Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 10 Jun 1998

Vol. 492 No. 2

Urban Renewal Bill, 1998: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

When I reported progress on the Bill last night, I was speaking about the guidelines set down by the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, on 24 November 1997. I particularly welcome the change of focus and direction in urban renewal policy. The Minister is now talking about a scheme which will feature a more focused approach targeting the remaining areas of need. It is important to emphasise areas of need in urban renewal policy.

The Minister also said the Government and the national anti-poverty strategy require that future policy on urban renewal must take full account of the social needs of and the effects on areas targeted for regeneration. Architecture, design and conservation opportunities under the scheme must also yield optimum results. It is important that local authorities have been given a role and responsibility for leading the preparation of these plans. Although there has been much criticism of local authorities, they are best suited to bring forward these plans. Some local authorities have submitted a number of applications and have not prioritised them. They did what local authorities did in the past with applications for the national lottery grants. In fairness Galway County Council, which sent in an application, focused on an area plan for Tuam which I, as a Deputy who has represented the town for the past 23 years, welcome. Tuam needs this type of incentive. The Government, through the Minister, set out criteria which will assist local authorities in the selection and prioritisation of the areas for integrated area plans.

I am a little concerned about the guidelines which refer to a population of 6,000. The guidelines make the point that few towns with a population of fewer than 6,000 have received designation up to now. It looks as if it will be difficult for towns with populations of fewer than 6,000 to be included in the present scheme. It is, however, more important that the scheme reflects an urban renewal application which could be achieved without the figure of 6,000 being applied to a town. The Minister said the panel's recommendation was that the guideline of 6,000 should remain unchanged on the basis that it is only a guideline. It would be unfair if a town was excluded from the scheme because the figure of 6,000 had not been met. The population of Tuam in 1991 was 5,540 and it increased to 5,627 in 1996. What is most important about Tuam and many other towns is the hinterland which is served by the town. The population of the rural hinterland around Tuam amounts to 27,000. These factors should be taken into consideration when talking about the guideline of 6,000 people.

The designation of sites and areas for tax incentives has been an important measure in the redevelopment and renewal of many towns and cities. In the case of Tuam, the integrated area plan for Galway County Council was carried out by Brady, Shipman and Martin Planning Consultants. The object of the plan was to provide a planned integrated and focused approach to urban renewal. When this is implemented, the IAP will aid the physical, economic, social and environmental regeneration of a declining urban area.

Tuam was selected because of the high levels of unemployment and social deprivation in the town and the surrounding rural area. The town has significant areas of physical dereliction and investment has been hampered by poor image. Ironically, the service functions of the town are threatened by its proximity to Galway city. Tuam also has the potential to attract investment through its good location, educated workforce, historical heritage and modern infrastructure.

The main objective of the plan is to ensure Tuam is upgraded and improved. With the integrated area plan and the sub-area designation, a context will be provided in which huge development may take place exploiting the infrastructure, workforce and character of Tuam. I pay tribute to Galway County Council, Tuam Town Commissioners, the business community and voluntary organisations in the town which were so enthusiastic about putting forward the case for the town. Tuam is a market town and has retained important educational and ecclesiastical functions. Its industrial base has had a varied history with a number of traditional industries closing which has caused an increase in local unemployment levels. The town, which is 21 miles from Galway, has become a commuting centre but has retained its own distinctive identity. The setbacks suffered by Tuam in recent years include the closure of the Irish Sugar Company and cutbacks in the railway service.

Galway city has benefited from urban renewal schemes in the past and from the development of the economy. Urban renewal has been successful also in towns such as Ballinasloe and Loughrea. However, Tuam has not benefited to the same extent. The type of plan before us is one which should be of great benefit to Tuam. Various Ministers for the Environment allocated funding to Tuam for a waste water treatment plant where we have recently commissioned a £25 million water supply system. There are excellent link roads around Tuam which is situated on the N17 — the principal north-south route in the west — now famous in song and story. This infrastructure with the town's historical heritage provides a basis for the further expansion of the tourism and service industries. There are other plans and policies associated with the town, including the western regional authority plan 1996-2000, the Ireland-west regional tourism plan, the Western Health Board proposals 1998, the Galway rural development company — the ADM and Leader II programme, the tidy towns plan 1995, the urban and village renewal scheme 1994 and the Western Development Commission. This type of investment is important in addition to the proposal with the Department of the Environment and Local Government.

Education, training, employment and economic development are features of most of the plans with the Department. This is true also in the case of Tuam. I wish to mention in particular the proposal that a portion of the town be used for local community functions and operate in tandem with the commercial venture.

The Bons Secours hospital in Tuam has spent a substantial amount on refurbishment of existing facilities. However, there is a need for further refurbishment and an expansion of services. It is encouraging to note that the hospital is included in the development plan for urban renewal. Galway County Council is operating a refurbishment scheme in Gilmartin Road, Tuam, and an estate management course will be carried out in conjunction with it. Tuam has many archaeological remnants from its historic past. An objective of the plan is to exploit its rich heritage.

The Minister referred to consultations regarding the urban renewal scheme. Some Deputies were critical that local authorities did not engage in sufficient consultation. Public meetings were held in Galway on this issue. The principal partners in the development of the town were residents, business people and landowners, Galway County Council, Tuam Town Commissioners, the rural development company and the education and training providers. Arising from the public meeting held in Tuam on 5 February 1998 there was great interest and enthusiasm in the scheme. It was clear from that meeting that there should be more employment opportunities in the town. Another issue raised was that Tuam could benefit from a new hotel to serve both the town and the leisure industry. One hotel is not adequate to cater for the people of Tuam and the tourism industry, which has great potential. I hope, following a second planning application from a business group, permission will be granted for a second hotel in or near the town. Certainly Tuam town could benefit from a rail link with the city of Galway. I am a member of the western county rail committee which has as its secretary, Fr. Michéal MacGreil, from Westport, one of the pioneers as regards the railways. Five counties from Connacht have representatives on that committee. I hope the committee's efforts will be successful in getting a rail link with Galway city and the whole western region from Claremorris right down to Tuam and Limerick.

The plan emphasises that provision should be made for mobility of the disabled and parents of young children. The plan emphasises also that the town should exploit and capitalise on its history. At present there is a festival in Tuam commemorating Rory O'Connor, the last High King. As part of that festival there is a major emphasis on the town's history.

The use of the town hall has been highlighted in the plan. Certainly the town hall needs refurbishment. I hope a portion of the hall can be used as a community facility.

The Dean of St. Mary's Cathedral, who has been speaking about the history of Tuam and is involved in the festival, has mentioned the necessity of developing St. Mary's Cathedral as a gateway to Tuam and highlighting the town's image and heritage. This is one area that should be emphasised.

I welcome the fact that we are discussing this Bill. I am pleased the scheme will commence on 1 August 1998. I hope the areas I mentioned as regards archaeology and conservation and the provision of car-parking facilities will be supported. The vision for Tuam is the most important part of the application by Galway County Council — a vision to develop the town as a self-sufficient urban centre that serves its huge hinterland. I hope the town of Tuam, through maximising its rich historic base, will become a prestigious inland tourist destination.

I wish to share my time with Deputy Joe Higgins.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

When the urban renewal schemes were introduced in the mid-1980s we were in the middle of an economic recession, unemployment was high, emigration was running at the rate of 30,000 per year, the building industry was in a slump and the centres of our cities and towns were, in many cases, derelict. There was strong justification at that time for the introduction of a scheme to promote investment in our towns and cities. We have a different set of circumstances today, however. We are experiencing an economic boom. People are coming back to the country. Property prices are booming and the question has to be raised as to whether we need a raft of tax incentives and rates remissions to encourage activity in the building industry in the centres of our cities and towns. That question was raised and answered in the Minister's contribution yesterday and the answer, with which I agree, is that there is a need to address areas of social disadvantage, to use the urban renewal scheme in a new way to do that and to integrate the urban renewal strategy with other strategies aimed at addressing poverty and social disadvantage in urban areas. In that context, the Minister referred yesterday to the national anti-poverty strategy.

This new approach to urban renewal was begun by my colleagues, Deputy McManus, when Minister of State with responsibility for urban renewal, and Deputy Howlin, when Minister for the Environment, who commissioned the study of urban renewal which formed the basis for the Bill before the House and for the new approach to urban renewal. The study is valuable not just in terms of underpinning the legislation before us but for the critical evaluation it undertook of the urban renewal schemes to date.

We should remind ourselves that the study was critical of the urban renewal schemes to date. It pointed out, for example, that the tax incentives provided in the urban renewal schemes were a cost to the taxpayer, something not often spoken about. We often talk about tax incentives and rates remissions as if they do not involve any cost but the report makes it clear that, depending on the parameter used, the total net cost of the urban renewal schemes up to 1996 was somewhere between £367 million and £461 million.

The other side of the equation, namely, the return on that State investment, does not appear at face value to have been of significant benefit. An investment of £17.7 billion was made in the various schemes undertaken. The net employment produced, admittedly excluding the IFSC, amounted to just 1,600 jobs. There was development of urban areas but the extent to which some of that development might have taken place anyway, and the extent to which the development caused displacement in business and commercial activity from other parts of cities and towns, is questionable.

From an architectural and conservation point of view, the report was also critical. For example, it points out in its executive summary that in many designated areas, the practice of conservation has simply resulted in the gutting of buildings and the retention of facades. Clearly the urban renewal schemes have been of considerable benefit to the recipients of the tax incentives and the rates remissions involved, including the developers, the property owners and the investors. Whether the communities who lived in the areas subject to urban renewal schemes benefited is an entirely different matter. The report states:

The impact of Urban Renewal Schemes on indigenous or adjacent communities is an issue which varies significantly depending on the prior condition or baseline before re-development occurred. In those designated areas which have adjacent indigenous inner city communities, the local communities believe that urban renewal, as defined by the incentive schemes, has not addressed issues which are central to the regeneration and sustainable redevelopment of these areas such as unemployment, the lack of public amenities, education, training and youth development.

The report goes on to state:

In general, socially deprived inner city communities are precluded from participating in tax-incentive led development both by virtue of the fact that they do not have sufficient tax liability or capital to benefit from the Schemes and due to escalating land prices in designated areas. Similarly, many not-for-profit and voluntary organisations have been unable to carry out social or amenity projects in designated areas.

