An apology has been received from Deputy Gilmore. We are to consider the Supplementary Estimate for the Department of the Environment and Local Government for the year ending 31 December 1999. I welcome the Minister and his officials. The Supplementary Estimate concerns subhead C.1, which deals with road improvement and maintenance. It is to be met in part by savings which are expected to arise under other subheads. Details have been provided to members in the Department's briefing material. Following discussion and agreement with the convenors, I propose to proceed with a presentation by the Minister.
Estimates for Public Services, 1999.
Vote 25 - Department of the Environment and Local Government (Supplementary).
The total amount involved in the Department's Supplementary Estimate is £52 million, an increase of 4% on the original 1999 Estimate of £1.316 billion. It arises from accelerated development of the national roads network. An additional £82 million is being provided for this purpose. Offsetting savings of £30 million are available on two programmes, namely, on regeneration of local authority housing areas and on urban regeneration, where a number of projects have not progressed as quickly as anticipated.
A major increase in national road investment has been taking place during this decade. Capital expenditure on roads in 1999 will have risen, in real terms, by some 125% relative to 1990. Much has been achieved - and is being achieved - with the investment. The Committee will be aware of the improvements made in many parts of the national road network. The Government is committed to accelerating this development of the network and in response the National Roads Authority and local authorities have "ramped up" the road improvement programme.
Eight major national road improvement projects commenced in 1999, such as the Drogheda bypass and the Limerick southern ring road. In addition, 14 major road projects have been completed this year, including the River Lee Tunnel; the bypasses of Arklow, Cavan and Donegal towns; the Clonmel, Kinnegad and Carlow relief roads; the Aghalane Bridge; the Curlews Mountains road; and the Ardee-Aclint and Naas road improvements. Construction is also continuing on other major projects including the southern cross section of the M50 and the Dunleer-Dundalk motorway.
This unprecedented level of activity, together with the following factors, has resulted in higher than anticipated levels of expenditure, which has necessitated this Supplementary Estimate of £82 million. Projected starts for the year have, with few exceptions, occurred as planned by the NRA. Good weather conditions and the adoption of more efficient operational practices by contractors have resulted in faster than expected progress - this increased efficiency has led to expenditure significantly in excess of the original allocation including on a number of major projects, such as the southern cross route and the Cavan, Donegal and Nenagh bypasses. There has been earlier than anticipated settlement of land purchases for new projects and of final accounts on a number of schemes, including the northern cross route phase 2 and the Arklow bypass projects and there has been increased expenditure on planning and design of schemes to be undertaken in the 2000-06 period.
The Supplementary Estimate of £82 million includes a provision of approximately £2 million so that the National Roads Authority can avail of EU funding that has become available from savings under the Ireland-Wales Maritime INTERREG Initiative. This initiative has been an important instrument in forging new links between Wales and Ireland. Currently, 11 road projects have been approved under the initiative with funding of £26.7 million provided by the EU. These projects improve access to the main ports of the eastern region - principally Dublin, Dún Laoghaire and Rosslare - which have ferry links to Wales. The additional funding will be used for two national road improvement projects, involving realignment works on the N80 at Whitemills-Bunclody and on the N25 at Bergerin-Assagart - Phase 2.
Looking to the future, investment in social and economic infrastructure is one of the principal priorities of the Government. This is reflected in the national development plan which provides for a comprehensive investment programme in economic and social infrastructure totalling more than £17.5 billion during the period to 2006, with the objective of a complete transformation of the physical infrastructure on which our economic and social development depends. Investment in national roads, including maintenance, will reach some £4.7 billion over the period of the plan. That will transform the road network, principally by developing the main inter-urban routes to motorway or high quality dual carriageway standard, further major improvements to the other national primary routes, improvements to key national secondaries and completion of the M50 and, subject to the statutory procedures, the Dublin Port Tunnel. The national development plan provides a clear strategy and the funding for the development of our national road network to the high standard necessary to support continuing economic and social development and to facilitate regional development. The expanded scale of the national road investment programme also makes it possible to plan for the development of the road network in a more integrated manner than has been possible up to now.
