatever warped enjoyment I might get out of doing that. I am concerned about the people living in these areas. I am sure there are other areas in which public representatives got the same reply. I am asking the Minister to provide money for this service. Dublin Corporation should be told tomorrow that money is available for this vital service and that it will not be a case of locking the door when the horse has gone, that it will not be a case of the usual pious platitudes we hear, it will not be a case of our delaying action here.
I would not wish that anything might happen that might bear out my fears; everybody knows they are ever present. Everybody knows that there are many people nowadays, some of their nature, some claiming that they are driven to it, who move into that which is not their own, to devastate society as we know it. These are people who follow a certain selfishness helping them to have that which does not belong to them. They contend that that motivation is heightened when they have the feeling that they will escape being identified or being brought to justice.
I look forward to hearing the Minister and to his being as brief as I have been in reducing the time allowed me by half. I hope he will give the House good news, not just for my constituency, but for all the constituencies in Dublin, that whatever else they may be without between now and Christmas, they will not be without public lighting.
I must say how much I deplore the attacks on elderly people in their homes and I wish the Garda every success in bringing those guilty to justice. I think the Deputy implied in some way that such attacks in Dublin city were due to the absence of public lighting. I am afraid I would have to express doubts as to the weight of that argument.
As the Deputy knows, the provision of public lighting is essentially a matter for Dublin Corporation. As Minister of State in the Department of the Environment I am involved only where the corporation propose either installing or improving public lighting on traffic routes with the aid of the usual Exchequer road grants. In such cases the role of my Department is related to the general standard of lighting proposed, its suitability to a particular location and its acceptability as a charge on road grants. All other matters in regard to public lighting fall within the discretion of Dublin Corporation.
Traffic route lighting provides a very high level of illumination, as we see as we drive. Its function is the safety and convenience of traffic at night and is recognised as conferring a measure of benefit in terms of accident reduction because 30 per cent to 50 per cent of night-time accidents are reduced as compared with the unlighted situation. That will give the House an indication of what good lighting does.
A change from amenity type lighting to traffic route lighting also produces benefits, again in relation to road safety. The amenity type public lighting which is provided on a wide scale on roads, other than our major roads in cities and towns and also through some villages and isolated clusters of houses, provides a lower standard of illumination. Its value in terms of accident prevention is difficult to assess. Its principal function is to assist pedestrian traffic at night and to provide a sense of security.
Public lighting in Dublin is regarded as being of a reasonable standard. Nobody can doubt that. Public lighting in Dublin is not bad. I will not say that it is not without fault or that some areas may not have it but, overall, when one travels throughout the city, it will be seen that there is a good degree of lighting in Dublin. In the Dublin area we know that some of the thieves and muggers deliberately knock out public lighting in order to facilitate their unlawful activities. All due credit to Dublin Corporation and their engineering staff in that for some time now, and with considerable success, they have selected vandal-resistant lanterns and other specialist items to counteract such actions. Like all of these things, they are not completely vandalproof but they have brought about significant improvement in that area.
In the present year Dublin Corporation will have provided £75,000 for the improvement of public lighting. I intend to examine this figure further. A figure of £4,500,000 is provided for maintanence and repair, in which there is included a figure of £1.3 million for electricity. Therefore, one is talking about £4.2 million for the maintenance and repair of public lighting. If Mr. Pickett, or whoever is the relevant engineer, writes and says their money is not being provided I would have to contend that that constitutes a considerable sum of money being expended by an local authority on pure maintenance and repair. Indeed, its size has surprised me. I should say that earlier I had asked my officials to examine that figure, to examine the whole aspect because I am not satisfied we are receiving that kind of value. I want to establish why that sum of money or a large amount of it cannot be expended on improvements rather than maintenance. However, that is for another day. But one can say that that constitutes a reasonable sum for the maintenance of public lighting.
They are all the waters that have gone past. Lighting cannot be provided now unless they are given some money.
I am talking about £4 million in this year.
The Minister of State is giving a great lecture on the virtues of public lighting. That is the reason it is missed when it is non-existent.
The Deputy made the case that there was no money, contending that some official had so written to him. I will be taking up that matter with Dublin Corporation on the basis of the information I have here. But the amount of money provided represents a substantial figure. My argument is that I do not believe we are getting value for the kind of money at present being expended. That is why I intend taking up this matter with Dublin Corporation because I am not satisfied that with the kind of money level being expended on maintenance we are getting value. I am not happy with the position and I intend to pursue it fully. Indeed, I thank the Deputy for having raised this matter this evening on that basis alone.
I should say also that there has been no cutback on the number or standard of public lighting, nor has there been any reduction in the period of lighting. In other words, there has been no cutback on standard or in the period of lighting time. It is important to make that point. I am informed also that every effort is made to effect repairs with the greatest possible speed particularly where the needs are greatest and special attention is given to calls or complaints from the elderly or from other problem areas.
While I am glad the question was raised, the fact that some official might contend that money is not being made available I would have to argue is wrong. As the Deputy is aware, in most of the areas about which he would be speaking other than the main traffic routes, which are the responsibility of my Department, we shall investigate and if we receive a particular request, we will make money available. They get their block grants and make decisions at estimate time as to how to spend that money. The Deputy is aware of this since we were both members of the same local authority.
This is a matter for the local authority. I intend to take up the matter with them on the basis of the kind of money they spend on maintenance to see if we are getting value. If additional moneys are there it is a matter for the local authority to decide how to dispose of them.
The Minister is being unkind. I quoted the engineer in charge who, as the Minister knows, is a very responsible and reliable man. He has indicated that he has no money. The Minister will accept that what he gave us here is typical of Departments and bureaucracies who turn inadequacies into virtues. There is no public lighting in my constituency.
It is not a typical Departmental reply. It is a statement of fact. It is a statement that this amount of money is being expended in a particular area. Having looked at the figures I am not satisfied that we are getting value and I intend to investigate it. That is not to impugn anybody's character.
The Dáil adjourned at 11.25 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday 12 December 1984.