The report presented to the Ministers in 1996 was highly critical of the extent to which the urban renewal schemes addressed the issues of social deprivation, poverty and disadvantage in the areas in which they operated. That is not to address the public perception of the urban renewal schemes and the degree of scepticism about them, that the areas selected for urban renewal and, in particular, the sites selected for designation had more to do with who owned them than where they were located.

The issue now is whether the Bill before the House will address the principal objective set for it, namely, to turn around the urban renewal schemes to address the issue of social exclusion and disadvantage in the areas concerned. The concept of the integrated area plans is welcome as are the general objectives set for those plans. I welcome also the section which addresses the question of monitoring.

As a means of addressing social exclusion and the principal objective set by the Minister, the Bill falls far short. There are a number of areas where, for example, the Bill does not go sufficiently far to address the problems of social exclusion and disadvantage. First, the Bill addresses solely the question of physical dereliction and does so outside the context of the other interventions aimed at addressing social disadvantage, for example, the approach being taken by the area partnerships, the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs, the county enterprise boards, the drugs task forces, the health boards and the education system. That underlines the necessity for a greater degree of integration in tackling poverty in our community.

The national anti-poverty strategy launched by my colleague, Deputy De Rossa, during the course of the previous Government, which appears to have been taken off the boil somewhat by this Government, should be put centre stage in tackling poverty in our society. The question that must be addressed is whether urban renewal will be effective in addressing social disadvantage and poverty or whether the social reasons expressed by the Minister are simply a justification for continuing tax incentives for certain favoured developers.

The second question which arises is whether tax incentives and rates remissions are the best instrument to achieve the objectives concerned. As I mentioned earlier, not-for-profit organisations are effectively excluded from participation in the urban renewal schemes because they do not attract tax incentives and rates remissions. For example, grants are not being provided except for conservation purposes. A grant-based approach in dealing with social exclusion might be a more effective way of tackling the problem. Grants could be made available to community organisations, voluntary bodies and local authorities to allow them undertake the type of developments that are necessary in areas of social disadvantage, particularly community-type developments which will not attract private investment and which consequently will not benefit from the urban renewal scheme.

I was concerned about the reference by the Minister to the discussions with the European Commission and to which Deputy Howlin referred last night. I have a second reason for expressing concern about it. One of the areas proposed to be excluded by the European Commission in the revamp of Structural and Cohesion Funds is the URBAN programme which is aimed at addressing social deprivation in urban areas. At a time when we are enacting legislation aimed at addressing social exclusion through urban renewal, it would be ironic if the Government would permit European funds, which will change after 1999, to be redirected from the areas in which they are most needed, such as social deprivation in urban areas.

The interface between the Minister of State's two responsibilities — urban renewal and housing — is not addressed. I am not sure to what extent the Minister is aware of it but there is a social housing crisis. Some 40,000 families are now on housing waiting lists. The numbers are growing as fewer people are able to buy houses because of the increase in prices. There has been an explosion in the number of people who are homeless or living in bed and breakfasts or in hostels as well as those living in unsuitable conditions in family homes. There is a serious problem in that private rented accommodation at lower rents is no longer available.

The housing situation is worse now than I have ever seen it in my time in public life. I am surprised the Bill does not seek to address that. It is not right that tax incentives are used to allow building luxury penthouse apartments rather than being targeted at the provision of social housing. One amendment I will table on Committee Stage will seek to have the tax incentives and rates remissions directed specifically at the provision of social housing. Taxpayers should no longer be asked to subsidise building penthouse apartments which are selling for £1 million and are being leased at enormous rents, while huge numbers of people, with their families, are living in squalid, appalling conditions or in unsuitable accommodation and for whom the State is not providing. If the urban renewal scheme is to be redirected, it should be at the provision of social housing.

Since Deputy Michael Kitt made a strong case for his local interest and one with which I do not disagree, I wish to make the Minister aware that my local authority, Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, has submitted an integrated area plan. I do not wish to compound the common perception that my constituency is exclusively wealthy and well off. Some of the worst areas of poverty in Ireland are to be found there. The integrated area plan submitted by the county council seeks to address that and I ask the Minister to seriously consider it when it comes to choosing the integrated area plans. At the same time, I agree with the comments of others that there needs to be a more transparent approach to both the selection of integrated area plans, to the designation of areas and to the costs to the taxpayer associated with the scheme.

(Dublin West): Gabhaim fíorbhuíochas don Teachta Gilmore mar gheall ar a chuid ama a roinnt. The Bill promises the socio-economic and physical renewal of urban areas. Crucially, we must learn from the mistakes of the past when urban planning was allowed to proceed in an extremely chaotic way. In many cases, landowners, developers and speculators decided the pace and areas of development, with compliant county councillors of the major parties responding to their requests and carrying out land rezonings and material contraventions which were utterly unsuitable.

Local authorities have a crucial role to play. The way they implemented the plan for greater Dublin in terms of the three towns of Tallaght, Clondalkin and Blanchardstown was disastrous for the tens of thousands of people who live there. Greenfield sites were chosen on which thousands of homes were built with no facilities or backup provided. No infrastructure in terms of community backup or even in terms of investment in employment was provided. The people of those areas are still running to catch up because of the mistakes made. That must not be allowed to be repeated.

Urban renewal is nothing if it does not involve investment in people and that is my main question with the Bill. It is not sufficient to have the renewal left to the speculators and so-called investors who take advantage of the various tax breaks. Fianna Fáil has traditionally relied on such people. It is no surprise they receive favours from Fianna Fáil when, for example, a builder donates £60,000 to £70,000 to the party in one year.

The suffering of those on the local authority housing lists is now immense and emergency investment is needed to provide homes for them. There is immense distress among young people who cannot afford to buy homes because of the actions of what I can only call gangsters in the building industry who have, by sheer profiteering, put homes outside the reach of ordinary working people on ordinary wages. That issue must be addressed. In the private rental area, we are seeing the return of the days described and condemned by James Connolly many decades ago. Rack renting has returned to Dublin and is alive and well and as ugly as ever. That should be tackled by the Government through investment in urban renewal. If these problems are allowed to continue, they will give rise to a major social crisis which is now already developing. The vested interests must be taken on and investment in people put first.

Urban renewal must also be set in a national context. Allowing Dublin to sprawl indefinitely and chaotically is no longer sustainable in terms of traffic and pollution. There must be national planning in all the counties so that people can stay in their home base, which is what most are happy to do if the jobs and the infrastructure are provided. In that way, there can be a balanced development throughout Ireland rather than the chaotic rush towards Dublin which creates greater problems for ordinary people.

I wish to share my time with Deputy Browne from Wexford.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

I express my wholehearted support for the Bill. Urban renewal applications in the form of a written statement and a plan were furnished by local authorities in February and are currently being assessed by the expert group set up by the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, to assist him in evaluating them. Both statements and plans must indicate the objectives for the social and economic renewal on a sustainable basis in the areas to which they relate and the improvements in the physical environment of the areas.

The Bill can be divided into four headings. First, it deals with standard provisions. It is also concerned with the preparation and contents of the integrated area plans and defines the functions of local authorities and the Minister. It also deals with the remission of rates and taxes. Part III relates to additional functions for the Dublin Docklands Development Authority. The final part provides for urban and village renewal grants for local authorities and the amendment of taxation provisions which relate to them.

Urban renewal schemes were introduced in 1986 as an answer to the increasing dilapidation and dereliction of many areas of our larger cities and towns. The main objective of the initial scheme was to promote urban renewal and encourage local development through promoting investment by the private sector. The aim of the legislation was to give an impetus to the construction and reconstruction of buildings in specified areas and proved highly effective.

Following the successful outcome of the 1986 initiative, it was decided to launch a further scheme in 1994. Both schemes have played a significant role in addressing widespread dereliction. They have been mainly responsible for the rejuvenation of areas that had fallen into decline. They have encouraged economic activity and enhanced tourism. Most importantly, they have restored the confidence of the local population in designated areas. It is obvious that the far sighted initiative taken so long ago has had very positive results. The resulting investment has generated many new developments in run down areas and has given the people who live in those localities a much needed boost. It has given them a renewed pride in where they live and the confidence to live in and invest in their own localities.

Some people believe the social aspect of the early schemes was not on a scale that might have been desired. This may be so but we cannot deny that the aim of urban renewal legislation was a worthy one. It was a step in the right direction. If this move had not been made we would be starting out on a new road today and making the mistakes of the past again. This Bill proves that we have learned from past mistakes. Approval for applications will be monitored within guidelines that have a strong emphasis on the social and environmental input.

The Bill obliges local authorities to prepare integrated area plans and promotes widespread consultation with local interest groups. Applications for tax relief must comply with local planning and generous incentives will be given. For example, grants will be available for the renewal and preservation of buildings of historical and architectural interest. Thanks to what we have learnt we will ensure that the renewal of local structures and areas will be examined and approved, bearing in mind the absolute necessity for social renewal.

We have designed a Bill that guarantees a positive bias in favour of social renewal in line with the physical renewal of the areas where the schemes will operate. It also demands a maximum return on investment in designated areas in its other aspects — environment, conservation, design and architecture. While the Bill will not solve all ills, it will give us an unprecedented opportunity to enrich the lives of people and the physical fabric of the areas they live and work in.

There was a heavy onus on local authorities to prioritise the identification of suitable areas to derive maximum benefit from the scheme. They owed this to the citizens of the areas for which they are responsible. They also had to bear in mind disadvantaged communities when presenting the case for designation of specified areas within their jurisdiction. They involved all interested parties in discussions and the views of local representative organisations were sought. All interests in a given area should have participated fully in the planning and realisation of urban renewal programmes.

As a member of Cork Corporation, I must voice my reservations that the preparation of the plans was an executive function of local corporations and councils. Councillors are consulted but have no input into the final format of the plan decided by the local authority. Cork city councillors did not have full sight of the local plan prior to its being submitted to the Department. That is not right — it is undemocratic. Councillors are elected on behalf of the local community and are entitled to have a voice in the future development of the localities they represent. The local community put its trust in them to decide the future of the locality. We were consulted but our views did not have to be listened to. It was the prerogative of the City Manager and his officials to decide the final plan.

