SELECT COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT debate -
Thursday, 1 Jun 2006

Vote 25 — Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Revised).

Chairman

I welcome the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche, and the Ministers of State at the Department, Deputies Noel Ahern and Batt O'Keeffe. I also welcome the Department's officials.

We meet today to discuss the Estimates falling within the remit of the aforementioned Department, namely, Vote 25. The clerk to the committee has circulated a proposed timetable for today's meeting, which will allow for opening statements by the Minister and Opposition spokespersons before opening the discussion on individual subheads by way of a question and answer session. Is the timetable agreed? Agreed.

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Mr. Roche)

I welcome the opportunity to present and discuss my Department's revised Estimate for 2006 with the committee. The Ministers of State, Deputies Noel Ahern and Batt O'Keeffe, will make opening statements on their areas of the Department's work.

The Department's revised gross Estimate for the year is €2.73 billion and is the largest ever Government spend on local government, an increase of 13% on the outturn for 2005. In 1996, the Government allocated a total of €890 million to local government. The Estimate will mean that the total funding available to the Department in 2006 will be €3.763 billion when account is taken of the local government fund, the environment fund and the capital carry-over from 2005.

Approximately €3.3 billion — €1.53 billion current and €1.77 billion capital — of the €3.763 billion will be allocated to local authorities. This level of central support facilitates local authorities in maintaining a balanced approach to raising local sources of funding, for example, through commercial rates. The total capital provision of €1.891 billion for 2006 has increased by €226 million, or 13.57%, of the 2005 Estimate and is the largest capital allocation to any Department in 2006. The carry-over of €76 million from 2005 is also available and has been allocated mainly to social housing.

It is important that there is increased provision of financial resources to meet demands arising from general economic growth and demographic change. Key performance indicators and delivery of outputs are the only real measure of how well my Department, the local authorities and other agencies within my remit are doing. I have placed strong emphasis on the monitoring of performance and promoting best practice to maximise the benefits of the considerable resources being made available. I expect local authorities to attain the same high standards. If I am putting pressure on the Government for increased resources at record levels, I expect performance to reflect it.

Achievements to the end of 2005 and priorities for 2006 include a new record level of almost 81,000 housing units completed, compared to 36,000 in 1996, social and affordable housing provided for 13,000 new households and a reduction of almost 10% in the number of households seeking local authority housing since 2002. Also during 2005, the Government introduced initiatives specifically to address issues raised in the National Economic and Social Council report. In June, we launched the affordable housing partnership to co-ordinate and accelerate the delivery of affordable housing in the greater Dublin area and, in December 2005, the Government launched the new housing policy framework Building Sustainable Communities.

Drinking water and surface water quality continues to improve. Currently, there is 90% compliance with the wastewater treatment directive. It is interesting to make a comparison with a decade ago, when the compliance rate was just 20%. There have been significant improvements during the life of this Government. A recycling rate for municipal waste of almost 34% by 2004, just one point short of our national target set for 2013, is another significant increase, from 7.8% in 1996 and 9% in 1998. Positively, our recycling of packaging waste over the same period rose from 15% to 56%, construction and demolition recycling is at a high of 85% and land-filling generally has fallen by 9% in four years. The total area currently protected in the interests of habitat or species conservation, including new marine areas, stands at 15,500 sq. km, of which roughly half, 8,700 sq. km, is on land. Increased resources for An Bord Pleanála, the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland, the Heritage Council and the EPA will ensure that these key agencies continue to delivery a high quality service, which is crucial to continued economic and infrastructural development.

A new line of funding will underpin the recently announced Irish heritage trust. Approximately 170 capital projects are aimed at developing and maintaining our six national parks and 78 nature reserves. Reprioritising of non-national road investment to reflect updated information from a new primary survey has been carried out. The vast majority of the busiest fire stations in the country are modern, up-to-date buildings with all the necessary facilities required by today's standards. The frontline fire-fighting fleet comprises modern, purpose-built appliances. The Minister of State in my Department, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, will give further details of investment under the fire services capital programme.

In addition to the significant investment in fire services infrastructure, I have also initiated a major fire services change programme to implement the key fire safety and fire services recommendations of the Farrell Grant Sparks report, Review of Fire Safety and Fire Services in Ireland. All of the key stakeholder groups are involved in this programme, which is being driven by a high level implementation group chaired by an assistant secretary from my Department. The group also contains the Dublin city manager, the Kildare town manager, senior officials from the London fire service and representatives of the trade union movement.