The challenge now is to implement the strategy. To do this efficiently and effectively will require improvements in programme management and delivery. A Cabinet sub-committee on infrastructure development chaired by the Taoiseach has been established to monitor progress in the delivery of key infrastructural projects. Work is also under way on improving programme and project management. The NRA has strengthened its capacity and is taking action to reduce the planning and procurement periods for major road projects. These initiatives will be supplemented by the Local Government (Planning and Development) Bill, 1999, which includes a number of provisions to improve and streamline statutory procedures relating to the approval of major road projects.
As committee members can see, substantial resources are being made available to address road infrastructure deficiencies along with improvements in the delivery of projects. I hope I have outlined the need for the additional expenditure sought and I commend the Supplementary Estimate to the committee. I will be pleased to clarify any issues Members may wish to raise in the question and answer session which follows later.
We are happy to see the pace of work in various areas expanding. However, a Supplementary Estimate of £52 million, which as the Minister points out is the addition of 4% to the original Estimate, is no mere bagatelle. If the Minister finds himself at this stage of the year having to add as much as 4% to the overall Estimate, then the original planning of the Estimate for the year is suspect, to say the least. The Minister, or his colleague, the Minister for Finance, either got the sums wrong or did not properly foresee the scale of expenditure required. I am sure the Chairman would agree with me that we would be more inclined to lay the responsibility at the door of an incompetent Minister for Finance rather than the hapless Minister for the Environment and Local Government who must put up with the bumbling of his overlord in the Department of Finance. At this stage in the year, seeking a 4% increase in an Estimate does not speak well of the Government's financial management or planning.
More worrying is the composition of the provision which brings the net requirement down from £82 million, 4% of the total original estimate, to £52 million. There are off-setting savings of £30 million on two programmes. Perhaps the Minister would give details of the off-setting savings on each one. The first is the regeneration of local authority housing areas. That immediately raises the question as to the ability of local authorities to deliver on these regeneration projects. The principal one under way at present is the Ballymun project. Perhaps the Minister would tell us the principal difficulties there. Perhaps he would also tell us if there are any other regeneration projects where difficulties and delays have been encountered and, if so, what are the reasons for those delays. We have an enormous housing problem which is worsening. If local authorities are unable to deliver even on regeneration projects, then the outlook for people on the housing list is rather bad.
I am also told that savings are available on urban regeneration programmes. We spent some considerable time this year and last year discussing urban regeneration projects of different types, and I will not repeat the arguments I made in earlier debates on the arbitrary nature of decision-making on these projects, although I want that point to stand in the record. The decisions are entirely arbitrary and, in some cases, they are the decisions of the Minister for Finance and the Minister for the Environment and Local Government with no guarantee for applicants who conform to all the criteria laid down in the legislation that they will receive an urban regeneration project. We now find that, in spite of that rather dictatorial approach to the handling of the matter, there are savings. In other words, there are delays in urban regeneration projects.
Regarding what is provided for national roads, no one on the committee or in the House would object to additional expenditure on national roads. Unless my geography is very much astray, the Chairman would be about the last to object to any additional expenditure on Aghalane Bridge. The Minister has glossed over a few problems in accounting for the additional expenditure. I find it less than satisfactory to hear the Minister say that projected starts for the year have, with few exceptions, occurred as planned by the NRA.
As it happens, I live very close to one of the exceptions, namely, the Kildare bypass. We have been expecting that work to start this year. There had been hopes it might start the previous year. Will the Minister give us an update on that project because we should by now have spent a substantial amount of money on that? I know we have spent some money. We have a new monument in County Kildare, namely, a wonderful construction of a bridge to carry the new motorway over the railway around Cherryville. This magnificent construction now stands in the middle of a bog with nothing else around it. That is part of the Kildare bypass.
