Is there to be no Member from the Government side present?
Private Members' Business. - County Roads: Motion (Resumed).
The following motion was moved by Deputy O'Rourke on Tuesday, 21 May 1985:
"That Dáil Éireann calls on the Government to fund a special programme for the maintenance and improvement of the county road system."
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann" and substitute the following:
"welcomes the commitment of the Government to roads as demonstrated by the publication of the new Road Plan which contains a realistic development programme, the provision of substantially increased State funding and the announcement of the first ever medium term financial commitment for improvement and maintenance covering the period 1985 to 1987".
—(Minister for the Environment.)
Mr. Cowen
The Chair has no input into that but would point out that we are beginning just on time.
Mr. Cowen
In the short time available to me I wish to add my support to the motion tabled by my party concerning the state of the county roads. First, I should like to quote from that infamous document, Environment: Achievements Since December, 1982 which was published recently by the Minister. This is a document which is long on statement and on intent rather than on achievement. The only achievement it seems to point to in relation to road development concerns the new plan put forward by the Government entitled, Policy and Planning Framework for Roads. I quote from page 26 of the plan which outlines road development policy briefly as follows:
— the provision of an adequate inter-urban system for the major towns, ports and airports;
— the elimination of traffic bottlenecks by the provision of by-passes for towns on national routes;
— the reduction of urban congestion by providing new bridges, ring roads and relief roads;
— the preservation, through proper maintenance, of existing and planned road investment; and
— the improvement of road safety.
It will be noted that there is no commitment there in relation to the vast majority of roads, which unfortunately are not regarded as national primary or national secondary roads. In particular I would draw to the attention of the Minister of State who is present that this plan which is deemed to be such a major achievement for the Government has little or no significance for the area I represent. I shall outline why it is irrelevant to my area.
In County Offaly the mileage of national roads is 11½. In 1984 the allocation was £145,000 or approximately £13,500 per mile. There are 77½ miles of national secondary roads in County Offaly and the allocation in 1984 was £1,280,000 or approximately £16,000 to £17,000 per mile. On the other hand there are more than 1,150 miles of county and other main roads in the county which are not designated as national secondary routes. The total allocation in that respect is a mere £563,417 or an investment of about £480 per mile. That is in stark contrast to the allocation for the national primary and secondary routes. Put simply, 84 per cent of the total road network in County Offaly attracts 34 per cent of the total funding for road development while only 16 per cent of the total road network attracts 66 per cent of the total funding from the State.
It is my contention that the basic flaw in all this relates to the fact that there are no Stage grants being made available for county roads maintenance. I ask the Government to support our motion on the basis that some of the most vociferous complainers in relation to the deterioration of our county roads are members of the Government parties at council level. As a result of the under-financing of the county roads system in Offaly, there is not even proper road maintenance. Many of these roads have bog foundations and require the application of significant amounts in terms of maintenance. The roads are surface dressed and figures I have obtained from Offaly County Council show that in 1982, 62½ miles of county roads, roads other than national primary or secondary roads, were surface dressed in the four engineering areas. The corresponding figures were 62 miles in 1983 and a mere 28 miles in 1984.
A member of Offaly County Council on the Fianna Fáil side and who is involved in employment with the county council informs us that the situation in the Birr engineering area for this year is that a mere three miles of the 150 miles of county roads will be surface dressed. That means that there is a cycle of the county roads there being surface dressed once in 50 years and we all know that if a road is left without surface dressing for that length of time it is likely to have gone out of existence. The under-financing by the Government of the county road network has brought about this catastrophic situation. There is no point in speaking here in broad terms about the major investment that is to be made in roads if the taxpayer is in the position where he has great difficulty in travelling to work because of the condition of the roads. It is accepted by all the officials in Offaly County Council that the county roads in Offaly are in a dangerous state and will require a trebling of the present investment if they are to be maintained simply as county roads. We are not talking about improving them but simply about maintaining them in their present state.
Since the Government came to power the amount of money spent on county roads in Offaly in each of the four engineering areas has decreased in terms of the percentage of the total expenditure on all roads. In the Birr engineering area in 1982, the expenditure was 7 per cent and this decreased in 1984 to 4.8 per cent. In the Ferbane engineering area the expenditure was almost 6 per cent of the total expenditure and that figure decreased to 4.4 per cent in 1984. The figure in respect of the Tullamore engineering area for 1982 was 6.85 per cent of the total expenditure on the roads in the county and in 1984 the figure was 4.4 per cent. Likewise, in the Edenderry engineering area in 1982 the expenditure was 8.5 per cent approximately of the total and in 1984 that was reduced to 6.6 per cent. Those statistics show clearly that the amounts of money being allocated to county roads is decreasing. It is crazy that, while councillors in Offaly, have total discretion as to the expenditure of the total amount of money they are allocated, the only discretion they have in relation to how the money is spent, amounts to just 4 per cent of the total budget of Offaly County Council. Grants are coming from central Government but we have sent requests to the Department asking that small amounts of that money that are going towards the maintenance of national primary and secondary roads be allocated for maintenance of county roads. We, as councillors are not being given the power to decide where the money is to be spent. It is farcical to talk about local authority reform if central Government are not prepared to give to councillors some say in how the money is to be spent, particularly in relation to the road network system.
It seems that central Government lacks the confidence in local democracy to allow councils decide where the money is best spent. On behalf of the Fianna Fáil councillors in Offaly, I assure the Minister that the public money being spent on the road network system would be spent much better if we had discretion as to where it should be spent. The vast majority of Fine Gael and Labour councillors would support this motion. I am appealing to the Minister to be constructive in his approach to the motion and to give some assurance to the House that the people of Offaly and of the other areas represented here will be given the sort of funding they require.
It is quite clear from the debate that has taken place on this motion last night and tonight that Fianna Fáil have no firm idea as to what their policy priorities for road development should be. Some of the Opposition speakers were supportive of the major road improvement programme set out in our new road plan and wanted that fully implemented in addition to their so-called special programme for county roads. Other Opposition speakers took a different view. Deputy Byrne accused us, in our national road programme, of building speed tracks to impress officials from Brussels and suggested that we divert money away from the major road programme. It is clear that Fianna Fáil, divided as they are, have not got their act together on this issue. At least this Government have a clear policy on road development and have had the honesty and integrity to spell it out in the new road plan published last January.
Frankly, the Fianna Fáil contribution to the debate so far has been very poor and has generally been inadequately researched. Some of the contributions, notably those of Deputies Byrne and Calleary, have been more entertaining than illuminating. However, I have managed to distil a few minor points from the mass of words spoken and I now propose to answer some of them.