Local authorities are delivering on increased demands across a wide range of services which enhance the quality of life for everyone, including local roads, urban renewal and regeneration, waste management, water services, housing, library, community and recreational facilities. There is need for the highest levels of efficiency in the delivery of these services. A first report on details of local authority performance over a range of 42 service areas has been published. This is a first for the public sector and provides a benchmark to assess performance in future years.

A critical question for local authorities is how to translate the results of the first report, and the 2005 report I expect to receive shortly, into action. Local authorities must take the actions necessary to ensure that quality customer service is a key driver of local authority performance. I have asked the local government customer service group to carry out a review of the present set of indicators, to ensure that they fully reflect customer-service requirements.

Significant funding is being provided to assist local authorities with these services through the local government fund. The amount available through this fund in 2006 will be just under €1.4 billion, an increase of 7% on last year and a fourfold increase on the €339 million provided in 1997. The transfer of resources to local government on such a massive scale underlines this Government's commitment to sustaining and developing the local government sector.

The general purpose grants notified to local authorities for 2006 amount to €875 million. This is an increase of 7% over the amount provided in 2005. Since 1997 grants of this nature, from central government to local government, have increased by about 160%.

Our booming economy has had a major positive effect on the income of the local government sector as continued expansion in commercial development throughout the country has added to the valuation base of local authorities. In order to build on this, a provision in the business improvement districts Bill will make new premises liable to make a contribution to local authorities as soon as they are valued by the valuation office. At present there is a delay between the valuation of a major commercial development and payment of rates. I will eliminate this delay, increasing the yield to local authorities. I will publish that Bill before the summer recess. I intend to build on the progress achieved to date by engaging with the efficiency recommendations outlined in the report on the review of local government financing which was published in March.

Additional capital funding of €6 million is being provided for a new social and community facilities scheme. This will support and strengthen local authorities' work in building social capital and is in line with their expanded role in social inclusion and community development. I intended that the scheme would be used for targeted capital works. Local authorities were invited to submit project proposals and a significant number have been received.

The 2006 provision of €5 million current expenditure and €10 million capital expenditure, together with a carry-over of €3 million capital from 2005 for disability services, was allocated to local authorities and bodies under the aegis of the Department in April 2006. These allocations will complement funding for disability-related provisions incorporated in mainstream local authority works programmes and support services. Authorities have been asked to prioritise requirements under the Disability Act 2005 and commitments in the Department's outline sectoral plan in determining projects to be funded from the allocation in 2006.

Chairman

As there is a vote in the House, we must suspend until after the vote.

Sitting suspended at 10.45 a.m. and resumed at 11.05 a.m.

Mr. Roche

Prior to the suspension of the meeting we discussed disability services. I will now move on to the implementation of the national spatial strategy.

At national level the Department leads and oversees the process of embedding the national spatial strategy, NSS, into the policies, programmes and activities of Departments and agencies with a view to ensuring that all relevant activities support the NSS. The process at national level is underpinned by an ongoing programme of research and co-ordination activities at regional and local level. Effective co-ordination of regional and local planning with the plans and programmes of Departments and agencies has become increasingly important in light of the Government decision of July 2005 that the regional dimension of the forthcoming national development programme should be based on the national spatial strategy.

I will provide approximately €400 million for investment in water infrastructure this year. Since 2000, we have invested approximately €2.7 billion on new water services infrastructure, a figure that will comfortably pass the figure of €3 billion by the end of this year. As a result, we have advanced from a situation where only 25% of discharges were compliant with the standards of the urban wastewater treatment directive in 2000 to a compliance level of more than 90% at the end of 2005. We now discharge 45,000 tonnes per annum less pollutants into our rivers, lakes and seas.