As far as I have been able to determine, the only snails which have been causing problems are in Fianna Fáil.
That is a bit obvious.
When one leads with the chin, one is bound to be clobbered.
Could Deputy Dukes not come up with something more original?
The report by Kildare County Council which was to deal with the various issues which arise there, the snails being only a small part of it, concerns with the effects on Pollardstown Fen being by far the greater part of it, has not yet gone to the Department of the Environment and Local Government, although we have been told consistently, constantly and repeatedly since last April that the report was on its way to the Department. I do not know how long it will take that report to make its way through the inner machinery of the Department before it goes to the Commission in Brussels for a final decision. Perhaps the Minister could tell us if there is anything he can do to have the process concluded so that the people who need to travel along that artery will be able to do so in relative comfort and that the Chairman, to whom I listened last night being interviewed about other issues, will know when he leaves Kilgarvan in the black dark of the morning that he will not spend an hour going from Monasterevin to the other side of Kildare on his way up to Dublin and that he will not be delayed excessively on his way home either. I know he is anxious to go home on this occasion if certain things are done for him today. If not, he will not be too concerned about delays between Kildare and Monasterevin.
I was hoping in the course of my journey that I might bring some equipment to deal with these snails as people in Kildare will not do so.
The snails are not a problem, Chairman, but do not bring any cooking implements as one is not allowed to eat them.
The Minister spoke about his plans for road development through the national plan which may not be strictly relevant to the Supplementary Estimate. However, given his comments this morning and the provisions in the national plan, particularly the road map, it is obvious that there are no thick lines west of the Shannon, with the exception of the main road from Athlone to Galway. In addition, there is little provision for road improvement in the western half of the country which will be essential if the Government is serious about dispersing economic growth into the Objective One region.
The Minister stated that the expanded scale of the national road investment programme also makes it possible to plan for the development of the road network in a more integrated manner than has been possible up to now, and that the challenge is to implement the strategy. What strategy? This is a rather disingenuous comment from a Minister who has been given the job of drawing up the spacial strategy which is supposed to underpin the national plan. This strategy will not, apparently, be available until we are one third into the period covered by the national plan, by which time at least two thirds of the investment programmed under the plan will have been determined. Will the Minister rethink the way in which he is going about drawing up this spatial strategy so it will be produced more quickly than at the overly relaxed pace currently envisaged by the Government?
We have been told about the Cabinet sub-committee on infrastructural development which will monitor progress in the delivery of key infrastructural projects. I am glad the sub-committee is in operation. It was brought into operation two years after it was first proposed by me and my colleagues. The Minister mentioned strengthening the capacity of the National Roads Authority and referred to the fact that initiatives of this kind would be supplemented by the Local Government (Planning and Development) Bill. I look forward to the Bill coming before the committee because, while I agree with the broad thrust of the legislation, it needs reinforcing in a number of ways, not least concerning planning procedures, if we are going to get the kind of support for the investment programme necessary for future development.
Before calling the next speaker, I remind members that we are dealing strictly with the Supplementary Estimate and ask them to refrain from referring to other programmes. I call Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin.
Chairman, can we now put questions?
We will have an open forum.
According to my agenda we are now to take questions, so I wonder if members will confine themselves to questions? I have only one question to ask.
The Deputy might wait until I have had the opportunity to——
I am calling members in the order they indicated.
That is okay, Chairman, but are we allowed statements or is it just questions?
Questions to the Minister.
I welcome the opportunity to address this proposal which I support. The proposition involves works which have moved forward with greater speed than anticipated. The programme is being brought forward in a number of other instances and, therefore, the requirement has been created. This is welcome news, a particular case in point being the Cavan bypass with which I am familiar. I also welcome the development at Aghalane.
