Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 5 Dec 1986

Vol. 370 No. 8

Supplementary Estimates, 1986. - Vote 30: Environment.

Minister for the Environment (Mr. Boland)

I move:

That a Supplementary sum not exceeding £13,777,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1986, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for the Environment, including grants in lieu of rates on agricultural land and other grants to Local Authorities, grants and other expenses in connection with housing, and miscellaneous schemes, subsidies and grants including certain grants-in-aid.

This supplementary estimate is necessitated by: (i) a greater demand for the £5,000 grant for local authority tenants than had been anticipated; (ii) Government decisions during the year relating to the Housing Finance Agency and flood relief measures; (iii) adjustment of the grant in lieu of rates on agricultural land consequent on the results of land assessments carried out up to the end September 1986; (iv) the enactment of the Dublin Metropolitan Streets Commission Act, 1986, and (v) costs in connection with the oil pollution threats to the south west coast.

The Supplementary Estimate involves a redeployment of the Environment Public Capital Programme allocation to the extent of £12,662,000 and a nett increase in current expenditure of £1,115,000. I want to make it clear to the House, therefore, that this Estimate represents a nett increase in public expenditure of only £1,115,000.

In my reply to the debate on Second Stage of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, 1985, on 4 November last I dealt in some detail with the transformation of the housing situation that has been brought about as a result of the effectiveness of the Government's housing policies. Not only have these policies radically increased the numbers of persons housed by local authorities but also they are now significantly reducing the cost of the programme to the taxpayer. In 1982 some 7,900 applicants were housed from the local authority housing list which at the time stood at just 30,000 applicants. Last year 11,800 applicants were housed, an increase of 50 per cent on the 1982 figures. This year it is likely that a similarly high figure of the order of some 11,000 applicants will be housed by local authorities. The waiting lists which stood at 30,000 when the Government took office have been reduced to 22,000 or, I suspect when the official figures are published at the end of the year, somewhat fewer. In addition, a large proportion of those on the waiting lists have been offered and have declined accommodation as they wish to obtain accommodation in a particular location. This radical improvement can be attributed in the main to two policy measures, the £5,000 grants for tenants surrendering their houses and providing for themselves in the private sector and the availability through the Housing Finance Agency and local authorities of suitable loans which have enabled thousands of families of modest means to provide their own houses rather than rely on public housing.

The significantly reduced pressure on local authority housing has enabled us to redeploy some resources from the local authority house building programme and into these two schemes. The objective of the local authority housing programme is to provide accommodation for persons unable to obtain suitable accommodation from their own resources. This objective can be achieved either by the provision of a new local authority dwelling or by the release for reletting on an existing one. The £5,000 "surrender grant" scheme is about six times as effective in housing applicants as direct investment in the building of new local authority housing. Of course, the scope of the £5,000 grant is essentially limited and a need will remain for a direct local housing building programme. However, by balancing a surrender grants scheme with a substantial house building programme the Government have shown clearly that record levels of applicants can be provided with housing and waiting lists significantly reduced or virtually eliminated in certain areas.

This year the demand for this grant has continued to exceed expectations. Since the inception of the scheme two years ago nearly 8,500 applications have been received and about 6,000 houses have become available to local authorities for reletting. As part of the redeployment of resources referred to, the Supplementary Estimate makes provision for an additional £5 million to meet grants maturing for payment in the current year. This year total grant payments will number 3,350.

Another element of the redeployment is the provision of a grant of £6,912 million to the Housing Finance Agency under a new subhead D.7. Arising out of the Government's review of the operations of the HFA earlier this year and the subsequent restructuring of their financial arrangements it was decided that a special capital injection should be made to the agency.

The restructuring of the agency's financial arrangements arose principally from the need of the agency, due to changed conditions in the financial market place, to rely on costly short term borrowing to fund its operations. The changes made in the agency's scheme were also designed to deal with a bad debts problem. The payment of the grant will place the agency on a firm financial footing and allow them to continue in their present role of providing funds to housing authorities to make house purchase loans available to persons of modest means. As part of the restructuring, the agency's borrowing arrangements have been broadened to allow them to raise long term funds on a conventional basis and an interest swap arrangement will apply to assist the agency in matching the cost of such funds with the return they can obtain from income-related repayments by borrowers.

Since they were established in 1981 the Housing Finance Agency have advanced over 15,300 loans valued at over £300 million. They now play a critically important role in the provision of mortgage finance for people on modest incomes. Three repayment options are now offered — a convention annuity system, an income related repayment option similar to the HFA scheme and a new convertible repayment option offering income-related repayments for the first five years and then reverting to an annuity system for the balance of the life of the loan. These changes followed close on the £5,000 increase in the maximum loan limits which I announced under the SDA loan scheme from 5 June 1986 and the increase to £10,000 in the income limit under the scheme. There is now a range of publicly funded house purchase loan schemes offering loans of up to £25,000 or £27,000 and a range of repayment options.

Yesterday, I informed housing authorities of a 1 per cent increase in the interest rate on annuity and convertible loans for house purchase and improvement. While I regret that some adjustment in the rate was unavoidable having regard to current trends in interest rates, generally, I am happy that the Government have been able to keep the increase down to 1 per cent. This will leave the interest rate on SDA type loans at 10.75 per cent which includes a change of 0.25 per cent in respect of mortgage protection insurance. I have no doubt the House will contrast this rate with building society rates which are now running at 12.5 per cent. As the interest rate on all SDA type loans is fixed for the life of the loan, yesterday's increase will not affect existing loans.

As the House is aware the severe damage caused by last August's storms met with an immediate and effective Government response. Among the measures taken was the allocation of an additional £1 million to the task force on special housing aid for the elderly to rehabilitate houses affected by the flooding. At about the same time the remit of the task force was extended to enable them to help where the houses of needy and disabled persons were in need of essential repair. This £1 million is provided for by way of an increase in the grant-in-aid under subhead D.5.

The various local authorities in the areas affected by the flooding were given the immediate go ahead by the task force to carry out on a recoupment basis necessary structural repairs and basic decoration. Dublin Corporation and Wicklow County Council were the two local authorities most affected but others such as Dublin, Cork, Kerry, Meath and Kilkenny County Councils are also involved, even though to a much lesser extent.

Another of the measures taken to alleviate flood damage was the announcement of a grant of £100,000 to Tipperary North Riding and Limerick County Councils for emergency repair works to the Mulcaire river. I understand that the two county councils are proceeding with the necessary scheme of repair works under the Local Authorities (Works) Act, 1949. It involves remedial works on breached and weakened embankments as well as removing trees, brushwood and shoal formations at various locations along the Mulcaire and its tributaries. The £1,000 is included in subhead W, item 19.