It is about time.
We will answer them, have no doubt about that.
It seems to be the form of all Ministers to stand up and berate the Opposition.
I will see to it that every speaker gets a hearing tonight.
Various Opposition Deputies made the point that our road policy reflects a bias against rural Ireland. Deputy Byrne made the accusation that we were treating the people of rural Ireland as second class citizens. I want to reject those suggestions with all the force at my command. Our road policy is not anti-rural. Our road policy is very carefully constructed to ensure the balanced economic and social development of all the country not for narrow sections of it. To suggest that a major road improvement programme which gives priority to the national routes is anti-rural is nothing short of rubbish and dishonesty. If we are to promote industrial development outside the major centres of population, if we are to provide farmers with access to their most important markets or points of export, if we are to provide tourist access from our ports and airports to our main scenic attractions, we must have an adequate national network.
Quite clearly Fianna Fáil have been deaf to the calls of bodies like the Confederation of Irish Industry, the Construction Industry Federation and the road haulier interests for an adequate national road system. Neither can they be aware of the views of the CII on our new road plan. Let me quote briefly from their newsletter of 19 March 1985, Volume 42, Number 20:
The Confederation welcomes the Government policy decision stated in the new Road Plan "Policy and Planning Framework for Roads" to accord a higher national priority to the development of the road network, particularly the national routes, in recognition of their importance to the economic and social development of the country. The moneys being invested in these routes are of direct benefit to the entire national community, not just particular localities or regions.
However, our policy is not only concentrated on national roads. We are also providing funding for regional roads and for the improvement of county roads, including a special 75 per cent for county road bridges which we recognise as important to the preservation of the road network. In 1985 the block grant, which includes provision for county road improvement at the discretion of the local authority, was increased by 10 per cent.
The impression has been created that virtually nothing is being spent on county roads. The facts are that in 1983 the last year for which we have full returns £46 million was spent on county roads. In that year, the first year in office of the present Government, we provided more money for county roads as a percentage of total funds than Fianna Fáil did while in office. State grants accounted for 8.6 per cent of expenditure on county roads in 1983, while the average for the previous five years during most of which Fianna Fáil were in office was 6.5 per cent. The facts speak for themselves and reveal this motion for what it is — a crude election time tactic and gimmick.
The suggestion by Deputy Nolan that works on county roads could be regarded as productive investment to be financed by foreign borrowing, as recommended by the National Planning Board, is another example of the confused thinking of Fianna Fáil and I certainly hope it does not reflect their understanding of economic issues. County road improvements would not qualify under the investment criteria set out in the planning board report. Because of their low traffic volumes, expenditure on county roads would not be justified in cost benefit terms alone, Clearly, the planning board recommendation applied to national roads and to the type of major improvement projects listed in our plan which provide an economic return on investment.
It does not state that.
It does. Last night, Fianna Fáil seemed to adopt a cavalier attitude to EC aid. While the new road plan gives priority to national road investment in its own right, it is also the only road investment which can be used to absorb available EC aid. To emphasise the importance of EC assistance let me quote a few figures. In 1984, the Department spent £101.5 million on road improvement grants. In that year, the EC gave a commitment of grant aid totalling £31.5 million, mainly from the Regional Fund. In addition, the EIB gave commitments to loans totalling £37 million.
Contrary to what was suggested by the Opposition, there is no realistic possibility of obtaining EC aid for county road improvements, with the exception of very limited FEOGA grants under the Western Package and a small amount of Regional Fund non quota aid for amenity roads as part of a wider, cross-Border package. There is no possibility at all of obtaining EC aid for county road maintenance. If we are to continue to absorb our full quota of Regional Fund moneys and avail of the highest possible level of EIB loans we must rely on a substantial national road improvement programme as the basis for virtually all aid applications. One must ask the question: are Fianna Fáil proposing that we forego some of this EC aid?
Fianna Fáil also talked about employment. The facts are that our accelerated road investment programme will generate substantial additional employment. State funded road employment in 1984 was estimated at 4,800. This will, it is estimated, increase to 5,400 in 1985, to 5,700 in 1986 and to 5,900 in 1987 or in other words a 23 per cent increase between 1984 and 1987. Spin off employment is expected to increase by 400 a year on average over the period.
Deputy O'Rourke claimed yesterday that the Athlone bypass was developed by Fianna Fáil. In fact, the application for the bridge order was made on 2 October 1981 but it was the Tánaiste, Deputy Spring, who on 15 March 1983 ordered the public inquiry and on 28 May 1984 the present Minister, Deputy Kavanagh, directed that the scheme should proceed. This Government and the previous Coalition of 1982 have provided £7.5 million to date for the scheme whereas Fianna Fáil provided less than £900,000 for preliminary expenses.
Deputy Hilliard mentioned a promise made by the Minister on his visit to County Meath on 11 March last but not yet delivered. The Minister promised finance for an acceptable scheme at Slane Bridge and asked the council to prepare one as quickly as possible. As soon as such a proposal is submitted to my Department the promise will be implemented.
The clear implication of the Fianna Fáil arguments is that, without question and whether the taxpayer likes it or not, they will find more money to give to local authorities to finance county roads. This is an ambitious boast for the party which, in 1978, forced through legislation against the vehement opposition of the present parties in Government, which placed greater limitations on local financial resources than any other measure in the history of Irish local government legislation.
There have been amusing and cynical attempts from the other side of the House to suggest that the Local Government (Financial Provision) (No. 2) Act, 1983, promoted by this Government is at the root of local authorities' financial problems. The real culprit, as everybody knows, is the Fianna Fáil-sponsored Local Government (Financial Provisions) Act, 1978. This purported to honour the commitment to remove domestic rates, but in reality it abandoned and disowned a parallel commitment by Fianna Fáil that local finances and services would not suffer as a result of domestic derating.
That was also promised by Fianna Fáil.
The 1978 Act effectively removed all discretionary powers of local authorities to increase their own financial resources and substituted a straitjacket of central Government limitations. The effect of this straitjacket, in the years 1978 to 1982, was to depress the rate poundage levels of local authorities nearly 30 per cent below the growth in inflation. As by far the largest programme relying on financing from local authorities' own resources, county road improvement and maintenance naturally bore the brunt of these Fianna Fáil inspired stringencies.
When this Government came to power in December 1982, they found local authority finances in the crisis which I have described. We immediately took three steps to improve local authority finances:
—an additional £31½ million was made available to local authorities in rate support grant for 1983 compared with what Fianna Fáil had allocated them;
—the Local Government (Financial Provisions) (No. 2) Act, 1983 was enacted in July 1983 in order to widen local authority charging powers, thereby giving them access to additional revenue and improving local discretion and accountability;
—the Minister did not in 1983, or any subsequent year, use his power to limit rate increases. Again, this has given local authorities much greater discretion over their own financing.