Will the Minister indicate the NRA's proposals to proceed with anticipated works on the N2 and N3, specifically the bypasses of Carrickmacross, Castleblaney and Monaghan town? Work on these bypasses is essential to the development of the N2 north to south. This is a critical artery but it was not included in the national development plan for motorway, high quality, dual carriageway status. Therefore, it comes under the category of further major improvements on other national primary routes. There are serious concerns about delays in these three critical bypasses which will significantly assist the passage of traffic from the indigenous community and those travelling between Donegal, Derry, Tyrone and Dublin.
The east-west link between Dundalk, Carrickmacross and Sligo is a glaring omission from the national development plan. Is it envisaged that this matter will be addressed within the Supplementary Estimate? The Minister's colleague, Deputy O'Hanlon, has often spoken on this issue and urged action, even when he was a member of Monaghan County Council.
I am concerned about saving (a) caused by delays in redevelopment work at the Ballymun flats complex. We are talking of projected savings of £22 million yet there is a serious problem in Ballymun which requires urgent attention. Will the Minister elaborate on the causes of the delays and the projected timeframe for proceeding with the essential redevelopment work in that area? Saving (b) on urban regeneration involves savings caused by certain projects not having progressed as quickly as anticipated. When the Minister speaks of savings is he referring to savings within the current budget or, as with urban regeneration and renewal schemes, are they time dated? Will the Minister clarify whether we are looking at situations whereby, because of expiry dates, works which were intended will not now qualify and that these moneys are being retained and will not go into urban regeneration? Savings arising from delays in Ballymun and urban regeneration would be most unwelcome as we want to facilitate and accommodate these works and see them proceed as quickly as possible.
Will the Minister indicate when work will commence on the Galway to Loughrea motorway and the Loughrea bypass? In which programme will these two projects be included? Will he give a breakdown of the off-setting of the saving of £30 million on the regeneration of local authority houses and urban regeneration? I do not regard this as a saving but a great loss to the housing sector. The more one delays housing regeneration the more expensive it becomes and the more hardship for tenants. It might also result in losses to local authorities as some houses may be beyond regeneration if left much longer. In the case of maisonettes on St. James's Road, Mervue, a programme was agreed two years ago but the project is only going to contract this week. I cannot understand why such delays take place as there is no saving. I have estimated that at a cost of £30,000 per house it would be possible to regenerate 100,000 houses with £30 million, a colossal number. It would cost that amount to build between 42,000 and 43,000 houses. The failure to use the money to regenerate existing housing constitutes a greater loss to the State in the long-term than giving the £30 million to make up the shortfall in the roads programme. The Minister should seriously examine this and I ask him to outline the causes of the delay.
There are savings of £30 million from the Ballymun and urban regeneration schemes. Why was this funding not used in other subheads of the housing division? I could understand if the money could not be spent under other subheads by the end of 1999 on other housing measures, but local authorities are entitled to take up the annual new-start allocation of other authorities which are not in a position to do so. Five local authorities in the latter part of this year received a reallocation of new-starts and acquisitions, including Galway Corporation and South Dublin County Council, as they proved they could get ahead with their house building programme in a more efficient and speedier way than other local authorities. Therefore, there is clear evidence that some local authorities can build or acquire houses faster than others. Why, therefore, has this money been lost to the housing programme? The savings of £30 million on two specific aspects of the housing programme could have been used to fund other areas of the housing programme, particularly given that it has been proven this year that five local authorities can do their business much more effectively than other local authorities. It is not that local authorities cannot build the necessary houses and therefore could not use the funding. I put this to the Minister, although it may be more appropriate to the Minister of State who has responsibility for housing and who, surprisingly, is not here today. It appears there is egg all over the face of the Minister of State given that this money is being lost to housing.
Can the Minister say the average cost of completing one kilometre or mile of motorway in 1999 in comparison to 1998 or 1997? He may not have the information to hand, but perhaps he will pass it on to my office. There have been examples of quite exceptional increases in construction costs in the housing sector and I would be interested to know the increases in the costs of motorway construction.