The level of the 1986 grant in lieu of rates on land was determined on the basis that local authority revenue from the farm tax during the year would amount to some £6 million.

Following the publication of classification lists of assessed holdings in each local authority area, authorities have now virtually completed the process of levying this tax in respect of 1986. However, having regard to the results of farm assessments to date and after due allowance for marginal relief and other factors, it is estimated that the total farm tax liability this year will be approximately £5 million.

Accordingly, the Supplementary Estimate includes an increase of £1 million in the agricultural rate grant in respect of this shortfall. The revised provision in subhead N will be £120.5 million.

The Supplementary Estimate includes a sum of £100,000 to meet costs falling on my Department in respect of environmental protection measures mounted to deal with oil pollution from the Kowloon Bridge and the risk of pollution from the damaged tanker Capo Emma. My Department's Vote normally includes a contingency sum for emergencies of this type, while there are established procedures for the immediate release of any additional funds that may be required in an emergency. My responsibility in relation to incidents such as the Kowloon Bridge and the Capo Emma is to deal with pollution arising and to protect, as far as possible, important marine life and amenity areas and to arrange for clean up of contaminated areas.

Arrangements to deal with oil pollution incidents were last reviewed by the Government in 1984. It was then decided to augment contingency measures, which essentially relied on local and regional responses to pollution, by establishing the operations group which would exercise overall central direction and control of operations to deal with major spillages threatening or affecting the shores. The group is under the direction of a senior inspector from my Department, and includes representatives from the Departments of Communications, Tourism, Fisheries and Forestry, Defence, the Naval Service and local and harbour authorities.

The Kowloon Bridge and Capo Emma incidents presented the first occasion on which it was necessary to call in the group. Members of the group were placed on standby on 18 November when first reports were received that the Kowloon Bridge and Capo Emma were in difficulties. The group was directed to intervene on 23 November in view of the increased pollution threat posed by the Kowloon Bridge following its abandonment. By 7.30 a.m. on 24 November, control centres were set up in Skibbereen and Bantry, the latter to deal with any pollution risk posed by the Capo Emma. Priority areas in this vicinity of the Stags Rock, including Lough Hyne, were identified and special arrangements made to protect some of these, using booms. It was necessary to concentrate on protection and shore clean-up measures as the fuel oil on the vessel does not respond to dispersants.

In accordance with a direction issued by the Minister for Communications the owners of the Capo Emma are proceeding with arrangements for the removal of oil from the vessel. I understand that this operation is due to begin today if local weather conditions are favourable.

Protective measures, involving the use of booms and the provision of vessels for spraying dispersants, were taken at Bantry Bay in anticipation of the transfer of the crude oil cargo to another tanker. The first phase of this operation involving the offloading of 36,000 tonnes of oil was completed successfully. The operation will be completed as soon as weather permits.

I am satisfied that arrangements to deal with pollution, in so far as they came within the remit of my Department, have been found generally adequate. The need to respond to two incidents simultaneously presented special challenges. I want to place on the record of the House my appreciation of the commitment shown by the staff of my Department, the local authority and indeed the whole operations group in dealing with these two major problems to date.

I have no doubt that the operations group and all concerned have learned by these experiences. My Department will be reviewing their contingency arrangements to deal with oil spillages and will put to good effect the experience gained so as to improve arrangements in whatever respects may be necessary.

I expect that the additional provisions sought will be sufficient to meet payments arising in the current year. I will seek additional funds next year should this prove necessary. I will be seeking full compensation for any costs to public funds arising from these incidents.

The provision of £20,000 in subhead Y is to enable the Dublin Metropolitan Streets Commission to be established. I intend to make an establishment order presently, to appoint the members of the commission and to bring it into operation before the end of the year. The commission will have special powers during its three year life to improve the area designated as the metropolitan central area. This area comprises O'Connell Street, Westmoreland Street, D'Olier Street, College Green and Grafton Street together with short lengths of the side streets off those streets and was chosen because of its special importance not only for Dubliners but for visitors to our country. A concentrated effort to improve environmental conditions and raise the standards of civic amenity in the very heart of the city will bring many benefits to the business community and the ordinary citizens of Dublin and will make our capital city a place to be proud of once more. This special investment of time, expertise and money will, with the cooperation of all who have Dublin's best interests at heart, bring new life to Dublin's centre.

I commend the Supplementary Estimate to the House.

Mr. R. Burke

The figure of £13,777,000 is an extraordinary overrun and, taken in conjunction with other Estimates, means that there will be a total of nearly £100 million overrun on the Estimates published by the Government for 1986. This is proof that the public finances are totally out of control. At the end of this year we will have the largest current budget deficit in our history in money and percentage terms and this from a Government who were elected because of their commitment to and promise of financial rectitude, especially in tackling the current budget deficit. They lectured the people on what they would do in relation to public finances, not just at the time of the 1982 general election but again on the publication of that dismal grey book Building on Reality when they promised to reduce the current budget deficit to 5 per cent.

It is interesting to note that commentators have got into the habit recently of saying that the Government's finances are off target to the sum of £180 million. We should remember that the sum of £180 million comes on top of what they estimated, making the total current budget deficit for the year nearly £1,500 million or 8.8 per cent, the largest in the history of the State. The Estimate before us ignores the fact that the Government have been accepting and approving grant applications for reconstruction at the rate of about 1,200 per week. In reply to a question last Wednesday, the Minister said that at present there were 124,000 applications on hand——

Mr. Boland

There have been more since then, keep publicising it.

Mr. R. Burke

I did not interrupt the Minister. As a result of the grants approved to date a figure of £248 million would be needed but the Government have approved a sum of £24 million for 1986.

The role of housing and the construction industry has been down graded by the Government. The popular perception of previous Coalition Governments is that they never favoured the construction industry and, on the performance to date of this Government, they seem intent on reinforcing this view and setting new records for the dubious reputation of not favouring the construction industry. Since they took office in 1982, there has been an unparalleled decline in building activity and a concomitant decline in the numbers employed in the industry. Over that period, approximately 50,000 people engaged in the building trade have lost their jobs, making it by far the worst hit of our various economic sectors.

A recent survey carried out by the Department of the Environment concedes that 7,000 building workers lost their jobs in 1985 compared with the overall rise of 2,000 in unemployment. This suggests that there has been a considerable decline in the building construction labour force as workers previously engaged in the industry have sought employment opportunities in other sectors or, regrettably, gone abroad. The decline is not limited to building workers, long established construction companies and professional firms have been faced with the prospect of closure, liquidation or seeking work outside the country. The effect of this appalling decline in building activity has been to utterly decimate a workforce which had, in the previous 25 years, developed considerable skills in a whole range of advanced and modern construction techniques. For example, the abilities which the industry so impressively demonstrated to foreign industrialists in the various major industrial projects of the seventies have been permanently lost. These skills, managerial, professional and trade related, from the project manager to the bricklayer, will take another generation to build up again.