I intend no reflection on these people when I voice my objections to the way in which the scheme was introduced. They were operating within the constraints imposed on them by the guidelines set out by the Department. The ground rules must be changed. All future plans must be a reserved function of the elected members of a local authority. They must be allowed make the decisions that are fundamental to shaping the new cities, towns and villages under the umbrella of such schemes as integrated area planning. The Minister and the House must take note of my views and I would like to hear the Minister of State's views.

Living over the shop has been particularly successful in Cork. The guidelines for the scheme will be continued in Cork where we have had tremendous success. Cork Corporation submitted two integrated area plans — one for the Blackpool-Shandon area, the second for the city docks. Both plans differ in character. Designation for both would achieve important objectives for the city. Blackpool-Shandon is an area of low employment with many run down black spots. It is in the heart of my constituency. There are major traffic problems, smog, grime and a poor environment. Now that the construction of the Blackpool bypass has commenced, thanks to the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, and the commitment of the Taoiseach when in Opposition——

What about Deputy Howlin?

No. Everything stopped in October 1994. Deputy Howlin did nothing for Cork in that three year period. I commend the Taoiseach for committing funds in September 1996.

Mr. Hayes

The Deputy has a jaundiced view.

The bypass will lessen traffic and remove a major drawback for intending developers. Business interests have a negative perception of Blackpool because of the traffic problems and the dereliction of major tracts of the area. With the incentives being offered they will be able to invest in and develop Blackpool which will once again be the social and economic focal point of the northside.

Cork Corporation has placed great emphasis on refurbishing the existing homes of owneroccupied houses. This guarantees stable communities with long-term commitments to an area. This is vitally important in areas such as Wellington Road which boasts many large l9th century houses. We know how difficult it is to repair and maintain such property, much of which has, for this reason, been developed into poor quality rental accommodation. Incentives will encourage a return to owner occupancy. There should be no limitation on house sizes as many of the larger dwellings are the most worthy of preservation. Owner-occupiers of listed dwellings should be given special consideration. Their properties are often financial burdens because of age and character. They must receive positive encouragement to refurbish many of those buildings that have been sadly neglected.

The other designated area of Cork is the docks area — the gateway to Cork city. It is a high visibility site in a very central area which has suffered long periods of decay and neglect. The docks area has a mixture of residential, commercial, service and industrial buildings on the north side of the River Lee. If the Minister of State accepts the corporation's plan for the area we will see an Isle of Dogs or St. Catherine's type waterside development within a number of years which will enhance the gateway to the city. Such a development must be incentive-driven.

The houses in Montenotte slope down to Kent railway station and the famous Horgan's Quay. There are also old warehouses, mills and heavy industry on the marina on the south side of the bank. Urban renewal in these areas must be used to guarantee the preservation of the many fine old terraced houses that are, in some cases, threatened with decay.

Sympathetic restoration of some of the city's finest industrial heritage buildings is a priority. Its early 20th century industrial architecture must be protected. This area is an important and representative part of Cork's history. The proposed upgrading of the railway station will have a major environmental and aesthetic impact. It will encourage the use of public transport, and, I hope reduce the volume of vehicular traffic on our roads. It is important that public transport be of a standard and quality that will attract road users. This poses a challenge for Bus Éireann and Iarnrod Éireann. We are all aware of the success of the latter's Arrow service in Cork and other areas.

Urban renewal must be utilised to relieve the increasing congestion on roads. It is vital that we use the integrated area plan to the fullest potential to achieve this. CIE has invited proposals for the development of Horgan's Quay and the redevelopment of Kent station and has submitted plans for both to Cork Corporation. These include a new railway concourse, shopping area, new railway station, a hotel, apartments, IT centre, telesales and offices. I understand a number of proposals have been shortlisted. We must match this body's faith in Cork by demonstrating our commitment to renewal of the area.

We are all aware of the controversy surrounding the Horgan's Quay site in Cork, of the actions of a Minister in the previous Government in relation to the proposed purchase of the site by a well known and respected Cork developer. I had numerous discussions with the late Hugh Coveney and with Alderman Jim Corr of Fine Gael who, as Lord Mayor, spearheaded the proposed development with CIE and to whom I express my sincere gratitude for not politicising the matter. I also express my gratitude to the Minister for Public Enterprise, Deputy O'Rourke, and the board which advertised the proposed development in December last year.

I could talk for an hour about the wrongdoing in relation to the Horgan's Quay site but that is history, the people concerned are no longer in power. What we must do is match the enthusiasm of Cork Corporation for the redevelopment of all the localities covered by the two area plans submitted. I trust the Minister of State will endorse and approve them when they have been evaluated by the expert group. They will stand as the legacy of the Government and are of vital importance to the renewal of the city. The Minister of State has demonstrated his commitment to conservation and an awareness of the social implications of urban renewal. I praise him for adopting an innovative approach in this Bill and I ask the House to offer him its full support.

(Wexford): I welcome the Bill. The urban renewal scheme has been a success story since its introduction ten years ago and has helped to rejuvenate many of our towns and cities. Urban areas have been given an opportunity to modernise while builders and developers have been encouraged to become actively involved with local authorities in restoration projects. Wexford town, which was designated ten years ago, has reaped the benefits.

Enniscorthy was granted designation status in l992 by the then Minister for Finance, Deputy Albert Reynolds. It had suffered severe job losses following the closure of bacon and flour milling factories. Many agricultural enterprises had also closed down. The town was in serious decline. Today, it is thriving; two new hotels have been built in the last year with new cineplexes, apartments and a swimming pool. The Department of Agriculture and Food has relocated in the town. As much work remains to be done, an extension of the scheme has been sought to allow development take place across the river. I hope this will not be blocked off by the Bill. We have been informed, however, by county managers, town clerks and other local authority officials that, from discussions with Department officials, it is unlikely extensions will be granted. I ask the Minister of State to take a direct interest in the matter and allow projects already begun to be completed.

There has been much talk about crime levels and the need for conservation. I am not certain, however, that the granting of designation status will solve the problem.

The developer has an important role to play. What consultations have taken place with developers over the past ten years? It is my understanding that the Department's proposals are not developer friendly, that they will create problems for developers. We should remove the red tape so that they are not driven away. There must be a shared arrangement whereby towns will reap the benefits and developers are encouraged to participate.

The 6,000 population guideline is a source of concern. If this criterion is included and strictly adhered to, many small towns will not benefit. I cite New Ross and Gorey in County Wexford as examples. I ask the Minister of State to consider removing this figure.

Deputy Howlin admitted that the one mistake he made was giving exclusive responsibility to county councils which are generally made up of big wealthy farmers who have no interest in urban developments. Because of this no decision was made in County Wexford and a list of four towns was submitted to the Department. Urban councils have no say. The Minister of State should look at this matter. It is not right that councillors who represent rural areas have a say when it comes to the designation of urban areas. Responsibility should be transferred to borough and urban councils, town commissioners and the Department.

Mr. Hayes

I wish to share my time with Deputies Enright, Perry and Ring.

I welcome the Bill and I listened closely to the Minister of State. This side of the House has supported the concept of urban renewal since l986 as we realise fully the benefits it can bring to communities. We welcome the integrated area plans, which are a central focus of this legislation. It is bad practice that the House is being asked to rubber-stamp legislation which, in effect, has already been put in train. That point was referred to by Deputy Dukes last night. Various sections deal with the integrated area plans, their monitoring and other functions, which have been decided upon. Section 7(6) outlines the basic provisions that should be included in an integrated area plan. The House has not been consulted on that matter, yet all the integrated area plans were submitted to the Department by March.

Deputy Gilmore raised the issue of social housing. If the collective view of the House was to prioritise social housing as a major function of a new integrated area plan and, accordingly, change section 7, would that necessarily mean the 78 integrated area plans submitted would have to be thrown out of the Department and the county councils and various corporations that submitted them would be asked to revisit them? That is bad practice. This legislation should have been before the House months before those integrated area plans were sent to the Department.

Section 7(7) states that "In preparing an integrated area action plan the local authority or authorised company concerned may consult with such other persons. ." Deputy Howlin mentioned the lack of consultation some local authorities have engaged in with the partnerships, chambers of commerce, residents' groups and a range of people in their county. County councillors have echoed the point made by Deputy Flynn. If it is the collective view of the House to insert a specific provision for consultation, how stand the integrated area plans? If Department officials were to go through each of those plans, I suspect they would find the variety of consultation that exists in an area like south Dublin, which has the wholehearted support of the South Dublin Chamber of Commerce, the partnerships and other bodies, may be different from the level of consultation that may exist in Tipperary or Cork. It is bad practice to put in place legislation after the horse has left the stable.

If it is the collective view of the House that we should have a much stricter regime to monitor the effectiveness of these plans one or two years down the road, what powers exist to provide for that? That is another example of bad practice. If the House decides on Committee or Report Stages to substantially amend the legislation, where stands the integrated area plan? I would like the Minister of State to respond to that point. Will the 78 plans be returned by the Department to the county councils or companies and told that the collective view of Dáil Éireann is somewhat different from its intentions last January, February or March, that they should go back to the drawing board and start again? That is an important parliamentary point. Unless the House can put its impression on this legislation, many of the integrated area action plans will not have the necessary force to achieve what we want. I do not say that to be critical but to stand up for the democratic rights of Members of this House, to allow them have their imprint on legislation and to ensure that imprint can be effectively enforced.

As has been said on numerous occasions, since 1986 urban renewal has made a difference to many large towns, particularly to some cities. It is right that the strategic plans, which should be central to urban renewal in the future, should have a much sharper focus. We must ensure there is a bias towards local community groups taking control of a plan because to date, particularly in the Dublin area, local people have not benefited directly from much of the investment in very deprived communities in the inner city, particularly in the west and south west of the city which I represent. I applaud the aim in the Bill which will ensure that we will have a much more strategic approach to urban renewal in the future.

I am critical of the fact that while the integrated area plans have been sent to the Minister, ultimately the Minister for Finance and the Minister for the Environment and Local Government will make the final decision. In this new age of explaining the decisions of Government and being open and accountable to local authorities, I would have thought it only sensible that an explanation should have been given as to why those integrated area plans which do not gain the approval of those Ministers on 1 August do not meet the necessary criteria, but there is no provision for that in the Bill and that will have to be revisited on Committee Stage.