The Government has a plan to build 35,000 local authority homes over the next seven years. The current bureaucracy in dealings between the Minister's Department and the housing authorities increases the waiting time in terms of construction. Every new-start home must get the go-ahead from the Department of the Environment and Local Government before a local authority can commence building. In the long run it would be much more efficient if lump sum funding was handed out on a yearly or three yearly basis to each local authority to build houses, rather than having to ask for approval for the building of each house. The local authority house building programme is being expanded, and if the current bureaucracy remains, it will be necessary to double the numbers involved in the unit of the Department which deals with design and approval. The Minister may have to consider this when he is presenting his Estimate to the committee next February or March.
The Dublin Port tunnel runs from the port to Santry and is in my constituency. The public inquiry has been held and I gather the report of the inspectors has been given to the Minister and that a ministerial decision is awaited. Is there any word in this regard? When might a decision be made? Does the Minister have any figures at his disposal showing that the costs are spiralling upwards and will this have any influence on his decision? Is he still committed to the project? Would the problem of escalating costs present difficulties for the Minister if and when he makes a decision? What is the timescale for the completion of these works? Obviously the project is long overdue from the point of view of the National Roads Authority. If, for example, the Minister made a decision to sanction the project in the near future, what would be the timescale for completion? Can a decision on the project be expected shortly?
I thank Members for their comments and questions. In the time available I will try to briefly respond and if further information is required I will try to supply it if Deputies ask for it. Regarding Deputy Dukes's point about the 4% increase in the national roads programme being a sign that things are badly planned, I am sure that in his wide experience of these matters the Deputy knows that on a year to year basis the Estimates for various programmes are based, broadly speaking, on the experience of previous years and the capacity of different agencies to deliver, etc. I am very pleased to say to the committee that the NRA responded very well to calls I made to vamp up expenditure on national roads. They exceeded my wildest expectations in this regard thereby making this Supplementary Estimate necessary. One of the strong points I was able to make in negotiations on the roads programme included in the national development plan was that the NRA was able to increase capacity and spend in excess of £600 million per year during the lifetime of the plan, as was indicated by the work it was doing this year in response to the calls made on it. I am glad that my good friend, the Minister for Finance, was able to respond and accept my word. That is why the Supplementary Estimate is much in excess of the original Estimate, something for which I will not apologise. I hope the NRA will be able to spend or over spend again next year to ensure we deliver on the roads' programme.
Regarding the Ballymun regeneration, which was raised by Deputy Dukes and a number of other Deputies, the delay arose directly as a result of the necessary time provided for local consultation on the design of the houses. A delay resulted from that in regard to planning permission. Subsequently, three schemes were appealed to An Bord Pleanála and a legal challenge was made in July seeking a judicial review. The challenge was withdrawn at the end of August. Extensive ground and other works were also required.
Ballymun Regeneration Limited has received tenders for four housing schemes comprising approximately 80 houses for which full planning permission has been granted. Those tenders are currently being examined. An EIS has been submitted in regard to three schemes which are on appeal to An Bord Pleanála and it is hoped to have a decision on those before Christmas. Tenders will be invited for a further 212 houses in January and 205 houses in February. The enabling works have recently commenced for the first 320 houses.
On the point raised by Deputies McCormack, Hayes and Ó Caoláin, it is something of a misnomer to refer to "savings" but that is the term used in this bookkeeping exercise. The money is not lost, rather it must be accounted for in this accountancy year and it will be provided again next year. Time has been lost because of other factors but there has not been any loss of money to the project. The savings will be paid out.
Will the Department draw up a Supplementary Estimate for housing in addition to the £13 million? Will that £13 million be in addition to the normal allocation for next year?
No, we will estimate the amount of money Ballymun Regeneration Limited will be able to spend next year to deliver the programme outlined.
Will that be separate from the Department's other housing allocation?
Yes, we provide for that in the Estimates.
Surely there was nothing to prevent some of the local authorities, which can build their allocation in a year, receiving a further allocation? I accept there is not any loss involved but some programmes could have received more as a result of the £13 million.