Even if we assume that the Coalition's record in respect of the construction industry is not based on pure malice — and there are many who dispute this view — the most dispassionate observer must accept that during the Government's term they have demonstrated an incredible ineptitude in their handling of the construction industry.

An Ceann Comhairle

To which subhead is the Deputy referring?

Mr. R. Burke

I refer to subhead D.4.

Mr. Boland

The £5,000 grant is for people to rehouse themselves, not for the construction of new houses.

Mr. R. Burke

The Minister has used this grant as one of the aids to the construction industry because of the fact it is available to people——

An Ceann Comhairle

Unless the Deputy can relate what he is saying to the Estimate a full blown debate on either unemployment or the economy would not be in order.

Mr. R. Burke

Under subhead D.4. of the Supplementary Estimate an extra £5 million is required for housing purposes. What can be questioned is the value of the grant and the policy of grants as distinct from taxation. What is the logic on the one hand, for example, of increasing VAT, which was done in 1985 and which was a typical example of the Government's lack of vision, and giving grants on the other? The damage that VAT increase inflicted on the house building sector was particularly evident to us on this side of the House and to most experienced observers. Nevertheless, the Government persisted with their policy in spite of the hardship they inflicted. However, I can assure the House that on re-election to Government, which will be shortly, Fianna Fáil will give the necessary injection of confidence and resources to the construction industry to get it off its knees. There was a politician in this House during the time of the Coalition Government of the late fifties who became famous for one comment that was referred to regularly, that was, that when that Government left office there was not a bob for a bag of cement. Unfortunately, the same situation exists today.

Mr. Boland

You have to go back 30 years to quote your unfortunate dead father. Have you no original thought in your head? Will you do us a favour and stop?

Mr. R. Burke

If the Minister cannot take criticism that is his problem.

Mr. Boland

Have you no original thought in your head?

Mr. R. Burke

It is unfortunate if the Minister cannot take criticism.

Mr. Boland

I had better let you go on to read out the speech the lads wrote for you.

Mr. R. Burke

The position with regard to the £5,000 grant is directly related to the fact that tenants want to leave their homes, first, because for a three year period there was no house purchase scheme available to them because the Government would not introduce such a scheme. The purchase scheme was directly connected with the differential rents scheme. The attractiveness of local authority housing has now to be called into question in relation to the differential rents scheme.

A further regrettable example of the dishonesty of the Government was the decision they took last August to renege on the commitment of successive Governments since 1973 with regard to the operation of the differential rents scheme. They reneged on a commitment given in 1973 to the National Association of Tenants Organisations that that association would have negotiating rights in the assessment of differential rents. The Government, because they were incapable of taking a decision, handed back to the county managers, the assessment of differential rents and consequent increases in differential rents. This dishonesty with regard to local authority rents was dressed up in the title of "devolution of powers to local authorities". It is no such thing and the only reason for it is that the Minister does not like to make unpopular decisions. The Minister has handed the power to city and county managers so that they could act as his hatchet men and on his behalf to increase the rents on local authority tenants and because he was incapable and afraid to negotiate a fair rent review with NATO despite there having been a commitment since 1973 to do so.

In 1972, there was a regrettable rent strike. In 1973, the Coalition of which, a Cheann Comhairle, you were a member, took the enlightened view and gave negotating rights to the National Association of Tenants Organisations so that a fair and equitable national rent would be charged for local authority houses and that the situation would not arise where a family on one side of a county border were paying one rent while on the other side a similar family for the same type of accommodation were paying £10 more a week. Therefore, a national scheme was devised which worked very efficiently through successive Governments, Coalition and Fianna Fáil. Successive Ministers for the Environment operated that scheme. The present Minister for the Environment when he was spokesman on the environment for the Fine Gael Party prior to the general election of June 1981 gave a commitment to the National Association of Tenants Organisations on behalf of himself and on behalf of his party that in Government Fine Gael would continue to operate the national rent review with the National Association of Tenants Organisations having negotiating rights. That system continued to operate right up until August of this year when the Minister and the Government who did not have the courage to negotiate a fair rent review with NATO ran away from the question and handed it over to the county managers. We now have chaos because local authorities around the country are charging different rents. This is exactly the recipe which brought us trouble up to 1972.

I want to make a commitment in this House today that on re-election to Government Fianna Fáil will return to a nationally negotiated rent structure because that is the fair, reasonable and rational way to advance.

Mr. Boland

Congratulations.

Mr. R. Burke

The Government have made a song and dance about the injection of confidence which the reconstruction grants have brought to the construction industry. It has done no such thing. In the Estimates for the public services, 1986 the Government include a figure of £24 million for grants for improvements to houses. I welcome the fact that applications have come in to the Department in large numbers. Since the commencement of the scheme, 124,000 applications have been received. If a Government are going to initiate a scheme of that order it is incumbent on them to provide sufficient funds to operate it. On their own figures, the average grant for the number of applications approved to date — more than 90,000 — is £2,000. It is fair to assume that the balance of the applications will stand at the same figure. At Question Time the Minister questioned my arithmetic ability. If I multiply 124 by 2 I get 248. The Minister may get a different figure. There are 124,000 applications. Using their own figures the average value of each grant is £2,000. Therefore, £248 million is what is needed but there is only £24 million allocated in the Estimate. I want the Minister to assure the House and the people who have applied for grants that he will provide at least £200 million in the 1987 Estimates to meet those grants. Anyone who submitted a grant application prior to mid-November would expect to receive a cheque before Christmas 1987. The Department estimate that the time scale involved is somewhere between six and nine months, that is, from receipt of the application to the final inspection. We have used the outside figure of nine months which means that all these applications will be due for payment in 1987.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am sure the Deputy will think I am being hard on him but——

Mr. R. Burke

I have finished with that point. In relation to housing and the £5,000 grant, the Minister informed the House this morning — it is a matter of deep regret and not a very pleasant Christmas present for those taking up loans — that he has increased the interest rate by 1 per cent on annuity and convertible loans for house purchase.

Mr. Boland

Your buddies in the building societies increased it by 3 per cent.

Mr. R. Burke

That increase is one further shock to the already hard-pressed home owners and those intending to purchase homes.

Mr. Boland

It is 2 per cent less than the rate your friends used.

An Ceann Comhairle

We cannot have interruptions, Minister.