More recently, the national plan announced the creation of a new farm tax, the revenues from which will accrue directly to local authorities. This brief history of the respective records as regards local authority finances of Fianna Fáil and the present administration is a sobering but very necessary exercise. Fianna Fáil policies and actions in this area, while in Government, have been disastrous and have contributed more than any other single cause to the problems affecting county roads which they now deplore.
We are now asked to believe that Fianna Fáil, naturally while in opposition, have found a solution which makes everything rosy once more in the local government garden. The key to this solution, we are told, is a guaranteed statutory contribution which Fianna Fáil in government would make each year to local authorities.
The cop-out perpetrated by Fianna Fáil in the 1978 Act should make us suspicious of any easy solutions offered by them now. So to the Opposition spokesman on the environment, and indeed to his leader who also seems to be placing great weight on the Fianna Fáil statement of 22 February on local authority finances, let me put a few inconvenient points.
The guaranteed Exchequer contribution to local authorities or the revenue sharing system which it seems to amount to, is a soft and doubtful option. It suggests the availability of increased revenues to local authorities, but in reality it is not a new source of revenue at all; in so far as increased grants to local authorities are contemplated, every penny of these would have to be raised in increased central Government taxation or at the expense of other services.
A guaranteed State contribution to local authorities is also a soft option, because it removes virtually all responsibility from local authority councillors and managers for raising their own revenues and all answerability in relation to spending them. Fianna Fáil are implying by this proposal that local authorities want to abandon their financial responsibilities and throw all onus on to central Government, so jettisoning what is one of the cornerstones of local democracy. If you talk to the general council of county councils, municipal authorities or to councillors from Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil, or Labour, it is clear that they are prepared to take on the responsibility of raising finance.
A guaranteed State contribution to local authorities will not last for very long in the real world of government. What Fianna Fáil Minister for Finance, or indeed Cabinet, is going to assent for long that, uniquely among public service, local government receives or pre-empts a predetermined share of State revenues while health, social welfare, education and industrial promotion do not?
On a point of order, the Minister keeps criticising Fianna Fáil.
That is not a point of order. The Minister must be allowed to make his speech without interruption.
This motion is about roads.
I am sorry if I am offending the Opposition, I will try to limit my criticism. Finally, it is well known, and already noted in the ESRI Report on Local Finances of 1975, that revenue sharing systems like those proposed by Fianna Fáil can, because they are based on a general formula, give rise to a less economical allocation of resources to local authorities than would occur under a system of specific grants. For this, and for the other reasons which I have cited, I urge Fianna Fáil to admit that the idea of a guaranteed contribution to local authorities is a non-runner.
This Government can stand on their record in relation to road development. We are the first Government to provide a firm medium term commitment of road improvement finance which at the end of 1987 will be 52 per cent higher in money terms than the 1984 provision or about 31 per cent excluding inflation. Not only did we promise the money but we are delivering on it. We increased the block grant provision by 10 per cent in 1985, a substantial real increase. We have published a new road plan which gives clear direction to road development and sets out a realistic and attainable programme of major improvement projects. We have also set out a clear policy on private sector investment which we are actively encouraging.
The new road plan gives potential investors a clear policy framework for assessing possible investments. In the case of toll roads, the policy is as follows and I quote from paragraph 3.16 of the new plan:
once constructed, the road will be a public road in the ownership of the local authority and subject to traffic management and other controls;
the road will be designed, constructed and maintained to standards acceptable to the local authority and to the Department of the Environment; and
the right of the private interest to collect tolls will be limited to an agreed period of years, with that right reverting to the public authorities at the end of the period.
We have also made it clear that we will consider private sector loan financing proposals provided the terms are at least comparable with and preferably more favourable than those for Exchequer borrowing. In February we circulated financial and other interests with a document setting out our policy and identifying five potentially suitable toll roads. The response to date has been most encouraging and I am hopeful that private funds will be available to supplement State investment. As the House is aware, one toll proposal is already well advanced which involves over £20 million investment in a road and high level bridge linking the Navan Road and Lucan Road and forming part of the Dublin Ring Road. These activities represent once again the Government's clear determination and purpose in relation to road development.
This Government are being criticised for spelling out a policy in relation to State funding county road maintenance which has been followed by successive Governments, including Fianna Fáil administrations and Deputy Molloy, when he was Minister. The policy was right then and it is right now. The Minister in his contribution last night explained the reasons for the policy. County roads though accounting for four-fifths of our roads carry only one-quarter of our traffic. We have one of the highest percentages of dust free road surfaces in the world, better than many of our wealthier neighbours and than those with lesser mileages of road per head of population.
Remember that our road mileage per capita is four times that of our nearest neighbour, Great Britain. The House should also take into account that we spend four times as much on our county roads per thousand vehicle miles of travel as we spend on our national primaries — in other words, when compared on a basis of road usage, county roads do well. Fianna Fáil have also accused us of depriving local authorities of resources when it was they who introduced the legislation to remove the financial discretion of local authorities by abolishing domestic rates and limiting rate increases. Once again their record speaks for itself.
In asking the House to reject the Fianna Fáil motion I want once again to call attention to their record while in office. In the first year of their much heralded road development plan they provided 57 per cent of the level of State funding they promised. In the first year of our new road plan we have provided every penny of the £152.5 million we promised. I leave people to draw their own conclusions when they hear Fianna Fáil promising to provide increased money for county roads.
This is a bit of a joke. One has to look at the whole infrastructure of the country and take the economic and social responsibilities seriously. Last year I was talking to a leading businessman in the United States who had been to Ireland. He said that two of our problems were our telecommunications and our roads. At that stage I was able to tell him we were doing something about our telecommunications and I would like to meet him now to tell him we are doing something about our roads.
Do not bring him down the country.
When people are interested in investing abroad, whether it be Ireland, Holland, Belgium or any other country, they vet the country. One of the first things they look at is the lines of communications. If communications are not good they walk away. We are talking about the economic development of the whole country and our programme involves major road networks. If we have good roads we will attract new businesses, because businessmen will know they can get their products from A to B. In this way we will be building a healthy and stable economy which can afford to develop the county roads.