They could have if they sought it and were in a position to spend it but the Deputy will be aware that figures from recent years show that while local authorities have been receiving allocations and new starts, the vast majority of them fail to meet their targets.
Some of them do meet their targets.
Yes, that is why we specifically encouraged local authorities to inform us which of them would reach their targets this year and which would not. That is why some local authorities received further allocations. We must think at all times in terms of capacity to deliver and make judgments on that.
Deputy Dukes alleged that decisions on urban regeneration were arbitrary ones between the Minister for Finance and the Department of the Environment and Local Government. The Deputy may recall that it was the Government of which he was a Member which made recommendations on the legislation implemented by this Government. The decisions are not arbitrary. Local authorities decide on the areas for which applications are submitted and an independent panel then makes the final decisions. The Government did not interfere with that in any way; we merely endorsed the programme put before us.
On the projected start date for the Kildare by-pass, I hope to have the full file in regard to the project some time this week and I will then make my decision. I assure Deputy Dukes, as I have assured the Minister for Finance, that there will not be any undue delay in issuing a reply to the Commission on this matter.
On the roads programme generally, Deputies may be somewhat confused in regard to the map contained in the national development plan. From a roads point of view, it would be preferable to refer to the national roads needs study published by the NRA which outlined a work programme. It should be noted that the commencement dates for various projects are out of date in that study so it is necessary to look at the roads needs study in conjunction with the national development plan.
Deputy McCormack referred to the Loughrea/Galway project and Deputy Ó Caoláin referred to projects in Carrickmacross, Castleblayney and Monaghan. All of those are due for completion within the lifetime of the National Development Plan, 2000-2006. Work is ongoing in regard to planning and design for most of the projects and it is a matter for the NRA to decide on the sequence of building. Any projects which are included in the development plan and in the road needs strategy study will proceed as quickly as possible. It is not possible at this stage to outline absolute details on what stretches of road will be built in what sequence.
On projects west of the Shannon, it is the Department's intention to provide a north-south corridor from Letterkenny to Limerick and on to Waterford. The east-west link is currently being discussed by Deputy O'Hanlon and other local authority chairpersons in the Cavan, Monaghan, Louth and Leitrim areas. I will also be raising the matter in the North-South Ministerial Council because the route may traverse the Border in some places.
I hope the final stage of the decision on the Dublin port tunnel will be made before Christmas. I am currently considering the many submissions, files and objections received on the matter but hope to be in a position to make a decision in the near future. The Government is committed to this project. Dublin Corporation added an extra £30 million to the cost with the further extension of the tunnel. We do not know what the costs will be but ten consortia, a combination of Irish and foreign companies with expertise in the tunnelling area, have expressed an interest in the project. If a favourable decision is made, I do not anticipate huge delays in the commencement of the project. The projected completion date is 2003. The project will take approximately three years from tender stage to completion.
The saving of more than £4.5 million in urban renewal and urban regeneration grants was due to the slower than anticipated progress in implementing projects for a variety of reasons such as the time taken for public consultation, obtaining planning permissions and so on. This meant there was not a full draw down of the grants. However, I assure members that the delay will not result in a loss of EU matching funds.
I will obtain the information sought by Deputy Hayes on the average cost per kilometre of motorway. The levels of inflation in the construction industry vary. It currently averages at approximately 10% per annum, but it can vary from 13% to 14% or even lower for some contracts.
I am always anxious to keep bureaucracy to a minimum and to ensure it does not slow down house approvals and so on. This is why the multi-annual programme and starts were put in place. A unit cost has been delegated to local authorities which will allow them to proceed with building houses without prior clearance provided they are below certain realistic levels. These have been increased significantly recently to allow for maximum flexibility. I am sure the Deputy will appreciate we cannot remove the cap completely because we could end up with local authority house prices going through the roof. Local authorities have been notified of this decision.
I thank the Minister for the able manner in which he answered queries. I also thank his officials.