Mr. R. Burke

He is being particularly sensitive this morning. I do not envy him going out and facing the people of County Dublin when there has been an increase in building society mortgages of 3 per cent brought about by the——

Mr. Boland

By your friends.

Mr. R. Burke

My friends? I fought them harder than you ever fought them, and a lot more successfully.

Mr. Boland

Are they not the Deputy's friends?

Mr. R. Burke

Personal abuse will not save the Minister from the wrath of the people when they get him at the door.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order, please. The Minister must not interrupt and the Deputy must address the Chair.

Mr. R. Burke

I would not like to be in the shoes of any Government Minister.

Mr. Boland

You will not be.

Mr. R. Burke

I should not like to be them when they meet the mortgage holders who have been crippled by a 3 per cent mortgage hike as a result of the mismanagement of the country's financial affairs. They have so mismanaged our affairs that they have driven the interest rate to over four times the rate of inflation, the highest in the history of the country in relation to inflation. They will have to face the people in February despite their best efforts at trying to hang on, doing U-turn after U-turn, Wednesday night after Wednesday night.

Mr. Boland

It is 4 per cent less than when the Deputy was Minister for the Environment.

Mr. R. Burke

The poor Minister is feeling sensitive. He must not have had a good night.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order, please.

Mr. R. Burke

In relation to the Housing Finance Agency, £6.9 million is provided in the Estimate. Prior to Christmas 1981 a debate was guillotined by the Government. It was on a Bill to introduce the Housing Finance Agency. We were assured at that time that it would be a cure-all for financing local authority housing and why Fianna Fáil had not thought of it and why it had not been introduced before, the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and others could not understand. The Tánaiste was very involved in it and Deputy Barry was Minister at the time. That particular charade is costing the taxpayer £6.9 million.

The Minister makes great play about the financing of local authorities. In the Estimate there is provision for a £1 million grant to local authorities in lieu of rates on agricultural land. Again and again the Minister told us that local authorities have done incredibly well under this administration but since 1981 there has been a real shortfall in local authority finances of about £110 million.

The Minister has included a sum of £100,000 for oil pollution control and pollution control generally. He informed us of the success the co-ordination committee had in the operations of the Kowloon Bridge and the Capo Emma. I hope the operation in Bantry will be successful and that the transfer of the remaining oil from the Capo Emma to the other Italian tanker will be concluded today. I understand that 40,000 tonnes of oil remain and it is my fervent wish that we shall see the back of the Capo Emma out of Bantry Bay as fast as her power can take her and as soon as that transfer of oil is completed. We have had enough pollution of our beaches and do not need that hulk down there.

The Minister was very complimentary on the co-ordination exercise carried out in regard to the Kowloon Bridge. I understand from colleagues in the area that there was a delay of a couple of days in trying to negotiate exactly who was in charge and who was doing what. The point came up at Question Time recently as to which Department were responsible — Communications, Environment, Fisheries or which. Be that as it may, I fervently hope that the fuel oil will be taken from the now sunken ship. According to radio reports this morning, the salvage team have equipment to take oil out of ships from under the sea. I hope that this will happen as soon as possible. It is something that all Governments would desire in order to protect our beaches, our marine life, our seabirds and our tourist amenities generally from the threat of pollution. I trust that the operaction will be successful and I would ask the Minister to keep a very special eye, on behalf of the people, on the operation of the co-ordination group, to make sure that no money is spared and that eventually the Kowloon Bridge owners will pay for the operation of having the oil taken away safely. It is essential that our people, our marine and bird life and our beaches are protected from all such disasters.

When one mentions pollution, in the Irish context it is difficult not to mention the threat to our seas and the Irish Sea in particular which is now described as the most nuclear radioactive sea in the world because we have Sellafield so near our shores and this network of aging nuclear plants along the west coast of Britain. I am glad that the Government eventually joined in the Fianna Fáil call, which they rejected twice earlier this year, for the British Government to close Sellafield. This menace, which is not just a civilian but a military menace being used for military purposes in the production of fuels——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is going outside the Supplementary Estimate again.

Mr. R. Burke

This is on pollution control.

An Ceann Comhairle

I think that was a specific incident.

Mr. R. Burke

I am asking that some of this money be used in the monitoring of the Irish Sea so far as pollution is concerned. It is vitally important from our point of view that we have proper monitoring of this monstrosity which is sited less than 100 miles from us.

An Ceann Comhairle

I think that was a particular incident giving rise to pollution.

Mr. R. Burke

I am particularly anxious that the Minister would use his good offices to protect the shores of that most beautiful part of Ireland, the west Cork area. Bantry Bay has had its experiences in the past and the people of Bantry do not want further damage to be done to their area.

The Minister has included in this Estimate a figure for the Dublin Metropolitan Streets Commission. He makes the point that this commission will have special powers and will do special things in relation to the centre of our capital. The way forward in relation to the Dublin region should be an integrated programme for the development of Dublin, rather than a series of commissions of the type he has proposed. The Dublin region has one third of the population. There are at the moment Dún Laoghaire Borough Council, Dublin County Council and Dublin Corporation. We have, as joint authorities, applied to the Department of Finance to be allowed to make application to the EC for a 75 per cent funding grant which is available for the carrying out of a study to develop an integrated programme for Dublin. Whatever funds are available, whether national, local authority or EC, the idea is that they would be spent in a planned way to fit into an integrated programme so that one would not be throwing money at a particular problem and a particular part of the city and county. So far, the Departments of Finance and the Environment have not let us make the application to the EC for this integrated programme. The Minister, instead, has put forward this commission. The way forward is an integrated programme and I would ask the Minister and his Government to allow direct application to the EC for these funds. This project would cost around £300,000 and up to 75 per cent of that would be paid by EC funding.

Mr. L.T. Cosgrave

I am glad to contribute on this Supplementary Estimate. I agree with the previous speaker in relation to the hope that the work at present going on off the south coast in connection with the Kowloon Bridge and the Capo Emma will be a success. Unfortunately, certain damage has been done to our coastline and I hope that the money provided here will go some way towards undoing that damage.

We have coastlines with vast potential which are a tremendous tourist attraction. It would be very unfortunate if, as a result of a combination of errors and a possible cavalier attitude on the part of tanker owners, damage would be done. It reinforces the need for regulations and a tightening up on information in relation to these tankers drifting into various harbours — particularly where it appears that all is not well — and then drifting out again. It must be made clear at international level that if these foreign tankers are to come into our ports certain regulations must be stringently ahdered to. I hope, as a result of what has happened down there, that there will be a review of the operation of these tankers. The damage which can be caused by any spillage or accident is detrimental and costly to the marine life in these areas. I hope when matters have been resolved and the operations, as is hoped, are a success, that there will be a claim for compensation against those who have been responsible. It is not acceptable that tanker owners can suddenly drift into foreign ports and cause such trouble.