Wastewater treatment facilities equivalent to the needs of 3.1 million people have been put in place, including major new sewerage schemes in Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Galway. On the water supply side, we have, since 1997, provided additional drinking water capacity for a population equivalent to more than 1 million. A great deal has been done. There is still more to do. I could coin a phrase. Incredible improvements have been made. As the Chairman knows, last year Dublin became one of the few capital cities in Europe to have a blue flag beach within its metropolitan area. Cork saw an extraordinary improvement with the €350 million scheme which came on stream and the Lee Swim was conducted in the heart of the city for the first time since 1954.

ln tandem with rapid economic growth, record numbers at work and the scale of development generally, we have managed not just to maintain environmental standards but actually to improve them. People now swim on a blue flag beach in Dollymount, the only such amenity within the bounds of any European capital city. I was in Cork recently and a local Deputy, from another party, pointed out to me that the River Lee is now clear and fish can be seen swimming in it. There has been an extraordinary change.

When I published the current water services investment programme just before Christmas I also announced that once a local authority had received preliminary sanction for a scheme valued up to €5 million, it could proceed to construction without any further clearance from the Department. This applies to 413, or over 57%, of the schemes in the current programme and will greatly accelerate progress. The Minister of State, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, will provide further details.

The serviced land initiative plays an important part in relieving pressure on housing supply by increasing the availability of serviced land for residential development. At the end of 2005, in excess of 81,000 sites had been provided, with a further 95,000 sites at construction stage and schemes with the potential to provide a further 72,000 sites at various stages of planning.

Last February I announced a capital allocation of €133 million, the biggest ever in the 44-year history of the rural water programme. The bulk of the funds are earmarked for the provision of water treatment and disinfection facilities for group schemes with quality deficient sources. By the end of 2006, some 100 new water treatment plants will be operational and will deliver treated water to over 26,000 rural households. A further 77 water treatment plants, serving 17,000 rural consumers, will be advanced through the planning stages with half of them commencing construction this year.

I can now say with confidence that we have reached the turning point as far as the elimination of poor quality group water schemes is concerned. l will quote the chairman of the National Federation of Group Water Schemes, Mr. Brendan O'Mahony, who, at the launch of this year's rural water programme, generously commented as follows: "The Minister has done his bit and it is now up to the individual group water schemes to carry through and complete the works to improve the quality of water being supplied to their consumers." I have every confidence in the federation, which has done extraordinary work, as have the group schemes. With the resources they now have they are confident they will be able to make the final breakthrough.

In 2006 investment in non-national roads will top the €500 million mark for the first time ever. Funding for non-national roads in 2006, at almost €558 million, is the highest ever. Not alone is it the highest ever level of funding available, it also represents a very substantial increase of 13% on last year's record allocation, or an increase of almost €62.5 million.

The 1996 pavement condition study identified that some 47,000 km of non-national roads in county council areas were in need of restoration by the end of that year. Since then more than 80%, 37,600 km, of that network deemed to be deficient has been improved. The results of the recent pavement condition study and review of pavement management systems showed a very large growth in traffic volumes and in the number of heavy goods vehicles on our roads in the past ten years. The overall conclusion of the study is that the existing restoration programme requires refocusing to increase the relative level of funding to counties that have the greatest identified pavement strengthening needs.

Last year, the process of refocusing priority investment under the programme to areas of most need commenced. This year, the process is being continued and strengthened and I am sure members will support that.

Some €11 million has also been allocated for new strategic non-national roads schemes. A total of 12 projects are receiving allocations in 2006, which will make a significant and specific contribution toward the national spatial strategy. Continued progress will be made on existing key strategic non-national road projects, which will assist housing and commercial and industrial development. It is estimated that these projects will facilitate the provision of approximately 44,000 housing units and benefit over 900 hectares of industrial land.

I have noted that some local authorities have cut back in real terms on their allocations from their own resources, rather than maximise the impact of the additional funds being made available. This is unacceptable. It is not right that councils, at a time when they have increasing resources, cut back their contributions to local roads. I have made it clear on a number of occasions, including to county managers, that I disapprove. I am pleased to anticipate that, this year, local authorities will significantly increase contributions from their own resources to non-national roads, to €223 million from €161 million last year. I will keep a very close eye on this issue because I am not prepared to tolerate local authorities cutting back and passing the burden onto the general taxpayer.

Meeting our commitment under the Kyoto Protocol to limit emissions to 13% above 1990 values is one of the main challenges facing this country over the coming years. Ireland's approach to reaching this target involves a range of measures across the economy, grounded in the national climate change strategy and including measures introduced after the strategy's publication in 2000. It also involves participation by large CO2 emitters in the EU emissions trading scheme, which accounts for one third of Ireland's emissions. In addition, flexible mechanisms under the Kyoto Protocol will be used to purchase credits on behalf of the State, in principle where this is less costly than the implementation of measures to secure equivalent reductions in emissions. A substantial provision of €20 million is being provided in this year's Estimate for the initial purchase of carbon credits.