As I said before, and I will say it again because it is worth repeating, one would get the impression that county roads were the responsibility of central Government until the last few years. As far back as 1971 Deputy Molloy said that the responsibility for county roads clearly lay with the local authorities and not with central government. That has been the on-going policy. The policy of central Government was always to look after national primary roads. That is what we are doing, unlike the Fianna Fáil plan in The Way Forward. They had great ideas, but no money. We are developing a good solid road network so that if a person wants to set up a factory here or there, he can be assured that he will be able to move his products anywhere he wishes. In this way industrialists will be attracted to the west, the north-west or the south. When Fianna Fáil say our plan has an anti-rural bias, this shows their lack of knowledge in this area.
Our policies have been set for the next three years and there will be a further programme into the nineties. In ten years' time we will have a road network of which we can be truly proud because we will have the infrastructure necessary to attract businesses to the far flung corners of this country. If we put all our money into county roads and ignored our national primary roads, who would thank us at the end of the day for empty roads, roads which were of little consequence?
Let us be serious. Stop playing petty politics coming up to the local elections. Let us look at this country in a broad way and work in the national interests, not in narrow parochial interests. What we are doing is in the national interest but what Fianna Fáil seem to be advocating is in the local interest.
In the people's interest.
I believe that what we are doing is right and this will be borne out. At the end of our plan I am prepared to put this to the test and to ask the IDA or any of the other agencies which attract foreign industry ——
What about Hyster?
That has nothing to do with road development.
The Minister is talking about Government policy.
The Deputy should know that. We do not do what Fianna Fáil advocate. Last night their leader went on television to say he will borrow £200 million ——
That is not in the motion.
What is wrong with that?
He said he would borrow a further £200 million for county roads. Who is to pay for that? It will fall on the backs of the PAYE taxpayers. I want to repeat that what we are doing is in the national interest and what Fianna Fáil are doing is in the narrow parochial interest coming up to local elections.
The Minister almost believes that.
The Minister still believes in Santa Claus.
I support this motion and express my disappointment at the Minister's speech. He did not refer at all to the motion before the House. This motion may not be of great interest or importance to Deputies living on the east coast, but it is before the House because of the frustration felt by Members on this and the other side of the House and every county councillor trying to operate on a local authority. Listening to the Minister was like listening to an extract from Building on Reality, which is put before us in every debate. The technical jargon resembled quotations from British Standards or Road Note 4, about which I happen to know a bit. The Minister's speech also resembled a Fine Gael manifesto coming up to the local elections. It had no relationship to the motion before the House.
The Minister mentioned his meetings with county councillors at the General Council of County Councils, but he must not have been talking to the Fine Gael councillors that I have been listening to. They are absolutely frustrated at this stage. The Minister has expressed no practical knowledge of rural Ireland. In that he could be accused of taking an anti-rural position.
There is no doubt that the county roads system has now reached a crisis, with many county roads practically impassible and in many cases impassible because of lack of maintenance and surface dressing. Although the Minister has ignored the appeals up to now I beg him, as a matter of urgency, to bring forward an emergency package to improve the county roads system. Not alone would this relieve the problem which we have been discussing yesterday and this evening, but would also create very badly needed local employment. Nobody could deny that local employment is badly needed. If money were invested in our county roads system there would be a great opportunity for local employment. In addition, native materials would be used for the strengthening and maintenance of those roads. Quite a number of jobs could be created, instead of the temporary jobs of which we see so many at present and which serve no real purpose.
In recent years, because of the increase in the carrying weight and capacity of trucks and of traffic generally, many of our roads are unable to take the heavy loads. Following EC legislation, tonnage has been increased. In the most remote parts of rural Ireland huge bulk tankers for collecting milk, delivering bulk feeding and supplies are normal, everyday events on roads which were designed for horses and carts, or very light traffic.
Along with the breakdown of the county roads there is evidence of damage to the numerous small bridges on those roads, many of which are in a very dangerous condition. The engineering staff in my own county were appalled at the results of a recent report on this matter. When there was greater need for more investment, the opposite happened.
Most Deputies on this side of the House spoke of their own counties and I turn now to mine. I have been a councillor for 11 years and remember as a councillor being able to go to my county engineer or local engineer to discuss a problem with him and finance would be made available and the works would be carried out immediately. Since those times the situation has changed completely.
I want to refer to the block grants. In 1981 in my county this amounted to £226,000. That rose to £260,000 in 1984 and in 1985 the figure was £367,000. While there was a considerable increase from 1984 to 1985, the increase from 1981 only barely kept pace with the fall in the purchasing power of the pound. A sum of £100 in 1981 was worth £77 in 1983 and considerably less in 1985. These figures are from the Central Bank and are not my figures.
The block grant can be used only for improvements in county roads as distinct from their maintenance. With regard to Kilkenny County Council the allocation in 1981 was £1,632,000, compared with £1,383,000 in 1985. This represents an actual drop of 15 per cent in money terms and of 43 per cent in real terms. No matter what the Minister says here, those facts speak for themselves. With regard to our county roads allocation, in 1981 this was £1,240,000 and in 1985 it was £1,110,000. Again this represents a drop of 10.5 per cent in money terms and in real terms 43 per cent. So we have an overall drop of 43 per cent. The Minister used quite a number of statistics, but I also remind him that there were very steep increased costs during that time.
To put that in context, in Kilkenny there are 2,495 km of county roads, which is 82.6 per cent of the total mileage of the county. The figures quoted are further proof that the whole system of county roads is not getting the finance necessary to keep it in a reasonable state of repair, not to mention the improvements so badly needed. We must also remember the increasing costs which have had to be borne by the councils during the period 1981 to 1985. For example, labour costs have increased, by wages per week, from £82.87 to £123.82 in 1985. That is an increase of 49 per cent. Plant costs have increased from £10.50 in 1981 to £14 per hour in 1985, an increase of 33 per cent. Even more important, the cost of stone per tonne and bitumen have increased. Stone cost, I believe, in the region of £6.50 in 1981, while it now costs in excess of £10.50—an increase of approximately 65 per cent. Bitumen has increased per gallon from 82p to £1.47, an increase of 79 per cent. Those statistics speak for themselves. The Minister should include such figures and give a more reasonable balance. Stone and bitumen are the main materials used in our surface dressing programme. Surface dressing is the most important element of road maintenance. In my county in 1981 it comprised 29 per cent of our county road budget and in 1985 it comprised 46 per cent, although the actual mileage covered has been significantly reduced.
Again, in 1981 the surface dressing cycle came around approximately every 13 years, against 15.5 years in 1985. The desirable and recommended cycle, I understand, is ten years. I know that in other counties surface dressing is not taking place at all. The councils have not the money. If roads are not surface dressed they will disintegrate rapidly, and that is happening throughout the country. It is a policy in our county to surface dress as much as possible, but the mileage which can be done because of lack of finance is being reduced considerably each year. The consequences of this enforced inaction will be disastrous in the short term, leading to a complete breakdown in our county road system. The major national improvements which are taking place are to be welcomed, but it is hard to explain this to an individual who has to make a detour to get to his home from his county road. I hope the Minister will attend a council meeting to explain this position.