As other colleagues have been bleating understandably about their constituency demands, I will spend the remainder of my contribution focusing on the problems facing south Dublin.

We have not been bleating.

Mr. Hayes

Perhaps not bleating, but I learned that attribute from the Deputy in the Seanad.

The Deputy must be one of those wealthy county councillors.

Mr. Hayes

I am a member of a county council but I am not a farmer, so unfortunately Deputy Browne's comments do not apply to me. Of the 11 areas of social deprivation in the country, nine are in the Dublin area. To date many of the urban renewal proposals have referred specifically to conservation, protecting old buildings and such like, but the focus should be on developing communities where housing estate after housing estate has been built and very few social facilities and infrastructural development have been provided.

One of the more innovative proposals has come from South Dublin County Council concerning Tallaght and north Clondalkin. As all Members are aware, the designation of The Square in Tallaght has made a dramatic difference to creating a new town centre in the middle of the third largest conurbation in the country. Tallaght, in the south-west of this city, is larger than Limerick city and has a huge population. The Square and the new town centre have acted as a hub of investment, as can be seen in the rental price of commercial property. That innovative proposal from South Dublin County Council involved designating the whole area, but the local authority will establish a fund through which businesses in The Square, which have done very well, will pay into it. That fund will go directly towards providing for the new suburban parts of west Tallaght where there is no infrastructural development.

It uses the centre of Tallaght as a hub through which funds can be made available for areas such as Brookfield, Fettercairn, Killinarden and Tallaght which would not have a hope in hell of getting investment were it not for the fact that moneys can come from The Square.

This is the type of concept the Minister and his Department should support because the areas I mentioned, which have massive rates of unemployment and have one type of social housing, will not receive any direct benefits from urban renewal unless it is filtered through a major hub of investment such as the town centre in Tallaght. The plan has the complete support of Tallaght chamber of commerce, the partnerships and all the groups which were involved in the report.

I ask the Minister to look in an innovative way at the plans which will come before him. This is the type of investment we must encourage. The areas I referred to, which have one type of social community with massive deprivation, are completely different from other communities. If areas are correctly selected urban renewal will make a difference to these communities.

Urban renewal has been a considerable success and the relevant Ministers, officials and local authorities deserve congratulations. In rural areas we face a problem in that huge numbers of people are going to the larger centres of population, resulting in the closure of houses, schools, Garda stations and post offices in villages and towns. This is causing further urban deprivation leading to major housing problems. In my constituency there is a serious housing problem in Tullamore and Birr, a relatively small town. Services are not being put into smaller areas. In future there must be some mix in the context of wealth which normally concentrates in the centre. Consideration should be given to wealth being moved to outlying areas thus encouraging inward rather than outward development.

Urban renewal should encourage the restoration of areas in need of renewal. In many areas derelict and semi-derelict areas have been restored under this scheme. The Minister must seriously examine the guideline of 6,000 recommended by the expert group and which I think should be scrapped. Three plans were submitted by Offaly, one for the Tullamore-Clara catchment area, one for the Birr, Crinkle and Riverstown area and one for Edenderry. If the Minister applies the provisions in the Bill, Birr and Edenderry will be excluded. We went to the trouble of preparing a plan for Birr, a heritage town, with the aid of Patrick Shaffrey, an expert in town planning, and I hope it is not excluded. These areas must be examined and I ask the Minister to do everything possible in this context.

Tax incentives are important and I am glad they have been renewed. The overall scheme is highly desirable and I am sorry I do not have further time to discuss it.

Urban renewal presents the Government with an opportunity to transfer resources via the investment sector to Sligo and western regions which are removed from the east coast industrial and commercial sectors. This can play a major role in offsetting some of the effects of peripherality. Major investors in such sectors as retail will not be encouraged to invest unless tax incentives are used to offset the disadvantages of location and population.

Towns such as Sligo, Ballymote, Tubbercurry, Collooney and Carrick-on-Shannon represent the last centres of population in the north-west and require positive investment discrimination if they are to remain regional and county focal points.

Urban renewal investment presents an opportunity to create a vibrant local investment climate, encouraging redevelopment in derelict and run down areas. Since 1993 urban renewal has attracted in excess of £100 million in investment for Sligo city, creating a new vibrancy in the city which is apparent in improved streetscapes and new tourist, shopping and cultural activities.

Sligo still lags behind as a regional centre for the north-west, not having experienced the retail expansion of competing towns such as Galway, Athlone, Longford and Derry, thereby posing a threat to long-term viability. I am aware of moves to limit retail expansion, something which is very welcome as controls are being introduced to reflect the need to support existing established activity. In this context the capping of floor size is very welcome.

In its submission for urban renewal Sligo has sought to encourage the rebalancing of the city centre by strengthening the retail sector with multi-storey car parking, encouraging a strong programme of conservation of existing streets, protecting inner city residents and seeking to increase hotel accommodation.

Nationally, the Government is moving towards the removal of multi-storey car parking incentives. This is a mistake and will have a major negative impact on a number of areas, particularly Sligo where there is a need to radically increase car parking availability. Providing flat parking in urban areas is an inefficient use of scarce urban land. The incentive should remain for certain nominated areas such as Sligo in order to allow a managed expansion of the retail, office and commercial sectors.

The rural scheme which will be piloted in portions of south Sligo will very much complement the urban scheme. The Minister should implement the rural scheme in additional areas of County Sligo as an imbalance can be created when an urban scheme is promoted in the absence of a rural scheme.

There is little encouragement for owners or residents in city streets, such as John Street in Sligo, given that tax incentives may be inappropriate in the context of an aged population which has possibly no tax liability. Yet buildings in such areas are listed as part of our national heritage and must be given Government consideration.

Retail growth must be induced to develop in a manner that supports local shopping and existing independent retailers. This requires a response similar to that in the UK and internationally, namely, supporting policies that encourage expansion from within city centres. In the UK there were outer urban renewal schemes which resulted in city centres becoming derelict. We must encourage second and third generation business people by ensuring they receive some of the incentives available.

A licence system is required to enable local authorities collect levies for community facilities — currently there is no such legislative power — monitor building sites in order to eliminate the black economy and secure local employment opportunities.

The new urban renewal scheme, which will commence on 1 August 1998, will mark a change of focus and direction in urban renewal policy, which I welcome. The new scheme will be different from its predecessors, all of which have been in existence in some shape or form since 1986, as it will target the remaining areas of need in a more integrated, focused and streamlined manner. While physical renewal will, of course, be the central objective, it will not be the only one. The future policy on urban renewal must take account of the social needs in the areas targeted for regeneration. An important objective of the new scheme is to ensure that physical renewal contributes to social renewal.

Relevant local authorities seeking designation will be required to prepare integrated area plans, IAPs, for parts of urban areas in most need of physical and socio-economic rejuvenation and to identify targeted sub-areas or key developments within them for which designation is sought. The need for such designation must be justified by reference to the IAP's objectives for the area. A starting point in the preparation of an IAP should be an analysis of the physical and social needs of the selected area and a vision statement as to how urban renewal could, and would, address these needs.

Urban renewal schemes have achieved a great deal since 1986. The purpose of the new scheme is to focus resources from both the private and public sectors into the remaining areas which have the greatest need of development and potential for redevelopment.

Local authorities are required to prioritise potential IAP areas to ensure the new scheme is properly targeted having regard to the following factors: It is envisaged that priority will be given to areas in cities and towns with strong urban characteristics where the greatest concentrations of physical decay and social or economic disadvantage tends to occur; the IAP area must contain sites or key developments with the potential to benefit from designation incentives and must have the potential infrastructure to cope with any likely developments; and the IAP may also present opportunities for partnership arrangements between public bodies and the private sector for the development of publicly owned land or other arrangements with possible spin-off benefits for the local community.

The opportunity for achieving synergy with other area-based plans should be maximised, without duplicating work already undertaken. The following programmes, in particular, may present opportunities to assist in this process: local authorities' programmes in regard to infrastructure, transport and social housing; urban renewal and environmental improvement works under the EU urban and village renewal programme; there may be opportunities to build on the achievements of the earlier designated areas or enterprise areas in a particular region; local development plans prepared, or in preparation, by local development organisations for the purposes of the local development programme; and plans compiled by the county enterprise board.

The integrated area plan process aims to give local people a stake in the rejuvenation of their areas by focusing on community attainment and sustainable job creation. The education, training and employment and social needs of indigenous local communities must be assessed by relevant agencies and matched, as far as possible, with new job opportunities. Some of these jobs can be created within the area by developing its existing economic base. The local authority, in co-operation with local business interests and development agencies, should analyse barriers to growth and the employment of local people as part of baseline studies into this issue. They should also identify scope for generating new economic activity in such sectors as small enterprises, local services and tourism which will not displace, but rather enhance, the economic and social prosperity of the indigenous disadvantaged population.

Limerick County Council has already submitted an integrated area plan to the Department of the Environment and Local Government in accordance with the guidelines laid down on this matter. I congratulate and commend the officials of Limerick County Council involved in drawing up these proposals relating to urban renewal opportunities in County Limerick. I fully support the council's application to the Department of the Environment and Local Government in regard to seeking urban renewal status for the towns of Newcastle West, Rathkeale and Kilmallock. The population of these three towns exceeds the population threshold of 6,000 people which is normally the test applied before urban renewal status is granted.

A very practical purpose would be served by granting urban renewal status to the towns of Rathkeale, Newcastle West and Kilmallock. It would send out a very clear message that this Government is serious about promoting positive and constructive rural development policies whereby long-term and sustainable jobs would be created. One of the ways in which the Government could achieve this objective would be by introducing urban renewal benefits to the towns which have been included for recommendation for such status by the proposals submitted by Limerick County Council. Moreover, it would serve a social and economic purpose within County Limerick itself and assist in redressing the one way traffic in terms of investment which has been directed towards Limerick city to the detriment of the county.

