I am not happy with the reply on the figures given by the Minister. This Minister was not present when I asked the questions but I assume that he has been advised on the questions that were asked about the present administration of the fund which we are seeking to increase by a further £1,000 million, as has been pointed out. I had asked specifically if it were possible to have a breakdown over the last three years of the amounts that had gone for different aspects of housing policy. I wanted to know specifically how much had gone on house improvement grants in the last year. I was anxious to know then, apart from housing which is the area the Minister dealt with to some extent, what the position was in relation to other capital expenditure, a breakdown on the figures in different areas. This is very important because we are not here in this House just to facilitate the Minister by authorising a further £1 billion increase in the size of the fund. We are here to monitor and, if necessary, criticise the priorities in the policy approaches in the Local Loans Fund. For the reasons I outlined in my speech — I do not intend to go over them again — these priorities are not good social priorities. They do not meet the areas of greatest need. In the area of housing, as I have illustrated, they are not meeting the need. That need has been aggravated by existing Government policy.
The Minister in his reply did not refer to the question of seeking to control the price of local authority housing. He seemed to think it was satisfactory that it would automatically rise with inflationary tendencies and average incomes. House prices have clearly risen far in excess of incomes. Is it a satisfactory situation that we do not attempt in the interest of families, in the interest of the basic human need for shelter and homes for families to assert a control over the price of sites and the price of housing? We seem to be prepared to control prices in other areas, of which I am very much in favour. I would like a broader based income control. Uniquely, as far as this Government appear to be concerned, housing is excluded from any form of control. Therefore, the average price of local authority houses between 1976 and 1980 has gone up from £8,553 to £22,161. That is an average price. The price is much higher in the areas where socially, it is necessary to have housing, in centre city areas. In Dublin city centre, the sites acquired by local authorities are uncontrolled and exploited. Enormous profits are made on developing these areas. I want to know whether the Government have any intention of asserting some control and standards in this area or whether they are just looking for a further £1,000 million, unrelated to any kind of policy in any set of priorities in this area. I specifically asked for the figure on home improvement loans because these loans have been availed of very substantially by those who have homes. I have great sympathy for people in the particular economic climate. Why should they not avail of grants if they are made available to them? It depends on how we use our public resources. I have some doubts at the moment whether it is socially justifiable to allow a substantial proportion of a fund to be absorbed by home improvements grants to those who already have homes and who tend to be better off, when we have a very severe housing crisis, and people cannot get the basic shelter over their heads or a satisfactory minimum for themselves and their families. I also think this is an opportunity to get specific figures on the other capital allocations from the fund. I appreciate that a number of the policy issues behind the distribution allocation of the Local Loans Fund can be raised on the Appropriation Bill. That will be an opportunity to cover the whole range of Government policy relating to the various Departments. It is more difficult to get specific information. I would ask the Minister if he could give a further breakdown of figures on section 1 of this Bill.