I know deputations from various counties have met the Minister and have tried to impress upon him the importance of making money available for our county road system. Unfortunately, they have been totally ignored. The saying "A stitch in time saves nine" is one to which the Minister should pay attention tonight. Unless action is taken in the form of the motion put forward by us, I have no doubt that in a couple of years' time it will take major finance, because not alone will we need maintenance and surface dressing but the whole carriageway, the sub-base and foundation of every county road will have broken down and there will be nobody to blame except the Government because——
Hear, hear.
——they have not made the finance available. I appeal to the Minister to take seriously the motion before the House and take into account all the statistics, not just those which have been fed to him. The ones used in the national plan have been proved to be very disastrous so far.
At the outset I wish to refer to a remark made by the Minister suggesting to this side of the House that own goals were being scored. As this debate draws to a close it will be seen that it was a very obvious motion which was absolutely necessary in order to highlight to the Minister, the Minister of State and the officials in the Department the serious problem which we in the country are experiencing. With due respect to the Ministers concerned and to the officials, they are obviously not aware of those problems if they are suggesting that own goals are being scored. The main reason the roads are in such a bad state is that the Government are not making available the domestic rate relief grant which Fianna Fáil made available in 1971 and during the years before this Government took office. Less money is being given to councils for the repair and maintenance of the county roads.
I accept that the problem of county roads is a national one. However, it cannot be denied that Donegal holds the record for the worst roads in the country. We have approximately 3,900 miles of road and of that figure there are 3,373 miles of county roads which are in a disgraceful condition. They have deteriorated rapidly in the past few years because of lack of finance. The Government did not make the money available. They did not increase the domestic rate relief grant as Fianna Fáil did by 10, 11 or 12 per cent. This year they have given a miserly 0.6 per cent.
It is 10 per cent.
If the money had been given in the past few years the problem would not be as serious now. We need now a major injection of money from the Exchequer to ensure that the roads do not continue to deteriorate. The Government must fund the special programme as outlined in this motion. In Donegal we have the worst roads in the country and we have the highest percentage of county roads. The roads in the west of the county are used extensively by heavy vehicles taking fish from the ports to Dublin and to other centres for export. All of this heavy traffic has contributed to the deterioration of the roads.
The Government seem to be proud of their road development policy. It refers to the provision of an adequate roads system for major towns, ports and airports, to the elimination of bottle necks and the provision of by-passes. This is poor comfort for the people of west Donegal and rural Ireland. All of the matters mentioned by the Government must be attended to but not at the expense of the people whom I and other Deputies represent. There is no reference in the Government's programme to county roads except to say that grants will not be available from the Exchequer, that expenditure under this heading will continue to be a matter for the local authorities even though less money is being made available to them. This is poor comfort for people who have to travel on these roads and whose vehicles are being damaged. The situation is fast approaching where people in my county and other counties will find it impossible to travel on the roads. We have been inundated with complaints from drivers of all kinds of vehicles and soon school bus drivers will not drive on the roads because of the damage caused to the buses. In that kind of situation the children's education will be affected.
Because of the inadequate money to carry out a reasonable surface dressing programme the structure of the roads is being damaged seriously. As was pointed out by another speaker, the cycle of surface dressings was once a ten-year cycle and was a 17-year cycle in Donegal but now it will be a 40-year cycle. The finance which should be made available for surface dressing is being devoted to filling the craters on every county road. It is accepted in Donegal that the condition of the county roads was more satisfactory 40 years ago. It has been stated that the tracks in the Sahara are better than the county roads in Donegal.
The policy of the Government is shortsighted from the point of view of business. It means that the heavy investment in county roads in the sixties and in the early seventies when Fianna Fáil were in power is being put in danger because of the deterioration of the roads in the past few years. The public are waiting anxiously their opportunity on 20 June to give the Government an answer, to let them know they are sick and tired of the policies being pursued by the Department. Before I conclude I shall refer to the report of the Donegal County Manager regarding the 1985 Estimates when he said:
It seems to me, therefore, that the council is left with no option but to virtually abandon county roads unless a favourable response is given to the request to the Department for financial aid or unless moneys become available otherwise.
The powers of the local authorities have been downgraded since November 1983 by this Government due to the lack of sufficient funding to enable them to run the affairs of each authority in an efficient manner. The people are calling for action and they are demanding central Government funding for local authorities, as they have had in the past. In this way confidence will be restored. The onus is on central Government to guarantee essential funding to local authorities. This should be known in advance of the estimates meeting of each authority so that detailed and proper planning may be possible.
The motion before the House calls on the Government to fund a special programme for the maintenance and improvement of county roads. To date central Government have not made available such funding. The serious condition of those roads is a cause of concern, especially in tourist counties such as County Kerry.
The county roadwork in Kerry consists of approximately 2,400 miles and of this figure approximately 95 per cent or 2,300 miles have been surface dressed. The county road network in Kerry varies considerably in quality and carrying capacity. We have several hundred miles of such roads between ten and 12 feet wide which are not subject to very heavy traffic. Generally these roads are taken over by Kerry County Council after improvement works and surface dressing under the local improvements scheme. In the county in excess of 75 per cent of the county roads are constructed on poor, boggy foundations. This leads to a deterioration of road surfaces under heavy loads and in times of dry weather the peaty foundations tend to dry out and contract. From an engineering point of view the best method of keeping our county road network in a well maintained state was to ensure that surfaces were adequately sealed. This was done by means of an intensive surface dressing programme during the years.
The servicing of the loans on capital investment and the operation of new schemes have resulted in reducing the finance available for county roads maintenance to a frightening degree. I might give the House some example of the problem we are encountering with regard to the finances available to us for county roads. In 1979 Kerry Councy Council had at their disposal £1.4 million for county roads maintenance and in 1984 £1.34 for the same purpose, which figure should by then have reached £3.4 million in order to keep pace with normal inflation. In 1979 Kerry County Council had a surface dressing cycle of approximately 9.7 years on its county roads network. No surface dressing has been carried out on those roads in Kerry in 1983 or 1984. The surface of many of our county roads—now carrying heavier loads than ever before — is becoming dangerous and subject to water penetration. If we are subjected to bad weather this winter and the following one a very large percentage of those county roads will deteriorate beyond measure. It is now felt that approximately 50 per cent of our county roads network, or some 1,200 miles are at serious risk and it is estimated that the cost of repairing 1,200 miles is approximately £18 million, that is 1,200 by £15,000 per mile. It is proposed that that amount of money should be made available over a six year period so that a programme of county roads restoration could be maintained.