Private investment is needed in Limerick county just as much as in the city and the granting of urban renewal status to various towns in the county would be a positive step in the right direction. It must also be emphasised that if urban renewal status were granted to some towns in County Limerick, under the round of urban renewal towns which will be granted such status later this year, it is probable that other towns in Limerick would benefit from urban renewal status soon after. Extensive consultation took place on this whole issue between Limerick County Council and private and voluntary groups in the region, all of which must be commended for their efforts in formulating proposals relating to granting urban renewal status for towns in County Limerick.

We have all seen the benefits which urban renewal has brought to our cities in terms of infrastructural improvements and direct investment in their respective areas. In fact, the Minister for Finance recently announced the rural renewal scheme which is to apply in some counties beside the Shannon, including Longford, Roscommon, Leitrim and parts of Sligo and Cavan. This initiative is very similar to the urban renewal scheme and will prove highly successful in terms of the social and economic improvements it will make to this region.

It is, therefore, logical that if towns with fewer than 6,000 in population can benefit from the rural renewal scheme, it would be correct to allow towns with fewer than 6,000 in population to benefit from the urban renewal scheme. The Government should also consider allowing towns with fewer than 6,000 in population to amalgamate for the purposes of securing urban renewal status. This would be good news for Limerick county and rural Ireland.

I wish to share time with Deputy Ryan.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

I compliment the Minister on introducing this legislation and I express my appreciation to all those who have worked very actively to advance it and have carried out some of the necessary preliminary work. I would particularly like to put on record my appreciation to Mr. Dom Hegarty and the committee of experts who are evaluating applications under the scheme. The main criterion which should be taken into account is the level of deprivation, in terms of derelict buildings and decay, unemployment and poverty in towns. Poverty is more acute in some towns than in others. If one uses a population criterion of 6,000 people, one will find that most towns of that size are thriving and, with few exceptions, seldom have problems of economic and social consequence.

The consultation mechanism is extremely important. A typical example of the impact of urban renewal can be seen in Ennis. That town has been transformed into a thriving, vibrant economic centre since urban renewal commenced some years ago. The huge investment that has taken place and the escalation in the development of private housing as well as public buildings indicates the success of the scheme and demonstrates that a mix of commercial and private housing development can be successful. Another factor in the transformation of Ennis was the Government decision, at about the same time as the urban renewal decision, to relocate Government Departments there. This twin approach of renewal and decentralisation can have a highly beneficial impact in towns such as Ennis.

Many Members of the House represent areas which have experienced a massive reduction in population. If I had time I could quote statistics from district electoral divisions which show that in the period since the last census the population in some districts has declined by up to 40 per cent. There has been a huge decline in the agricultural population on the west coast of Clare and the indications are that the decline will continue. As agriculture becomes more mechanised and more intensive the flight from the land will accelerate rather than decrease.

For that reason it is critically important that we take initiatives such as this in areas which are bounded by rural districts suffering severe decline. I can offer the House one example. Last Saturday, confirmations took place in Kilmihil village for two large parishes adjacent to where I live, Coolmeen and Cranny. Fourteen children were confirmed, a 100 per cent reduction in the numbers five years ago. The seriousness of the decline in rural areas is not fully recognised by planners. Soon there will be ghost villages instead of the small villages which currently exist on the west Clare peninsula. Schools are threatened with closure while many post offices and Garda stations have already closed due to the serious erosion of the population. The most serious problem is that the population in the area comprises mainly old people and young children and many of the old people live alone.

If there is any prospect of dealing with this problem on the Loop Head peninsula, it will only be achieved through the designation of a town such as Kilrush which is the central focal point of economic activity. That is why Clare County Council put forward Kilrush in its application to the Department. Kilrush was built by the Vandeleurs and there are still derelict buildings in the old famine ward which were built by that family to ease poverty and deprivation during the Famine. The area could benefit from huge investment by way of restoration of buildings. The opportunity and finances to do so do not exist at present. Designation and an incentive scheme in that area would be critically important in securing the reconstruction of some of the unique historic buildings.

Kilrush also suffered a great deal as a result of the decline of the flour milling industry. The old buildings connected with that industry lie derelict and in decay with no prospect of ever being utilised except under a scheme of this nature. However, on the basis of population figures the town of Kilrush, despite the surrounding area which has a population of about 10,000 people, would not qualify for the scheme. It is important that, when making assessments, the review body take into account the population of the small or satellite villages adjacent to a town such as Kilrush. They include Cooraclare, Kilmihil, Carrigaholt, Cross and Kilbaha, villages which are suffering severely at present. I can make the same point about a town such as Lisdoonvarna, the only spa town in Ireland, which has also sought resort designation.

It is necessary to co-ordinate the activities of all renewal schemes, whether they are for resorts, urban areas, rural areas or villages. Under forthcoming legislation, a number of Departments will co-ordinate a new grants scheme for historic and architecturally significant buildings. Funding of £4 million is mentioned in the recently published document, Protecting our Architectural Heritage. The funding in section 17 of this Bill could be utilised to carry out this type of work and I hope that will be done. After some experience in the implementation of this legislation, we might examine the possibility of putting an authority in place which would deal with all urban renewal. That would avoid duplication and the confusion that will arise among various Departments and authorities.

People should also be drawn to a greater degree into the consultation process. There has been little consultation with people at local level about what is necessary and about the eventual shape of the integrated plans. The integrated plan is the focal point of this legislation and the key to its success. Substantial funding should be made available to local authorities to enable them to employ professional expertise to draft the best possible integrated development plans and to ensure we get the greatest benefit from this legislation.

I thank Deputy Daly for affording me the opportunity to speak on this Bill. The provisions of the Bill will be discussed in depth on Committee Stage. As my time is limited, I will confine my comments to making a case for the inclusion of Balbriggan in the new urban renewal scheme.

It is the view of the majority of the residents of Balbriggan that the town, once the industrial and textile capital of Fingal, has been neglected by politicians and the political system for many years. It is difficult to disagree with this view given the lack of industry in the town and the rate of unemployment, which is significantly higher than that of any other town in Fingal. There is also a high rate of youth unemployment.

It is also clear that there is a significant number of under-utilised and vacant buildings in the town and many other buildings which are in poor structural condition. The majority of these buildings are located where they can seriously detract from the overall appearance of the town. They provide an ideal opportunity for redevelopment and rejuvenation as provided for in the Bill.

The legislation provides for the preparation and submission of integrated area plans for consideration by the Minister. The community in Balbriggan, in conjunction with the planning staff of Fingal County Council, prepared such a submission, the only submission made by that local authority. There are areas in the country which the Celtic tiger has not yet reached and Balbriggan is one of them. There is a widely held perception that tax-related schemes, such as that for urban renewal, have been designated in the past not on the basis of need but on the basis of political expediency.

I hope the Government will not deny the town of Balbriggan its legitimate entitlement on this occasion. The Minister knows the town well and is also aware of the unique requirements of the urban renewal scheme. I urge him not to let the people of Balbriggan down and I hope 1 August 1998 will be a highlight in the rejuvenation of Balbriggan.

I wish to share my time with Deputy Belton and Deputy McCormack.

I welcome this eagerly awaited Bill. It provides for the preparation of integrated development plans by local authorities. It provides for recommendations to be made in respect of qualifying areas for the purpose of urban renewal tax reliefs. However, there is no indication of how widely these reliefs will apply. Perhaps the Minister will clarify that.

There is no doubt that previous urban renewal schemes have been a success, as can be witnessed around the country. Limerick has been transformed since the introduction of the schemes by the former Minister, Mr. Boland. I welcome that the Minister, in response to a number of requests to have the 6,000 population guideline reduced, emphasised that it is only a guideline and is not set in stone. This provides the Minister with an opportunity to examine any proposal.

I support the proposal from Limerick County Council that Rathkeale, Newcastle West and Kilmallock be designated. There has been serious decline in those rural areas of County Limerick and fourteen schools there will soon lose a teacher. This is an opportunity to rejuvenate a part of Limerick which has been in decline for some decades.

I will put the case for Rathkeale town. It is unique in many ways, but particularly because it is the home of a significant number of travellers. Of towns with a population of 1,500 or more in 1996, Rathkeale had the highest proportion of travellers. Up to 40 per cent of the population are from the travelling community. The number of travellers significantly increases at Christmas and for other special events.

Over the years the wealthier members of the travelling community have purchased or built their own houses in the town. A sizeable number of them remain unoccupied as some of the families pursue their trading activities abroad or choose to live in caravans adjacent to the houses. Often houses are used as stores and the doors or windows of many are fitted with unsightly iron grilles. The Roche's Road and Fairhill areas, which are a significant part of the town, are almost entirely occupied by travellers.

Nearly 50 per cent of the population of Rathkeale is travellers. There is a high level of tolerance between both communities in the town, although there is also a great deal of tension. Rathkeale has one of the lowest crime rates of any town in the county. There are few difficulties and two separate cultures live side by side in a spirit of tolerance and understanding.

However, it has created, and will inevitably create, problems for the town. There has been a great deal of tension between the communities. In recent years there has been progress and the situation has improved. However, that is not to say there are no problems. While the level of understanding in both communities is high, trouble flares up occasionally. I have asked for a special study of Rathkeale. However, because the town is unique, it would be difficult to find someone with the experience to carry out such a study.

A significant number of properties in the town require refurbishment. Sporadic dereliction can be detected throughout the town although it is particularly noticeable on the main street and the area of the square. The local enterprise group estimates that derelict and unoccupied premises comprise 40 per cent of the buildings on the main street. A decline in the physical fabric of Fairhill and Roche's Road also corresponds with extremely high vacancy rates. The extent of urban decay and obsolescence is quite high.

There has been little new investment in Rathkeale and this has resulted in a slump in the town's economy in the past two decades. Emigration from the town has continually increased as has unemployment. Population decline between 1991 and 1996 was the greatest of any town in the county at 14.25 per cent. Rathkeale suffers from extremely high levels of long-term and youth unemployment among a workforce predominantly consisting of semi-skilled and unskilled workers.

The economic hardship in the town is evident, not only in the dereliction of the town's physical fabric but also in its retail base which has been in decline. This decline is more evident as the retail base is almost exclusive to the main street. The unique traveller occupancy in the town creates a further requirement for incentives. Insufficient resources and a fragmented approach to meeting the needs of this group has isolated them and reduced the opportunities and services available to them.