I wish to deal with other matters raised in the Supplementary Estimate, particularly the success of the £5,000 grant scheme. Many houses have become available because people are availing of this scheme. This means that people who were living in overcrowded conditions or who are paying exorbitant rents can be housed by the local authority much more quickly than heretofore. It is heartening to note the very big reductions in the local authority housing lists. The housing lists of Dublin Corporation, Dublin County Council and Dún Laoghaire Corporation were lengthy a few years ago, but the numbers have been reduced substantially. This has been one of the results of the introduction of this scheme. While it is important to continue building local authority houses, it is only possible to build houses at a certain rate and at a certain cost, and it is important that people living in overcrowded conditions and paying exorbitant rents for flats or houses, some of them very damp, should be housed much more quickly by the local authority.

This scheme has also helped people who up to now found it very difficult to get the deposit to buy a house. We all know of the very high costs involved in buying a house, particularly getting the deposit, the legal costs and buying furniture. All these costs have tended to lead people to believe they would not be able to purchase their own houses. This £5,000 grant, plus the other grants for first time buyers, have enabled people to take this first step and to purchase their own houses. This underlines the need for us to look again at the system of house purchase. I believe there are many people who, if given half a chance, want to own their own homes and are willing to make the effort to make the repayments but they need a little extra help, an extra incentive, to get over this first big hurdle. There are many people who have purchased their houses and who are making their repayments because they were given this help. We should take another look at the early years of repayment of a mortgage to see if the time could be extended or if the repayments could be reduced because most people who come to me tell me how hard they are finding it to get the deposit, to pay the various costs involved and to buy furniture. If further incentives could be provided, I am sure many of the people on the borderline would buy their houses rather than put their names on the local authority housing list.

The previous Deputy spoke about local authority rents. Local authority rents are subject to waiver schemes and an examination of each case by the local authorities. I was surprised the Deputy did not go so far as to say that Fianna Fáil would abolish local authority rents altogether, given the commitments and promises they have been making in recent months.

I want to deal now with the money allocated to meet flood damage caused last August. I am glad the Minister found it possible to assist the people in the worst hit areas. The freak storm caused extensive damage. This underlines the need for reviewing our emergency procedures and I hope this money will go some way towards compensating people who suffered loss at that time. That freak storm unfortunately claimed a few lives. It is good to see extra money has been made available to assist those people whose buildings suffered structural damage.

I want to discuss now the money provided for the Dublin Metropolitan Streets Commission. While it is regrettable that this money did not come to hand before now, it is good that the money is now being made available and I hope that commission will be in operation in the new year. I also hope they will issue a report after six, eight, or ten months, or even one year in operation so that we can see what improvements have been made. The area from Grafton Street to Parnell Square has to be developed in conjunction with the local authority to make it more attractive and to woo businesses back into the city centre. There has been a tendency to develop the suburban areas but it is very important that we rekindle the long tradition of making our city centre more attractive and attracting more visitors. Other capital cities have areas of note which attract tourists, and such an area should be developed in Dublin. The money allocated under this Supplementary Estimate is a testimony that this Government are concerned about all these areas.

Mr. O'Kennedy

This Supplementary Estimate, in conjunction with the others, testifies one fact more than any other, and that is that this Government have totally and utterly repudiated every notion of fiscal control and management of finances. To introduce Supplementary Estimates of this nature at this time of the year — the total we have been asked to pass recently comes to £98 million — is about the most irresponsible action any government could undertake at this stage.

I want to point out just how irresponsible this is in the current economic climate. There is a document here which is presented as gospel——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is this relevant?

Mr. O'Kennedy

Yes, it is very relevant.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Stick to the debate.

Mr. O'Kennedy

I am dealing with Supplementary Estimates. We are told that the Government still have a commitment to this document, presented by the Minister for Finance. I want to refer to the part on Supplementary Estimates. The Minister for Finance indicated that the Supplementary Estimates would have to be restricted to enable Government finances to be properly managed and regulated. This is what he had to say to ensure that we would not go through this facade we are going through this morning. He said that a possibility would be that where expenditure in the course of a year exceeds the projected revenue by more than the margin agreed at budget time by the Dáil — which is certainly the case here — the Government, unless otherwise authorised by the Dáil, would be obliged to adjust their spending programme downwards or their revenue upwards in order to restore the projected balance. Far from adjusting their spending programme downwards or their revenue upwards, the Government are ensuring in these Supplementary Estimates that the actual overspill on Government spending——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy, I have been——

Mr. O'Kennedy

I know it is a very sensitive area, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is not sensitive to the Chair. The Chair is trying to guide the Deputy on the type of debate that can be allowed on a Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. O'Kennedy

I accept that.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I indicate to you that the debate on a Supplementary Estimate is a restricted debate and you are confined to the items involved in the Supplementary Estimate. You should not branch out into a general debate.

Mr. O'Kennedy

Do not take up too much of my time.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I am not wasting your time but you are wasting the Chair's time.

Mr. O'Kennedy

I have been here a long time as you know and I have a certain awareness——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I have the Standing Orders in front of me, Deputy.

Mr. O'Kennedy

When the Government introduce Supplementary Estimates of this order at this time of the year I am concerned for the role of this House, for parliamentary procedures and particularly for reasonable management of the public finances which is being thrown out the door. In relation to this Supplementary Estimate, I will illustrate how this concept is being totally and utterly repudiated. This Estimate provides for a sum just short of £14 million.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Under five headings.

Mr. O'Kennedy

Exactly, under five headings. It deals with housing grants, rates in lieu of agricultural land and so on. In relation to housing grants, what is particularly significant is that there is no reference in this Estimate or in the Government's projections for expenditure this year to the huge cost of house construction grants which they are going to toss into next year's budget. Because it has not been provided for this year, a figure of not less than £240 million will have to be provided next year to cover commitments made by the Minister and the Government in respect of house improvement grants. It is one thing to totally and utterly fail to meet the targets this year in the Department of the Environment, but to irresponsibily pass on a figure of that amount to next year's budget and next year's Government, guarantees that everything we all recognise as being of a very serious consequence will be even more seriously aggravated next year.

As one who will likely have a very serious responsibility in this area, I want to protest in the strongest possible way that this Government are not maintaining accounting procedures in the current year. They are passing on to the next Government a bill, in this one area alone, of over £220 million. They will then claim that Fianna Fáil could not balance the books in 1987. This is the most reprehensible repudiation of responsibility I ever witnessed from any Government in 21 years in the Oireachtas. It is coming from a Government who claimed they were going to plan a better way to manage the nation's finances. This is the worst possible way to plan the nation's finances. It is time we all admitted publicly to the people the extent of the problem. If there are to be cutbacks and a burden to be shared across the board, the action of this Government in passing on to their successor in Government a bill of the order of £240 million in this one area——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

House improvement grants are not included in the Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. O'Kennedy

That is the point I am making. I am just referring to it in passing.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

You have been passing for some time.