I join other speakers in endeavouring to impress on the Minister and his Minister of State the really serious situation confronting local authorities. It is not only a matter of the steady deterioration of our main roads and county roads structure but their speedy deterioration. The Minister of State appears to come into this House to juggle figures. He endeavours to give us figures for national primary and national secondary routes, an allocation heavily funded by the EC, in order to give the overall allocation a respectable look. The most serious problem confronting any local authority or rural community at present is the very badly damaged road structure because of lack of funding.
At our estimates meeting the county engineer put to us what he would require for main and county roads in order to maintain them at their 1976 level, that was prior to the abolition of rates on agricultural land and domestic dwellings. In subsequent years Fianna Fáil made good any shortfall, taking account of inflation. We did not experience a problem until recent years. The figures that the county engineer gave us demonstrated that he would require £3.3 million to maintain even the 1976 level, the minimum figure required to maintain the workforce at the previous year's level being £2.6 million. But the maximum amount that could be provided at that estimate's meeting was £2.4 million, which represented £175,000 less than last year and £1 million less than what would have been required even based on 1976 levels.
That is the problem with which we are confronted. We are faced with a £1.1 million shortfall grant in lieu of rates in County Monaghan this year in order to maintain our roads structure. We have been endeavouring to maintain our roads in the best possible condition. Over the last few years we discontinued the erection of any public lighting at churches, new housing areas and so on. Additionally we have discontinued road widening, the removal of dangerous corners and verge trimming and have concentrated completely on surface dressing. The advice we receive from our county engineer is that we would need to surfacedress our roads every ten years, but on the basis of the allocation we receive this year we shall be able to do so once in 25 years only.
The Department do not appear to recognise an area where there has been major development, in poultry, pigs, mushroom and bulk milk collection, as was mentioned earlier. For example, in recent years a broiler producer came to me wanting to erect a broilerhouse the materials for which could not be transported on an excessively narrow road. This meant we had to divert money from another source in our region so that we could widen a bridge across a small road enabling him to travel across it. Last year an egg producer came to me with much the same story, telling me that food suppliers had told him they would not deliver any more ten ton loads unless there was a bridge provided to carry that capacity. We had to facilitate that man, again diverting money intended for roads maintenance and surface dressing. These are the types of problems with which we are faced at present.
There is no point in the Minister coming into this House talking about national primary and secondary routes. Admittedly they carry the bulk of the traffic, but we cannot disregard county roads full of potholes and in many cases with the verges collapsing. Last year again one man told me that there must have been many spare springs sold in a certain agricultural development where he made large deliveries.
I appeal to the Minister to cut out this nonsensical talk about what they are doing and have done. Fianna Fáil, when in power, provided funding in lieu of rates.
No, they did not.
They did so in Monaghan County Council and we did not receive special concessions from any other source. The Minister will be visiting us within the week when we will furnish him with relevant figures. In fact one of his colleagues in the Fine Gael Party volunteered to furnish statistics which will startle the Minister when he comes down to a meeting. I do not want to scare him off but——
I am going up to open that new road.
Deputy M. Brennan has one and a half minutes approximately.
I want to thank our party spokesman for allowing me some time. I was very disappointed in the Minister's speech this evening. I wondered had he ever driven on a county road in his life. One would know that the Minister came from an urban area the way he spoke this evening. If he comes to the west, to Sligo, we will take him on some roads and he will know he has been on them.
The Deputy should get his county council to do something about them.
They have not got any money. The total mileage of county roads in Sligo is 1,428, the allocation for the upkeep of which in 1981 was £615,000. For 1985 the projected expenditure is put at £636,000, representing an increase of approximately 3 per cent which means a massive drop in real terms. When one takes inflation into account it will be seen that this is nothing compared with previous allocations. When I was first elected to Sligo County Council in 1974 there were 200 men employed; today we have a mere 116, because if and when anybody retires they are not replaced, there not being the money to do so.
As Deputy J. Leonard has said, there are many things also that we in Sligo cannot do. We cannot afford to cut the hedges along half the main roads in County Sligo at the moment because the county council have no money to do it. The local community have to look after our burial grounds now. This was formerly done by the county council. I would like to say to the Minister, the House and the Press Gallery that they should go out to County Sligo and have a look at our county roads and those in other parts of the west and they will see the deplorable condition they are in. I am very disappointed with the Minister's speech tonight. I hope he will make some funds available to try to do something with the county roads.
I am glad to have the opportunity to say a few words on this motion. I support the Minister's amendment. I note that over the next three years the Government have given a commitment to spend in excess of £500 million on our road network. This is a very welcome programme and one the Minister is to be complimented on, because it is vital that we bring our roads up to the standard of roads on the Continent and allow for easy transport from the west to our ports so that our goods can be exported easily. If we have not a good main road network it will be impossible for people in remote areas to have their produce sold on the world market.
I welcome the Government's commitment to commence work on the Athlone by-pass. I hope the work will continue over the next few years and that this new by-pass will be opened within the next five years.
That is not a county road.
I will deal with county roads in a minute. I welcome the commitment by the Government and the Minister to open another bridge across the Shannon. This allows for free transport from the west to the midlands and Dublin. This is vital. I welcome the turn-about by the Opposition, who are the cause of the problems with our county roads today because in 1977 they removed from local authorities the power to strike a rate, the power to raise money internally within the various counties. Many of the points raised by the people on the other side arose directly as a result of the Government who were in power between 1977 and 1981 preventing local authorities from raising finance locally.
The amending legislation, which the Minister will be introducing, to return power to local authorities to raise funds locally will enable them to rebuild our county road structure. I appeal to the Minister to examine the possibility of allowing flexibility for councillors to allocate more freely funds coming from central Government to enable block grants to be spent on our county roads. It is a pity the Opposition seven years ago did not regard our county road structure with the same importance as they regard it now. Is it because we have local elections in the near future that the Opposition are suddenly worrying about our county roads? When they removed authority from local authorities to raise funds locally they imposed a 2 per cent tax on all farm produce. That is their record in relation to our county road structure.
I ask the Minister for the Environment and the Minister for Labour to look at the social employment scheme to see how it could be utilised to improve our county road structure. No maintenance has been carried out on many of our county roads since 1977. The unions in my area are very reasonable people but I do not believe that any trade unionist could say that if work was carried out on many of our county roads under the social employment scheme it would prevent employment. It will give vital employment in many of our rural areas. It will also allow hedge trimming to be carried out.