Rathkeale has enormous potential to benefit from the integrated area plan designation. The recent completion of the town's bypass and improvement in sewerage and water networks ensure the infrastructure has the capacity to accommodate further development. Designation will bring investment into the town, creating jobs, encouraging enterprise and ensuring adequate levels of housing provision. Improvement will also occur in the social fabric of Rathkeale, with the promotion of greater social integration. This will lead to an expanded range of facilities and services available to both communities.

I impress on the Minister the unique position of Rathkeale and how important it is to restore the centre of the town to commercial activity. The extension of the scheme will provide an incentive to do this and will attract businesses to the town. The decline in the physical fabric of the main street is a serious problem. The inner core of the town is decaying and many of the buildings are derelict, dilapidated, unoccupied and disused. The blight of decay which has strangled the physical, social and economic life of the town must be stopped. People must be enticed to live in the town. The potential of the town to attract private investment and development is depressed because of the physical environment.

There is little interest on the part of many owners of property to undertake development of the buildings. The designation of the areas in Rathkeale for the purpose of urban renewal will lead to significant private sector investment and will contribute to the improvement of the town. The Rathkeale enterprise committee is unable to address the problem of dereliction. The increasing problem of dereliction and dilapidation on the main street was highlighted by a survey undertaken by the committee. Of every ten buildings in the main street, four are derelict, dilapidated, unoccupied or disused. Such buildings are often boarded up as they are owned by travellers who have moved on.

They have moved to Tipperary.

This is a national problem. Rathkeale has effectively dealt with it for a century, although with a great deal of difficulty. We try to manage the situation which has resulted in problems in the town which I wish to expose. I appreciate that comments on travellers are always made. However, Rathkeale is one of the best towns in the country in the way both communities live in relative harmony. There has been criticism of Rathkeale and its travellers. However, it has problems which must be dealt with and I am asking the Minister to deal with them.

For many years there has been no market for second-hand property because of the number of neighbouring derelict buildings. No new residential improvement has taken place in Rathkeale. An alarming number of businesses in the town have closed. Such a loss of economic activity is directly related to the decline in population. In compiling a strategic plan for the main street, the development committee consulted Limerick County Council. The council wholly endorses the promotion of the urban renewal scheme in Rathkeale. The Derelict Sites Act, 1990, which prevents property becoming derelict and detracting from the amenity, character or appearance of areas, has proved difficult for Limerick County Council to implement.

In Rathkeale main street buildings continue to be neglected and are unsightly. Urban improvement measures, whether promoted by the county council, initiated by community organisations or provided by private enterprise, were implemented in recent years and improved the physical appearance of the town. Such improvements are overshadowed by a number of derelict properties which, until removed, will make it impossible to achieve the objective of improving the physical environment of the town, attracting people to live in it and sustaining new enterprises. The experience of other designated areas underlies the interest of many people, particularly young people, in buying houses or apartments in urban areas and bringing life back into such centres. Elderly people also prefer to live in towns given their proximity to services.

The activity generated by an urban renewal scheme would halt the worsening process of decay and dereliction and change the face of Rathkeale. The result of such development would be to improve amenities for the existing population and attract significant numbers of young people to live in the town. The enterprise committee recognises the strong focus of the urban renewal scheme on residential development, relying on measures to conserve and use existing infrastructure. Rathkeale needs social and economic rejuvenation. Tax designation would encourage people to move back into the town and revitalise the community.

A successful town is associated with a growing population. Many people are ready and willing to make necessary investments if tax designation is granted. Many local citizens have invested money elsewhere in recent years. The risk of investing in property elsewhere is significantly lower and the likelihood of appreciation in values of properties is higher than in other towns. The designation of areas of Rathkeale and in particular the provision of residential allowances will bring life back to the town.

A survey of the town indicated there are 56 derelict, dilapidated, unoccupied or disused houses in the main street, more than 39 per cent of the total. Only 27 houses are residential, 13 are residential and business and 16 are business alone. Twenty of the houses have only one occupant, 22 have two or three occupants and three have two or more occupants. Occupants of 38 of the 42 residences are people living alone or two people living together who are over 50 years of age. We must break down the barriers to development. Property values in the town are plummeting and there is genuine economic decline. In the past 20 years, 64 businesses have disappeared from the main street and have not been replaced. There is a decrease in population and an increase in unemployment. We must break this vicious circle. I ask the Minister to examine this matter, particularly in view of the unique position of Rathkeale which often talks itself down when it should talk itself up.

I welcome the Bill and appreciate the Minister's intentions on this occasion. Urban renewal was carried out in the past for various reasons. I understand the emphasis on the involvement of the Minister for Finance in this scheme. Previously urban renewal was concentrated outside towns where various developments took place and developers were considered favourably in terms of investment. On this occasion the Minister is trying to avoid that and concentrate strictly on urban renewal.

I welcome the progress made under the urban renewal scheme in my town of Longford. Since County Longford has been designated under the rural renewal scheme, how will that compare with urban renewal? Will the same conditions apply for developers and other people who wish to avail of the scheme? A detailed integrated plan was drawn up by the local authority and I compliment the officials of the urban and county councils in that regard. Perhaps the Minister will outline the position for the county.

I welcome this important Bill. We must ensure an integrated approach is adopted. As Deputy Belton said, it is important that the urban renewal scheme is concentrated on the town structure. That approach has proved very successful in my town of Monaghan. I hope the scheme will be extended in the town. Since industries and businesses have to compete against those who receive tax benefits they should have an opportunity to take part in the scheme. That would ensure the town, which suffered much as a result of the Northern problems, is developed.

I wish to refer to an issue raised by the county manager and staff regarding this scheme. The population limit recommended by the group for qualification for the scheme is 6,000, but that eliminates towns such as Clones, Castleblayney and Ballybay in County Monaghan. Those towns suffered enormously as a result of large numbers of people moving from Northern Ireland because of the troubles. Those towns should receive funding in line with that made available to Monaghan and other towns, otherwise they will decline.

Ba mhaith liom an t-am a roinnt leis an Teachta Kelleher.

Acting Chairman

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Fáiltím roimh an mBille agus aontaím leis an Aire go bhfuil gá leis. Tá na buntáistí a bhain leis an scéim a bhí ann cheana rí-soiléir agus deineadh cuid mhaith den obair sin nuair nach raibh an tír chomh saibhir is atá sí anois.

Creideann daoine áirithe nach bhfuil gá le scéim nua faoi láthair ach is léir go bhfuil in áiteanna áirithe — ní hamháin sna bailte móra ach faoin tuath freisin.

I welcome the consultants' finding that physical urban renewal can no longer operate in isolation — virtually all the difficulties experienced arise as a result of that being the sole criterion — and the recommendation that a new scheme should address physical, economic, social and environmental regeneration. The new scheme is wisely linked to area-based integrated strategic planning. I am glad local authorities will have a much more central role than was the case previously.

Many problems with previous schemes, including the special tourist resort scheme, would have been avoided if there had been a higher level of consultation with local authorities in regard to physical planning and the provision of services such as sewerage and water, services which were inadequate in some of the areas nominated for the scheme. It seems county councils and borough councils were consulted while urban councils were not. That matter should be addressed.

One must also acknowledge that the expert advisory panel did excellent work in advising on the guidelines for identifying priority areas and suggesting the content of integrated area plans. The criteria for selection of areas for which plans were to be prepared included the policies and objectives of the county development plan. Unfortunately, those plans might not assist in counties where plans are up to ten years old. That matter needs to be addressed independently of this or any other scheme. The criteria also included the extent of physical decay, social and economic disadvantage and, most importantly, the need for the incentive and the likely benefits that might accrue from the scheme.

Clare County Council submitted Shannon town as its first priority for the scheme and did an excellent integrated area plan. Shannon town is unique in that it is the only town that does not have a shopping street. The town was built mainly to provide housing for people working at the airport and in the industrial estate and the town centre company, which owns the shopping centre, effectively decides who can operate retail outlets there. To be fair, it has not taken undue advantage of its monopoly, but it is extremely undesirable that any private company should have such a monopoly and control. A town the size of Shannon needs a shopping, cultural and social centre. This scheme provides an opportunity to build an entirely new streetscape, which I hope will be dealt with imaginatively. Despite the fact that the town is on the verge of an international airport, nobody has seen fit to construct a main street in it. The county council suggested an area in the centre of the town for designation which would be suitable for the creation of a shopping area.

The extent of the scheme is limited. There is a considerable need for urban and village renewal incentives for smaller towns and villages. Various speakers mentioned traditional market towns in their constituencies which, because of developments in shopping and other areas, have gone into serious decline. Miltown Malbay and Ennistymon in the west and north of County Clare were very important market towns but are now in a state of dereliction. The same is true of Scariff and Tulla. I agree with the expert advisory panel that this Bill may not be the correct context in which to set a scheme for such towns, but it should be addressed in the future.

A study of the position in Ennistymon shows that only 12 of the 56 teachers employed in the town live in the immediate area, only two of the 23 gardaí stationed there live in the town or its periphery and only two of the 17 bank staff live in the immediate area. Some 75 per cent of factory workers commute from places such as Ennis. It is undesirable that the main towns in almost all counties are the focus for development and housing. While it makes some sense when the people who live in those towns also work in the area, it makes no sense in the case of Ennistymon which is approximately 15 miles from Ennis which is already under considerable development pressure. The living-over-the-shop scheme, which is in operation in Cork and particularly successful in Stanford in Lincolnshire, could be encouraged in relatively small towns and villages.

When the 6,000 population guideline, about which there has been much criticism, was referred back to the expert advisory panel, it stuck to its guns on the basis that a certain minimum scale is required for the scheme to succeed. While most people would accept that argument, towns such as Kilrush would lose out if this guideline were rigidly applied. Because these towns were the focus of much development 20 or 30 years ago many industrial and commercial outlets and some living accommodation are in a state of dereliction. A strong case could be made for the inclusion of at least parts of such towns in this scheme.

I understand a recent report suggested the need for a minimum of 30,000 new housing units per annum over the next ten years. It has been suggested that figure could be as high as 40,000 or more. In Britain, John Prescott set a target of 60 per cent for new housing in existing or derelict urban areas. We should develop derelict sites and under-utilised space in villages and towns and encourage people to live there. This would ease the pressure on Cork, Galway and Dublin which needs to be addressed urgently. It would also ease pressure on towns like Ennis which is gradually attracting people from all parts of County Clare and address the problem of ribbon development that is inevitable in circumstances where housing is not available.