Mr. O'Kennedy

It is the most important and most critical issue.

I want to deal with two or three matters, one of which my colleague, Deputy Burke, was referring to when I came in, that is, the giving of support from the European Regional Fund to local authorities for integrated programmes. Having had consultations with commissioners of the European Community recently and from the experience I had there, I realise the case being made by the Government, that we are not in a position to put forward an integrated programme for any year because all Ireland is designated as a regional fund qualification area, is false. There are many areas in the European community that qualify for aid under the regional fund. Perhaps the most obvious example is the south of Italy. Because it qualifies for aid from the regional fund in no way disqualifies it from having an additional integrated programme for the city of Naples. That is the pattern throughout the Community. The Government should immediately make proposals — they have made none at all — for integrated programmes wherever they are urgently needed. There are so many of them that I cannot begin to outline them, whether in the Border regions, in Dublin city, in Cork city or even in north Tipperary. They need direct support in addition to our quota allocation from regional programmes.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Burke may have strayed a little.

Mr. O'Kennedy

I want to deal with something that is dear to your heart, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, and mine which is specifically referred to here, that is the Mulcaire River and the assistance being made available for cleaning-up operations on that river. These cleaning-up operations for which a paltry sum has been provided would never have been necessary if the Government had not, in this area as in many others, in the name of a review of the arterial drainage programme, used that review to postpone the whole operation of the arterial drainage programme. Three years ago they undertook a review when the Mulcaire River was ready to be drained under the arterial drainage programme. That review was a very convenient excuse for doing nothing for three years. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle and I know the consequences of their failure to do anything.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I do not know the last statement.

Mr. O'Kennedy

We both attended meetings in Newport and I am sure your ears were opened as much as mine were.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The last statement is not what I know.

Mr. O'Kennedy

The flooding that has occurred in that region, a very fertile area, has been beyond estimation. Allocating sums of this nature which merely cope with the consequence is not the way to approach it. The Government should renew again the arterial drainage programme and ensure that the most fertile area of the nation, on the Limerick-Tipperary border, will be brought into constant fertile productivity.

I have one final comment to make in relation to the Department of the Environment and again it relates to our own constituency. The Department, so appropriately named the Department of the Environment, on occasions, as in the case of a major regional water scheme for my town, Nenagh——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is out of order.

Mr. O'Kennedy

The Chair and I share concern about this.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We may but the Deputy is out of order. I have already indicated the restrictions that apply to this debate. I appreciate what the Deputy is endeavouring to raise but he is not in order.

Mr. O'Kennedy

I was looking for an opportunity to get the support of the Chair in the vital interests of our town, Nenagh.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy should not abuse the Chair.

Mr. O'Kennedy

I should like to make a point about that scheme.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy will not be permitted to make any point that is not relevant to the debate on the Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. O'Kennedy

Pollution and environmental control is dealt with in the Supplementary Estimate. I want to make a brief point about that scheme.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

This Supplementary Estimate deals with five subheads and they alone can be discussed. There will be another day to debate the matter the Deputy is interested in.

Mr. O'Kennedy

There will not and that is my point. Of course the day will come when I will make provision for work that should be undertaken in regard to that scheme. When any local authority, in Tipperary, Cork or anywhere else, bring forward a proposal backed by expert consultancy advice that suggests that a regional water scheme cannot be completed without a treatment plant to protect against the pollution of Lough Derg it should be listened to. It is a disgrace that the Department of the Environment are going to pollute the very atmosphere they are charged with protecting.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is being disorderly. I have pointed out to him the restrictions in the debate. The Deputy is being very irresponsible.

Mr. O'Kennedy

I am sorry the Chair will not allow me to raise this matter.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I cannot allow the Deputy even one minute; the case has been well made.

Mr. O'Kennedy

By whom?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

By all concerned.

Mr. O'Kennedy

This scheme is being ignored by the Government.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy, who has told us that he has been a Member of the House for many years, should have more respect for the Chair. He is not showing respect.

Mr. O'Kennedy

My intention is to be a Member for a while longer so that I can do something about this scandal. Bringing in Estimates for this amount is an abuse of the procedures of the House, a total repudiation of the hypocrisy expressed in all Government statements about fiscal control and management. Next year we will inherit a bill of £250 million for Supplementary Estimates, not to talk about what the Government will pass on to us but we will deal with them effectively by prudent management, something the Government have failed to do.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That does not arise on the Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. Calleary

I suggest to Deputy Cosgrave, who referred to commitments and promises, that he should get details of the Taoiseach's recent tours to find out what commitments and promises are all about. He should not be blaming Fianna Fáil for them all. I should like to bring to the notice of the House the storm damage that was caused in Mayo last night. I should like to thank the Minister of State for his courtesy and kindness to me since his appointment and I appeal to him to pay attention to what happened in Mayo last night, the worst night experienced in that country. Some of the money provided in the Supplementary Estimate should be devoted to dealing with the problems that have arisen following last night's storm. In north Mayo many towns have been affected. An area near the town of Ballycastle has been cut off from the remainder of north Mayo due to a major landslide that is continuing. People in that area must travel many miles to get to Ballina and other centres. The town of Crossmolina was badly hit by severe flooding. The town of Ballina, and its environs such as Creggs Road and the Sligo Road, were badly hit and a considerable amount of damage done.

Mayo County Council should be given a special grant to enable them to deal with the problems. The village of Rakestreet has been badly hit and in the townland of Comminch six families have been completely cut off. One young lady from that townland who was to report for work this evening in Dublin is unable to leave the area. Those families do not have any connection with any other part of the county.

The many people who called me this morning seeking assistance told me that it was the worst night experienced in the county. I understand that the fire brigade have been working through the night. I am very concerned about the problems of the people in north Mayo and I urge the Minister to do everything possible to help those people. It is important that money is given to the county council to help them repair the damage.

I accept that the £5,000 house grant was a tremendous boost to those anxious to purchase their own homes but there is a long delay in the payment of these grants. That delay in some cases is caused by the applicants. Most of those who apply for a grant must obtain bridging finance from financial institutions but, because of the delay in the payment by the Department, they fall behind in their payments. Many of them never recover financially. The excess bridging means that those people are in difficulty from the start. I appeal to the Minister to speed up the payments of those grants. It appears that a difficulty arises because the Department check with local authorities about the rent paid by the applicants and the income declared. That is causing considerable inconvenience to applicants.