I accuse the Minister for the Environment of grave dereliction of duty in his neglect of the county road system which covers 80 per cent of our roads. Deputies from every county are reporting on the rapid deterioration of county roads. About 12 Fianna Fáil Deputies have spoken during this limited three hour debate and have given us a litany of the Minister's neglect. The county road investment by generations of our people since the foundation of the State involving billions of pounds is now being washed away with every rainfall because proper maintenance on the surface of most of these roads has stopped. The small amount of money now available can only be use for limited emergency repairs in a few areas, with much of the county road repair work now being abandoned altogether by county council engineers.
The Minister is responsible for the implementation of a national policy for roads and he cannot exclude county roads from his overall responsibility. They comprise 46,000 miles of our national road network, they represent 80 per cent of the total road mileage, they carry 40 per cent of the freight transport and in recent years over 50 per cent of the new private houses built adjoin county roads. All of these important considerations seem to have escaped our Minister, whose pathetic performance last night in speaking to this Fianna Fáil motion on county roads leaves one to despair that the present neglect will continue.
I accuse the Minister of being lazy, uninformed, disinterested and completely ineffective in fulfilling his duty. In a 30 minute speech last night he made only the briefest of references to the terms of the motion before the House. His comments were inaccurate, ill-founded and displayed a callous disregard for the plight of the tens of thousands of families whom he condemns to suffering on under deplorable local road conditions, with the huge cost in motor car repairs, delays and in many cases in inaccessability to their homes.
One might well ask how this deplorable situation has come about. What policy change has resulted in county councils not being able to maintain the surface condition of county roads? In other words, who or what is responsible for the hardship which is now being inflicted on young and old throughout the country blocking future development and driving rural dwellers to despair.
I accuse the Government that their policy of neglect of the county roads is causing great anger, resentment and frustration among people living in rural Ireland. In the local elections on 20 June the people will have the opportunity to express their anger by voting against Fine Gael and Labour Party candidates whose parties are solely responsible for the deplorable state of county roads today.
Two decisions made by the Coalition Government are responsible for the now rapid deterioration of the condition of county roads. The first was the decision in the Local Government Financial Provisions (No. 2) Act, 1983, to stop the funding of local authorities in lieu of domestic and agricultural rates. Rate support grants have only increased by 3.5 per cent since 1982 and inflation in that period was 25 per cent. The loss of over 20 per cent of its revenue has left local authorities with no money for county road maintenance. The second was the decision to concentrate available resources in development of national primary, secondary and regional roads to the exclusion of county roads maintenance.
The combined effect of these two decisions is the cause of the rapid deterioration in the condition of the surface of our county roads and the position has now become so bad that Fianna Fáil believe special action is required to cater for the crisis that exists and to restore the worst affected roads to satisfactory standards.
Our motion calls for special action. Special funding is now needed from the Exchequer for maintenance and the rate support grants need to be restored to allow local authorities to maintain a satisfactory level of services. The Government made a major blunder in thinking they could replace rate support grants by imposing water and other charges.
That was the Deputy's idea.
Very little money has been paid under the Government's new service charges. A total of £40 million remains unpaid in service charges to date. Only £10 million was paid in all last year.
The Deputy should go out and collect it.
Deputy Spring said these charges would bring in £50 million. He expected that they would bring in £150 million in three years but in three years they have brought in only £20 million. What a farce. Local democracy is being destroyed and the services are deteriorating rapidly. That is the scenario under Minister Kavanagh's inept rule.
Fianna Fáil started it all from 1977.
The Government side should stop crying about that. They have been three years in office.
We had to deal with four years of neglect.
The Government side should stop crying and face reality.
(Interruptions.)
Fianna Fáil published the road development plan for the eighties in May 1979. That was the first major centrally co-ordinated programme for the development of the national road network. Expenditure on road improvement and maintenance under that plan increased by 63 per cent in real terms between 1979 and 1984. Surely that is ample evidence of a Fianna Fáil Government's commitment to the development of our national road structure. All we had from Minister Kavanagh last night were promises which may never be implemented and which those in business are sceptical of because of the lack of evidence on the ground that any of these schemes will start as scheduled.
They have started.
The Minister may be interested to know that I recently received a deputation from the Construction Industry Federation representing the owners of plant hire machinery——
They were with me today.
——used in road construction programmes and they informed me of their concern at the lack of road works starting up. They stated that in their view 1985 would be the worst year for a long time for those involved in major road work construction as hardly any of the Government's proposed road programme was going out to tender. They said that 75 per cent of heavy road making machinery was lying idle in their yards.
The Deputy would believe anything.
Yet last night we heard the Minister talking about the Government's road programme, about the £500 million they are going to spend between now and 1987. In his road programme published some time ago the Minister listed major road improvement projects which were to commence in 1985, but half way through the year none of the following has started: the Chapelizod by-pass; the Lucan by-pass; the Newtownmountkennedy by-pass; the Port Road — Manor-cunningham (County Donegal) project; the Blackrock by-pass in Dublin and the inner relief road in Kilkenny. Not one of those projects has started yet. The machinery is standing idle in the builders' yards. The money is not being spent.
(Interruptions.)
More than 2,000 road workers are involved.
We must have order on both sides of the House. I cannot hear Deputy Molloy.
I should like to tell Deputy Molloy that next January we will talk about that.
The Minister of State got his opportunity to speak.
County roads constitute over 80 per cent of the total mileage of national roads and the deterioration in the quality of these has been spectacular.
That is pathetic.
Surface dressing, an intrinsic part of any maintenance policy to protect the fabric of the road from ingress of moisture and to provide skid resistant surfaces, is virtually being dropped from the maintenance programmes of many counties. Local funds, from which surface dressing is mainly undertaken, constituted only 37 per cent of the total expenditure on roads in 1984 as opposed to 52 per cent in 1975. The desirable objective of surface dressing county roads every ten years or thereabouts has now had to be dropped, we have been told by county engineers, to 100 years frequency, or, indeed, in some counties to a virtual cessation of surface dressing activities.
That was because of Fianna Fáil policies from 1977.
Some counties have had to give consideration to the closing of stretches of county roads from a road safety viewpoint because of inability to maintain the surfaces in a safe condition.
Where?
In County Meath.
In County Offaly.
They have good roads.
It is significant that the cost of bitumen, an essential component of surface dressing, has increased approximately 15 times from 1970 to date, whereas the corresponding increase in the consumer price index has been in the order of a factor of four only. The regular appearance of the pothole is the most obvious manifestation of the deterioration of the quality of county roads; but much of the disimprovement is less obvious and will ultimately, and inevitably, culminate in major crazing and structural collapse of these roads. The cost of remedial procedures at that time will be far grater than the cost of regular surface dressing at sensible intervals.