We will also need to provide incentives for rural and village life, which does not necessarily mean providing housing developments. It will be interesting to monitor the development of the scheme introduced last year for counties along the upper Shannon region.

In some respects the Bacon report is a very blunt weapon and there is already evidence of how it is working. For example, rent for houses in Ennis which was running at approximately £480 per month has decreased to approximately £380. The loss of stamp duty exemption, tax allowances and the 20 per cent capital gains tax is effectively driving those with plans for integrated tourist developments out of the market. It will be necessary to police the effect of the changes made on foot of the Bacon report across a number of ministries to ensure they do not undermine desirable and necessary developments in the provision of tourist accommodation and so on.

A strong argument is frequently made — I am sure it emanates from the Department of Finance — that schemes such as that proposed in the Bill should be narrowly focused to be successful. That is not correct, particularly in the current economic climate when people have money to invest and broader schemes might be more successful. Neither do I agree with the view of the Department of Finance that these incentives are costly in the long term. The enormous short term gains from taxation on materials and worker's wages do not seem to be taken into the equation.

I thank Deputy Killeen for sharing time with me and I welcome the opportunity to speak on the question of urban renewal and the proposed integrated area plans. In the past urban renewal schemes were successful in that they achieved their objective, the structural renewal of towns, villages and cities throughout the country. However, they did not take into account the social implications involved or the fact that people are the most important aspect of towns and cities.

Under the current demographic trend, people are moving to cities and large towns where facilities and services are provided. This will place enormous pressure on towns and major cities in the next few years. For that reason, it is timely to amend the urban renewal schemes introduced in the past and examine the integrated area approach. The overhead shop scheme, for example, has not been as successful as we would have liked. In parts of Cork it was not taken up to the extent we had hoped for. I would like to see that scheme being extended with more incentives being given to developers to include that type of development.

Cork Corporation has submitted two integrated area plans — one for Blackpool and the other for the harbour area. Both of them are justified and would certainly enhance the living conditions of the communities within the areas of the proposed plans. In addition, they would enhance the city giving it an opportunity to develop as well as bringing forward the services needed for tourism, colleges and local business. Investors and businesses have been slow to move into certain sections of Cork city, even under the old urban renewal schemes but I hope they will now that we have larger areas in the integrated area plans.

We must take into account people living within the districts covered by the integrated area plans. I welcome the inclusion of provisions for amenities, employment and training, and that local people will be involved at an early stage through the consultative process.

I sound a note of caution, however; it is also necessary to consult developers because they will invest money in those areas. They are willing to take the risks so they should be consulted at an early stage. What might be very aspirational on paper concerning the integrated area plans may not always be sustainable from an economic point of view. Developers should be approached about this.

Skyscrapers have become part of the skyline of most major cities around the world, but not in Ireland where we seem to have a psychological block regarding such buildings. Vast tracts of land have been developed here, particularly featuring office block accommodation to a height of three storeys. I am not in favour of increasing the height of residential blocks but the height of office accommodation in our cities should be examined. I see no reason we cannot progress and decide that, towards the end of the 20th century, we can build skyscrapers while still making architecture attractive and interesting. The facades of modern buildings have become very mundane, although I know this is because of prohibitive cost. We must examine the possibility of allowing developers to build higher office accommodation away from residential areas. Such high rise developments have been successful in other cities throughout the world and I see no reason it should not happen here also.

The Bill is welcome and timely. We should change the aspect of urban renewal, taking into account people, communities and facilities available within the planned areas. Cork's two integrated area plans should be examined, not in isolation but in tandem for the benefit of the whole city. There is no point in looking at one plan without regarding the other. Both of them merit inclusion. They would have an immediate impact on the city as these are the last two areas that need to be developed there.

As regards the announcement by the Minister regarding the 3,000 square metre limit for retail space, many people have been considering that issue for some time. They include small shop-keepers and their representative body, RGDATA, which has been lobbying intensely for that matter to be examined. Ministerial announcements are very blunt instruments because they can have a possible impact on plans that are going through the planning process but may not yet have been completed. One or two developments in Cork will suffer because of that. However, as they are part of the integrated area plan, they might come to fruition and could yet be successful.

In making such an announcement, the Minister should have looked at individual planning applications that have gone through Cork Corporation, for example, and that could be lodged with An Bord Pleanála. Such a decision could have a devastating effect on a developer's initial intention.

I hope the Bacon report, which was published recently, will have an impact also. Integrated area plans and urban renewal schemes have all been successful, but if people cannot afford housing within such designated areas we are back to the old problem of speculators buying accommodation and renting it out at enormous prices. That has happened with past urban renewal schemes and I fear that urban areas could fall into disrepair and decay in the coming years if they are not monitored closely.

Overall, I welcome the proposals in the Bill.

I wish to share my time with Deputy Wall.

Acting Chairman

The Deputy has nine minutes.

I welcome the broad principles of the Urban Renewal Bill. It is the first time an integrated planning approach has been used as a basis for submissions. I recognise the work of my colleague, the former Minister for the Environment, Deputy Howlin, and that of the former Minister of State, Deputy McManus, who published this report and laid down the criteria for this legislation.

I welcome the Minister's introductory speech yesterday in which he gave his vision of how he sees this matter proceeding. As a result of recommendations laid down, all county councils throughout the country set about preparing their development plans. From the contributions that have been made on all sides of the House, it is obvious there are major areas of decay throughout the country where the Celtic tiger has neither been seen nor heard. It is also obvious that there is a need for flexibility concerning the 6,000 population figure which would exclude many towns in need of rejuvenation.

In the limited amount of time available to me I will speak about my constituency of South Tipperary. As elected councillors, we employed professional consultants to independently assess the two towns chosen in South Tipperary — Carrick-on-Suir and Tipperary. We agreed unanimously to allow the consultants to make their recommendations and priorities independently of ourselves.

The consultants were very thorough in carrying out research under the headings of need, potential, welfare and the balanced development of the county as a whole. They also looked at the economic disadvantages, social deprivation and physical quality of the towns. To achieve this information and arrive at their decision, they undertook widespread consultation that has been spoken about, but which was missing in some areas. That involved the business sector, community groups, chambers of commerce, elected members from the county council — which was the formulating body — and the utmost consultation with the urban district councils involved. This all took place in South Tipperary.

Other areas use different criteria and some councillors even voted to select their choice. We did not adopt this attitude in Tipperary because, first, we wanted to comply with the criteria and, second, we wanted a plan that would pass the expert group established by the Minister. We did not want to convey any political advantage.

In Carrick-on-Suir, Fianna Fáil councillors criticised their own colleagues on the county council for not having used their voting power to have the decisions made in accordance with party political considerations.

I want to give some idea as to why Tipperary town was prioritised before Carrick-on-Suir. I also want to confirm that it is imperative that both towns be successful in their applications to the Minister for approval.

Social and economic disadvantage is one of the areas covered in the document prepared by our consultants. Six measures were used to describe economic disadvantage. The first three related to: the position as it now is, in terms of the lack of job opportunity within the town; the lack of commuting to job opportunities, which were measured at more than five miles; and the level of commercial activity measured as the ratio of retail turnover per head of population.

These indicators show that while Tipperary has a very high level of unemployment, travelling to work in locations elsewhere is lower, suggesting a double disadvantage: the lack of jobs within the town itself and within a reasonable commuting distance from the town.

Both towns display relatively low levels of retail activity. Although Tipperary town may have a greater amount of floor space from a retail point of view, the overall quality and range of shops in the town tends to be very poor and this has been confirmed by all the information and questionnaires circulated in the town.

The three sets measured for economic disadvantage relate to the changes of the position in the towns since 1985. In each of the measures chosen, which relate to overall population change, loss of young potential workforce and change in manufacturing employment, Tipperary town showed the greatest possible disadvantage. The town now has a falling population losing nearly one in every five of its workforce and has lost an astonishing 57 per cent of its manufacturing capacity in the past seven years. Apart from the population trend, loss of migration, young workers and changes in manufacturing, the loss was 60 per cent in Carrick-on-Suir compared to 76.9 per cent in Tipperary Town.

The vision for the town has been devastated by the major loss of industry in recent years. Its close proximity to the faster growing centres of Limerick City and Clonmel, which benefited from urban renewal, leaves it in shadow. It is imperative for a town of the stature of Tipperary, a historical town, located on a traffic route, the national primary N24, and situated in a scenic area that the Minister, with his expert group, looks at this not in a partisan way but considering the absolute needs of not only these two towns but those mentioned by other speakers today.

Coming from a town which has an application before the Department seeking urban renewal status and knowing the importance of such status for the town, I ask the Minister to ensure no fragmentation of application will be permitted. Athy is the priority of Kildare County Council with Kildare town second and Kilcock third. Such an application should be taken on its merits. Urban renewal, on the evidence I have seen, is of paramount importance to the successful applicants. The areas designated in the last application by my colleague, Deputy Stagg, have seen major investment in terms of residential and commercial development and it has greatly advanced the towns' success.

Newbridge, County Kildare, has been transformed by hotels, shopping malls and residential development and is an example of how urban renewal can work extremely well and to the benefit of the community. The downside of the scheme is possibly that the development of towns such as Mullingar, Athlone, Newbridge, etc., which have been granted urban renewal status has a detrimental effect on adjacent smaller towns. These towns, while probably benefiting from schemes to beautify them rather than develop their potential, are vulnerable. This time the Minister must ensure such towns are not bypassed and are given the chance to develop in their own right. This will ensure that towns will, in many cases, be able to develop the natural resources in tandem with residential and commercial development. Athy, for example, is a heritage town with magnificent natural resources in the River Barrow and the canal and will, if successful, be in a position to develop such resources by providing riverside restaurants, accommodation, a marina and a hotel. These are areas where development is vitally important.