I had not intended contributing to this debate but I was glad of the opportunity to make an appeal to the Minister on behalf of the people of north Mayo. I have never had so many telephone calls from that area appealing for help. An emergency exists in north Mayo and the Minister should pay attention to it. I appeal to the Department to contact Mayo Councy Council to arrange help. It is frightening to think that some families are cut off and cannot be reached even by emergency services such as the fire brigade or doctors. I should like to thank the Chair for permitting me to raise this matter and I appeal to the Minister to transfer funds to deal with that emergency. I hope that when the next Estimate is debated in the House the Minister will be in a position to announce plans for the Department to commence work in Ballina.

Mr. M. Cosgrave

My contribution will be brief. I should like to make a special point in regard to the threat to the environment by the shipping disaster on the south-west coast. First, I welcome the Estimate as another boost to the building industry. It will create more employment and will maintain the present employment level in that industry. The £5,000 grant has made a big impact on Dublin Corporation and Dublin County Council housing lists, the best I have seen in my ten years as a member of both local authorities. The waiting list of Dublin County Council has been virtually eliminated.

I welcome the redeployment of money to the Housing Finance Agency which enables families of modest means to provide their own houses rather than being a burden on local authority housing lists. More than 8,500 applicants have availed of this scheme in the past two years. I congratulate the Minister and his officials for having brought in this excellent scheme which has given a great boost to the availability of local authority houses to needy persons.

The Minister and his officials should be congratulated on their work during the recent shipping disaster off the Cork coast. However, if such a disaster should occur in Dublin Bay are we ready to deal with it? For instance, have the Dublin local authorities stocks of dispersants, booms and other equipment available to them? Have we an oil pollution expert available to advise local authorities and the Department in the event of such a disaster? If not, efforts should be made immediately to recruit such an expert. We have dangerous substances being brought in and out of Dublin port. They are stored in the port. Have we proper fire fighting equipment and expertise to combat any serious fire or spillage in the port area? These substances are stored in the Dublin docks area. I suggest that the Minister should approach the Dublin Port and Docks Board and the people who store such substances in tanks above ground in an effort to get the tanks put underground, or otherwise to put them in a safe place where they could be better protected. I understand the EC have more than 600 sheets of information available describing methods for dealing with oil spills as well as the whereabouts of special equipment, dispersants and other chemicals. Ships and aircraft are available from the EC. Are local authorities aware of this? If not, I would ask the Minister to make them aware of it in the event of a spillage occurring.

Mr. J. Doyle

I welcome the introduction of the £5,000 housing grant. As the Minister said in his speech, it is of great assistance to taxpayers who previously have been on local authority housing lists. They will now be enabled to buy their own houses. There has been a high demand for this grant in the area I represent.

My main reason for speaking this morning is to thank the Government for the measures they introduced to help the victims of the flood disaster during the night of 26-27 August. It will be remembered by people throughout the country for a long time. In Dublin south-east and in County Wicklow there were many victims. I will make a passing reference to the lack of emergency services available prior to the flooding. Because of the accurate forecasts beforehand, the emergency services had time to take steps to deal with the subsequent floods and to take preventive measures in some areas.

I had the sad experience of trying to get the emergency services to help to protect property against flooding, with little or no success. After two or three days waiting, we had an announcement by the Government that £1 million would be available to flood victims. One's own house has to be flooded before one appreciates what it feels like to see everything one had built up over the years destroyed overnight, in some cases in a matter of minutes. I know people who closed their doors that night and have not returned yet. They could not face up to it.

Last Monday, Dublin City Council approved the expenditure of £270,000 to pay small builders who were employed by Dublin Corporation to refurbish houses damaged in the flood — replacing floor boards, plastering walls and so on. I understand that is only a quarter of what the corporation intend to spend. This money is available mainly to people who had no insurance. They are in the greatest need, but it has come to my attention that many people were under-insured and I suggest that their cases should be looked at sympathetically. If there is only small insurance cover, the necessary work cannot be carried out. It seems unfair to them to see a near neighbour who had no insurance whatever avail of the Government's generosity, having their houses totally refurnished and redecorated. I compliment the Government on coming to the aid of the elderly and the disabled in that crisis. Old people living alone suffered most in the floods.

Much work still has to be done to salvage some of the property damaged by the floods some months ago. I suggest the Minister should ask the local authorities to expedite the work so that it will be finished by Christmas. All who suffered in the floods, including my own family, would like to see their houses put back into habitable condition before Christmas. I appeal to the Minister to try to have the emergency services prepared for such floods in future. It is important also that local authorities would have a section to deal with the maintenance of rivers. They have such sections available for housing and roads and there should be river maintenance sections because if rivers were properly maintained we would not have had the awful problems we had on 26-27 August.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Before I call on the Minister to conclude the debate, on an order of the House dated 29 April, Deputies have the right to intervene or ask questions of the Minister before he replies. If Deputy Burke or Deputy Doyle wish to make any intervention before I call the Minister they can do so.

Minister for the Environment (Mr. Boland)

I have listened this morning to one of the most extraordinary speeches I have ever heard in my years in the House from an Opposition spokesman. It was extraordinary because in every single area of his criticism the Deputy attacked what is acclaimed by the general public and impartial commentators as one of the most successful schemes introduced by the Department. The Deputy attacked the £5,000 grant scheme and once again returned to what is now becoming a rather broken and pathetic record: he attacked in every part the most successful house improvement grants scheme ever introduced or operated by any Government in the history of this State.

One of the things rarely spoken of is the fact that the Irish have a very high record of home ownership, representing 84 per cent, the highest in the world. That is something of which we should be very proud. There has been virtually a continuous policy of generous grants and tax aid to prospective house purchasers to enable them to fulfil their desire to own their own homes, the result being that we have the highest record of home ownership in the entire world. In that context it is exactly right that Governments should, from time to time, introduce schemes to encourage people to maintain, refurbish or improve their own houses. It is the single thing of value the Irish have, ownership of their own homes, and for that reason the Government introduced a home improvements grant scheme designed to stimulate employment among legitimate small builders throughout the country and to encourage home owners to improve their property in the interests of their family.

Its success is now well known. As Deputy Burke said in his criticism, there are now over 125,000 applicants. That seems to be a source of annoyance to the Deputy, so I will give him a few more figures to annoy him further. Over 90,000 of these applicants have received grant approval. The sum of £24 million, a sum of which the Deputy was so critical and which may be pocket money to him but is an extraordinarily substantial amount, was made available this year by the Government to fund grants drawn down by people who went about improving, extending or repairing their own homes to improve the fabric of the housing stock, to provide employment for the smaller contractors in the construction industry and to generate activity throughout the country. One has only to talk to builders' merchants, legitimate builders, people employed in the building industry and home owners to find that they unanimously praise and acclaim the grants scheme. The single fear they express is that the repeated and deliberate criticism voiced about this scheme by one who would proclaim himself an aspiring Minister for the Environment means that if this man got his hands on this scheme he would be vindictive enough to abolish it because it was someone else's idea.