The total number of recorded accidents on all roads has risen from 15,000 in 1975 to more than 20,000 in 1982. Apart from the major direct material and personal cost of these accidents, they have led to crushing increases on every motorist in the form of car insurance premiums. Huge costs are incurred due to damage to cars arising out of the bad road conditions.
In road improvement and road maintenance, therefore, it is abundantly clear that we must have a much higher level of service than we have experienced in latter years and that the consequence of continuing failure to respond to the need will have disastrous consequences in the long term.
There is no doubt but that investment in road improvement in particular will yield a much greater return in real terms than would be the case in many other forms of local authority investment. Savings in travel time and in fuel consumption as well as the reductions in numbers of accidents and personal injuries are very significant. The employment content of road investment is also greater than in many other areas of corresponding expenditure and this must be very significant in today's climate of unending job losses.
That is why I am putting so much money into it.
It is clear, therefore, that a far greater input of central funding is required on both roads capital and maintenance works on an on-going basis since local authorities are unlikely to be able to finance such expenditures themselves from their limited resources. It is improbable that funds available from the private sector will other than marginally alleviate this pressing need. The return to the State on this financial outlay can be justified on convincing economic and material grounds.
We are calling on the Minister to change the policy. We accept that county road maintenance has not been funded from central funds.
It took the Deputy a long time to say that.
Because of the crisis that has arisen in the financing of local authorities, who are unable to carry out a satisfactory road maintenance programme due to the changes in the 1983 Act introduced by the Government and due to the serious cutbacks in the funding of local authorities, Fianna Fáil are calling on the Government to invest in county road maintenance and establish a five year programme to bring these roads back up to a proper standard. It is clear from what the Minister said last night, by continuing to refer to national primary, secondary and regional roads and to ignore the content of our motion, that he is not interested in rural dwellers and does not care. He has not briefed himself on the problems that affect the vast majority of the people who live outside Dublin. Is this a Dublin Government only? Are they not concerned about the problems of rural Ireland? Do they know what it is like not to be able to travel down a road from one's own house to the main road? The Minister must be ashamed of the ineptitude of his party and his refusal to do something about this matter. We are calling on the Minister even at this late stage to change his policy and recognise the reality.
Motion No. 25 in the name of Deputy Molloy, amendment No. 1 in the name of the Minister for the Environment. The question is: "That amendment No. 1 be made."
Question put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 70; Níl, 63.
Tá
- Allen, Bernard.
- Barnes, Monica.
- Barrett, Seán.
- Barry, Myra.
- Barry, Peter.
- Begley, Michael.
- Bermingham, Joe.
- Birmingham, George Martin.
- Boland, John.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Carey, Donal.
- Collins, Edward.
- Conlon, John F.
- Connaughton, Paul.
- Coogan, Fintan.
- Cosgrave, Liam T.
- Cosgrave, Michael Joe.
- Coveney, Hugh.
- Creed, Donal.
- Crotty, Kieran.
- Crowley, Frank.
- D'Arcy, Michael.
- Deasy, Martin Austin.
- Desmond, Barry.
- Desmond, Eileen.
- Donnellan, John.
- Dowling, Dick.
- Doyle, Avril.
- Doyle, Joe.
- Dukes, Alan.
- Prendergast, Frank.
- Quinn, Ruairí.
- Ryan, John.
- Shatter, Alan.
- Sheehan, Patrick Joseph.
- Skelly, Liam.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- Enright, Thomas W.
- Farrelly, John V.
- Fennell, Nuala.
- Flaherty, Mary.
- Flanagan, Oliver J.
- Glenn, Alice.
- Griffin, Brendan.
- Harte, Patrick D.
- Hegarty, Paddy.
- Hussey, Gemma.
- Kavanagh, Liam.
- Keating, Michael.
- Kenny, Enda.
- L'Estrange, Gerry.
- McGinley, Dinny.
- McLoughlin, Frank.
- Manning, Maurice.
- Molony, David.
- Moynihan, Michael.
- Naughten, Liam.
- Nealon, Ted.
- Noonan, Michael.
- (Limerick East)
- O'Brien, Fergus.
- O'Brien, Willie.
- O'Leary, Michael.
- O'Sullivan, Toddy.
- Owen, Nora.
- Pattison, Séamus.
- Spring, Dick.
- Taylor, Mervyn.
- Taylor-Quinn, Madeline.
- Timmins, Godfrey.
- Yates, Ivan.
Níl
- Ahern, Bertie.
- Ahern, Michael.
- Andrews, David.
- Aylward, Liam.
- Barrett, Michael.
- Brady, Gerard.
- Brady, Vincent.
- Brennan, Mattie.
- Brennan, Paudge.
- Browne, John.
- Burke, Raphael P.
- Byrne, Hugh.
- Byrne, Seán.
- Calleary, Seán.
- Collins, Gerard.
- Conaghan, Hugh.
- Connolly, Ger.
- Coughlan, Cathal Seán.
- Cowen, Brian.
- Daly, Brendan.
- Doherty, Seán.
- Fahey, Jackie.
- Faulkner, Pádraig.
- Fitzgerald, Liam Joseph.
- Flynn, Pádraig.
- Foley, Denis.
- Gallagher, Denis.
- Gallagher, Pat Cope.
- Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
- Harney, Mary.
- Haughey, Charles J.
- Hilliard, Colm.
- Hyland, Liam.
- Kitt, Michael.
- Lenihan, Brian.
- Leonard, Jimmy.
- Leonard, Tom.
- Leyden, Terry.
- Lyons, Denis.
- McCarthy, Seán.
- McCreevy, Charlie.
- McEllistrim, Tom.
- Molloy, Robert.
- Morley, P.J.
- Moynihan, Donal.
- Nolan, M.J.
- Noonan, Michael J.
- (Limerick West)
- O'Connell, John.
- O'Dea, William.
- O'Hanlon, Rory.
- O'Keeffe, Edmond.
- O'Kennedy, Michael.
- Ormonde, Donal.
- O'Rourke, Mary.
- Power, Paddy.
- Reynolds, Albert.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Tunney, Jim.
- Wallace, Dan.
- Walsh, Joe.
- Walsh, Seán.
- Wilson, John P.
- Wyse, Pearse.
Tellers: Tá Deputies Barrett(Dún Laoghaire) and Taylor; Níl, Deputies V. Brady and Browne.
Amendment declared carried.
Motion, as amended, agreed to.