Last night on the Adjournment I raised the chronic unemployment problems which affect south Kildare and requested the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to outline her Department's plans to attract investment to south Kildare. The Minister's response was disappointing. However, I hope my raising the matter will concentrate her mind on the problems facing south Kildare. Inward investment is crucial to replace the hundreds of jobs the region has lost over the years. Urban renewal can play a key role in attracting such investment. Not only does the construction employment related to the rejuvenation of a town give a major boost to its local economy and especially to local traders, the elimination of dereliction and a new spirit of initiative which it engenders in the local community makes the town attractive to investment by major industrialists.

Ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghlacadh le gach éinne a labhair ar an mBille seo. Tá sé soiléir go bhfuil leibhéal maith sásaimh le feiceáil i measc na dTeachtaí éagsúla agus na bpáirtithe éagsúla maidir leis an athnuachan a deineadh go dtí seo faoi na scéimeanna a bhí ann. Chomh maith leis sin tá sé soiléir go n-aontaíonn gach duine anseo go bhfuil gá anois go mbeadh na liúntais cánach agus araile dírithe ar bhochtanas agus ar rudaí eile nach raibh chun cinn chomh mór sin sna scéimeanna a bhí ann go dtí seo.

In this Bill I have attempted to strike the right balance between the need to continue with tax incentives based urban renewal schemes and the need to ensure the benefits of urban renewal accrue to the many poorer communities in disadvantaged urban areas as well as new residents, investors and developers. Many of the Deputies favoured this approach.

The new integrated area plan approach will address not only issues of physical development but also the wider issues of local socio-economic benefit. It requires local authorities to identify, following extensive consultation with local partners and the involvement of local communities, targeted focused sub-areas within the overall area covered by the plan which will qualify for urban renewal tax incentives. It also requires them to justify the need for the incentives by reference to the objectives of the integrated area plan.

The identification of the gains to the community in terms of employment, development of the local economy, social housing and environmental improvement will contribute to addressing the concerns of the Government's national anti-poverty strategy. The local authorities' selecting and prioritising the integrated area plans following consultation is an important step in highlighting for those local authorities and communities the sense of ownership of the new schemes which should help ensure their success.

We have, in combination with measures announced recently by the Minister for the Environment and Local Government and the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands, ensured that conservation of the built environment will be a guiding principle in a strategy of any plan for core urban areas. I am happy to give Deputy Howlin credit for initiating the process which has led to the statutory provisions before the House. He and his colleague, Deputy McManus, commissioned the study by consultants which examined the effects of previous urban renewal schemes. The consultants came up with the recommendation that urban renewal in the future should be built around broadly based strategic plans allowing for a more focused approach targeted on the areas of greatest need with greater selectivity in the application of incentives. The report from the consultants was considered by the previous Government and details of the proposed new approach to urban renewal to come into effect after the present scheme expires were announced in May 1997.

Against this background, I was somewhat surprised at the tone and nature of Deputy Dukes' response to the Bill's provisions. The Bill, which is of an enabling nature, provides the statutory framework within which decisions on designation for urban renewal tax incentives will be taken in the future. It sets out clearly the basis on which integrated area plans should be prepared, provides that such plans may contain or be accompanied by recommendations on designation to assist in achieving objectives of the plan, covers the role of the Minister for the Environment and Local Government in the process, links with the application of the tax incentives by the Minister for Finance under tax legislation and provides for the subsequent role of the local authority in terms of monitoring and reporting on the plan and certifying that developments qualifying for incentives are consistent with the objectives of the plan.

The Bill does not and could not seek to be specific on the extent to which designation will be applied. The application of incentives represents a cost to the Exchequer in terms of tax foregone. It is important we ensure maximum value for money and the best possible benefits in the application of public resources to supporting urban renewal objectives. As a former Minister for Finance, I found Deputy Dukes' apparent inability to accept that the potential effect on the Exchequer is a relevant issue in considering the extent to which designation can be applied somewhat unexpected.

The Bill's clearly laid out provisions are in sharp contrast with the provisions of the Urban Renewal Act, 1986, under which it was at the discretion of the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, to designate any area in which he was satisfied there was a special need to promote urban renewal. Those provisions successfully withstood legal challenge in the past. I have no reason to believe that the provisions before the House, which set out to achieve clear public socio-economic objectives, would not do likewise. It is important to note that the tax incentives in future can be applied only in the context of integrated area plans. The integrated area plan prepared on the basis of clearly defined criteria provides a basis on which the Minister for the Environment and Local Government may make his recommendations and on which the incentives may be applied by the Minister for Finance.

I welcome Deputy Howlin's support for the new approach to urban renewal in which we are engaged. I assure him that my commitment to ensuring the benefits of urban renewal accrue to the wider community is one which it is my intention to deliver. Deputy Howlin suggested there may be some deficiencies in the Bill in terms of the role of county councils in the process, transparency in decisions in relation to designation, the absence of a right of appeal and lack of consultation. I assure the Deputy and members of urban district councils throughout the country that pitching the role of making the initial decision in relation to the areas for which integrated area plans should be prepared at county level does not reflect in any way on either urban district councils or their members. However, for strategic reasons, related to balance and perspective in the context of the whole county, it made sense that the initial decision on the area to select should be made at county level. With the best will in the world it would be unreasonable to expect an urban district council to bring an overall strategic view of the county's needs to a county based decision-making process.

Although not included in this initial selection process, borough corporations and urban district councils were expected to participate fully in the process of subsequently preparing the integrated area plan. An extensive consultation process is clearly provided for in the guidelines on preparing integrated area plans. The extent to which this took place will be an important factor in the assessment process of integrated area plans which is now under way. A few Deputies referred to a lack of consultations in their areas. That is a matter of which I will take careful note not only in relation to their areas but in relation to all applications to ensure that the consultation process which was clearly laid out in the guidelines did take place.

Deputies Howlin and Gilmore raised an issue regarding ongoing discussions with the European Union. In May 1997 the European Commission wrote to the Irish authorities about the enterprise areas scheme, which is a subset of the urban renewal scheme. The reason for its writing was the extension of the enterprise area scheme in the 1987 Finance Act to the regional airports and the attendant press publicity at that time.

And to one port.

After prolonged discussions and examination, the Commission approved the enterprise areas designated in the 1987 Finance Act last December but retained the right to examine each airport, enterprise zone designation on a case by case basis as they arose. As a result of these developments it has become necessary to obtain European Union Commission approval for the new urban renewal scheme and the new rural renewal scheme, both of which will have to be notified to it.

The Commission is examining a proposal regarding the extension of the capital allowances for buildings in the wider Custom House Docks area beyond January 1999. Apart from some transitional cases, it will also be necessary to notify the European Commission about the tax reliefs in the wider Dublin docklands area. European Union Commission approval is not needed in the case of tax reliefs for residential accommodation. However, a problem has recently emerged in regard to the continued availability of the double rent relief for tenants of buildings in all tax designated areas in the context of the new European Union regional aid guidelines which are to come into force.

The Commission officials consider that this relief is not compatible with the new guidelines in the context of Ireland's improved economic position and, therefore, should not be granted, except in limited cases. The European Union Commission's objections are not expected to arise in the case of the capital allowances for commercial and industrial reasons but these will be subject to the aid intensity ceilings, arising in 1999, under the new regional aid guidelines. There are still many issues which will have to be resolved between ourselves and the European Commission before we can state clearly what the extent and level of tax incentives will be.

A number of Deputies raised the question of the population figure. I am conscious that Deputies have more than one town in their constituencies. This figure was included merely as a guideline indicative of the scale of urban area likely to meet the criteria for the new scheme. We are talking about urban renewal, not village or small town renewal. A certain scale of development is necessary in an area to meet all the criteria in relation to an urban area. No town will be excluded purely on the basis of population. All the criteria spelled out in the guidelines will be taken into consideration. Having said that, there are areas that warrant a high level of consultation, on the other hand in most areas there was a satisfactory level of consultation. I commend the local authorities that took the trouble to ensure as many people as possible had a role and participated in the consultation in regard to what was finally agreed.

Deputy Gilmore raised the question of grants to support the integrated area plan objectives. I have already spelled out the thinking of the non-availability of grants in reply to Parliamentary Question No. 40 on 6 May, tabled by his colleague, Deputy De Rossa.

I am interested in what was said about social housing because the guidelines for the new scheme — Deputy Gilmore and a number of others referred to this — refer specifically to the synergy within other area based plans, including those of area based partnerships. It is clear that the integrated area plans are not concerned only with physical renewal. It is a requirement set out in the guidelines that generally at least 15 per cent of the additional housing in an integrated area plan must be social housing. Housing incentives will only be applied where essential, taking account of market conditions. Deputy Browne referred to the fact that some of the towns designated under the old scheme were left in a half finished state. He referred to Wexford, his own constituency. Wexford submitted plans for New Ross and Gorey. However, there was nothing to prevent a local authority submitting an integrated area plan for a town which had designation under the old scheme, if it chose to prioritise such a town. Many have done so. The new scheme was bound to cause some reaction from developers, a matter to which he referred. Their reaction would probably be inspired by the social agenda this scheme is seeking to address as opposed to the previous property-led nature of earlier urban schemes.

Deputy Hayes raised the interesting point that if the Oireachtas was to reject the Bill or to make some fundamental changes to it, what would be the position? Fundamental changes in the Bill probably would cause difficulties in relation to integrated area plans already submitted. The net effect of this would be to postpone indefinitely the introduction of any new urban renewal scheme when the present scheme expires effectively on 31 July. I did grant an extension to 31 December to facilitate completion of schemes in the pipeline.

The process of preparing integrated area plans was initiated by the previous Government. I have given credit to the fact that the Bill was initiated by the Rainbow Government in May 1987. While the legislation may be catching up with what has happened in preparing plans, it also covers many matters that have yet to be decided. I am pleased with the warm reception for the Bill. I recognise the process was started by the previous Government. I brought it before the new Government in the first few weeks after coming to office and it got approval to proceed along similar lines. I hope there will be agreement on Committee Stage because initiatives were taken in putting forward guidelines. We do not want to lose time between one scheme and the next — we want continuity when the existing urban scheme expires and the new scheme take its place. That was the purpose of advising local authorities in advance of the legislation being passed. There are plenty of precedents for what we are doing but if the Bill is not passed all bets are off.

Acting Chairman

As it is now 1.30 p.m., I am required to put the following question in accordance with an Order of the Dáil of this day: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time".

Question put and agreed to.
Top
Share