Mr. J. Doyle

They abolished it before.

Mr. Boland

I was not going to refer to that but, as the Deputy reminds the House, there was a modest house improvement grants scheme in operation under a previous Fianna Fáil Government. Not only did they abolish it but they made such a mess of the abolition that in the fortnight's prior notice they gave of the abolition they got the equivalent of five years applications. In charity, the best I can say about the speech made by the Opposition spokesman is that his sole original thought was based upon something expressed by his father in this House 30 years ago. Congratulations to him.

The Deputy also expressed a commitment to reintroduce the national differential rents scheme if his party were returned to Government. I further congratulate the Deputy for reading out relatively well the biased and sectional speech written for him relating to the construction industry. The simple fact of the matter is that the construction industry now receives over 70 per cent of total turnover from Exchequer sources. I want to ask a question. At what stage or at what percentage is it regarded as reasonable for the taxpayer to stop funding a particular industry? We all know the difficulties of the construction industry, and none better than the Government, and we have endeavoured to respond to them by allocating capital resources in a way in which there was an effective return produced upon any capital investment while, at the same time, maintaining the highest level possible of activity in that industry during the recession. Over 70 per cent of the total turnover of the construction industry is funded by the taxpayer. At what stage is it reasonable to say the taxpayer has done enough for an industry? Is it at 75 per cent? Is it at 80 per cent? Or perhaps it should be 100 per cent.

However, the Deputy did not entertain us this morning with the promise of his leader to put a further £200 million into the construction industry. It could have been instructive for the House and the taxpayer to hear on what that £200 million is to be spent. Is it to be on cost effective capital investment? Is it to be spent on making work available? Is it to be on the house improvements grant scheme which the Deputy has clearly signalled he would abolish if he had his way? Is it strange that on the one hand the Deputy's leader intends to invest £200 million in the construction industry while his spokesman for the Environment consistently criticises the spending of money on the house improvement grants scheme and indicates clearly his intention, if he gets his way, to abolish that scheme. Does that mean that the £200 million is to be in substitution for the abolition of the house improvement grants scheme? It would have been more interesting for the House and the taxpayer and, not least, the construction industry, had the Deputy explained to us this morning precisely where he is going to spend this £200 million after he abolishes the house improvement grants scheme and precisely from which group of taxpayers he intends to extract this money.

The Deputy criticised the Government's record in public housing. The simple fact of the matter is that there are now fewer applicants for housing in the Twenty-six Counties than in one single borough of the City of London. There are something under 22,000 applicants nationwide here as opposed to something approaching 30,000 applicants in the single London Borough of Battersea. That has been achieved through a combination of the introduction of new, properly designed and publicly-funded schemes and the diversion of other resources; the £5,000 surrender grant scheme, of which the Deputy was so critical, the Housing Finance Agency, the financial viability of which the Deputy in his most recent and brief tenure in the Custom House endeavoured to undermine and which he tried to abolish. There have been the increases in income and loan limits for the SDA scheme and the continued high output of public authority housing, all of which have resulted in approximately 11,000 dwellings being let in the last two years annually, in comparison with the stated and accepted target of 9,500 and all done by the Government in the interests of both the taxpayer and those in need of housing. What has been the response from the Opposition: the £5,000 surrender grant scheme — wrong; the Housing Finance Agency — wrong; the SDA loans scheme — wrong the increase of 1 per cent — wrong. The Deputy's friends in the building societies recently increased loan interest rates by 3 per cent; apparently that was not wrong.

This morning has been an ordeal — to listen to a litany of complaints and criticism about every single thing achieved by this Government in the interests of those who cannot house themselves and who wish to provide and improve their homes. As recently as yesterday evening I announced improvements in the new house grants scheme. This will mean that people who have a disabled member of their family — even if they owned a house previously — may obtain the first-time purchaser grant in addition to the new £2,250 grant I introduced recently if they provide a house specially modified for the disabled member of their family.

Mr. O'Kennedy

On a point of order, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, may I seek your guidance? I have been listening to what the Minister has been saying. Would the Chair like to indicate to me how matters that are not referred to at all in the Supplementary Estimate introduced by the Minister now become relevant when you refused to allow me make even a passing reference? May I ask how the Chair can claim that this is being in any way consistent?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

While I was in the Chair I ensured that the Supplementary Estimate debate would be a restricted one relative to the five subheads as indicated on the list. What happened before I came in here is not my business.

Mr. O'Kennedy

I am talking about what the Minister is now addressing — you misunderstood me, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle — and what he has been addressing in the last five to ten minutes.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister is replying to the Deputy's party spokesperson on the environment ——

Mr. O'Kennedy

Either it is relevant or it is not. I would now have to insist that the Chair learn to be consistent; that is all. If I am not allowed to make a reference which arises with regard to pollution ——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

While I was here the Deputy was not allowed because the Deputy was not remaining within the confines of the Supplementary Estimate debate.

Mr. O'Kennedy

I was referring to——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is being disorderly and not for the first time.

Mr. O'Kennedy

I am anxious to ensure that the Chair will be orderly and consistent.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair was acting in accordance with the relevant Standing Order.

Mr. Boland

On a point of order, is it in order for a Deputy to impute that the Chair is disorderly.

Mr. O'Kennedy

It is in order for a Deputy to ask for consistency from the Chair. I am only saying that the range of matters the Minister has been addressing for the past five to ten minutes is not covered in this Supplementary Estimate——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

There was a range of matters discussed here before the present occupant of the Chair arrived. While I was here Deputy O'Kennedy was being disorderly. I appreciate the Deputy's concern at not being allowed to range over a wide variety of subjects but it was a very limited debate. The Standing Order is there and I read it out to the Deputy.

Mr. O'Kennedy

The Standing Order is still there. I wonder would you dream of reading it out to the Minister?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It so happens now, Deputy, that the time is up and I must put the question.

Mr. O'Kennedy

That suits conveniently.

Mr. R. Burke

The Minister has had to endure a lot this morning but it is nothing compared to what he will have to endure when he goes knocking on doors.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I am putting the question. Is the motion agreed?

Mr. Boland

Of course.

Mr. R. Burke

On the basis that public finances are now so far out of line that £13 million odd will not make much difference.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is it agreed?

Vote put and agreed to.