My Department made significant advances in compliance with EU environmental legislation in 2005. Just yesterday, I signed two further sets of regulations on end-of-life vehicles and ozone depleting substances. The establishment of the office of environmental enforcement within the EPA put a new focus on enforcement of environmental legislation. The office, operating since 2003, has been successful in improving the level of enforcement of environmental legislation. It also has a role in providing support and guidance to local authorities and in providing information for the public.

Early in 2005 I set up a task force comprising heads of division in the areas of environment, water and natural heritage, and heritage and planning. The task force has built on intensified engagement with the European Commission and has overseen a series of meetings with Commission officials resulting in substantial reductions in the number of active infringement cases. I previously told the select committee that I wanted to reduce the number of infringement cases significantly. At the start of 2006 my Department had 42 cases open with the Commission. This figure stood at 57 12 months ago. It is important to stress that these cases represent a fraction of the several hundred issues my Department has resolved with the Commission since the early 1990s. Most environmental issues are resolved through the normal consultative process. Only a few give rise to infringement proceedings, and even fewer reach the European Court of Justice.

ln March this year I hosted a visit to Ireland by the EU Commissioner for the Environment, Mr. Stavros Dimas. While he was here I took the opportunity to highlight to him the progress we were making in respect of environmental impact assessment, nature, water and waste, and to outline to him the efforts and effectiveness of the office of environmental enforcement. Commissioner Dimas acknowledged our progress on national radio and to me personally on a number of occasions during his visit. I am determined to build on this positive relationship.

The Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland plays an important role in supporting the Govemment's ongoing and committed campaign against the Sellafield operation in the UK, including the provision of scientific advice for my Department and the State's legal team in support of the State's legal action against the UK in regard to the Sellafield MOX fuel fabrication plant. Deputies will be aware of this week's decision of the European Court of Justice which places the European Commission centre stage in this regard and to which we will hold it.

The €1.22 million provided for the institute's capital expenditure represents a significant increase of almost €800,000 on the 2005 allocation. The bulk of this increase is to cover exceptional once-off expenditure to upgrade the institute's air sampling systems, which are part of Ireland's radiological protection and monitoring network. The upgrading of these systems was recommended in the consultant's report from the major test of the national emergency plan for nuclear accidents.

Increased provision of €34.73 million is being made for the national parks and wildlife service and the protection of biodiversity. This allocation has increased by more than one third from 2005. I made a commitment at one stage during a discussion in the Dáil to make significant increases in resources. This increase certainly does that.

Last November, I launched a comprehensive interim review of the implementation of the national biodiversity plan for the period 2002-06 and I was pleased to announce that 83 of the 91 actions of the plan have been either implemented or are in the process of implementation. I also took the opportunity to announce a number of new initiatives to give additional impetus to the implementation of the plan. These included the establishment of a biodiversity unit in my own Department; the establishment of a biodiversity fund of €1 million over the period 2006 to 2007, the first round of grants from which have already been announced; and a biodiversity forum, which is also now in place. I confirmed the establishment of a biological records centre and announced my intention to organise a dedicated biodiversity awareness campaign, which I hope to launch later this year.

Some €23.5 million, an increase of 29% on the output for 2005, is being provided for built heritage this year. A total of €12.78 million, an increase of 28.5%, is being provided for approximately 170 capital projects at various historic properties and national monuments as part of the national development plan. Details of some of the main projects are contained in the briefing material circulated prior to the meeting.

I intend to make over €6 million available for the conservation grants scheme, which was introduced in 1999 to assist owners and occupiers of protected structures to undertake conservation works. There was an increase of over 60% in the allocation for this purpose in 2005, and I propose to maintain this high level of commitment to the scheme again for this year. The local authorities are proving to be very efficient in delivering this scheme.

Funding of €500,000 is being provided this year to meet the establishment and initial running costs of the Irish Heritage Trust. There is also a new €5 million capital under subhead E.4 to enable endowment funds to be established by the trust. Each property acquired by the trust is to be accompanied by an endowment fund sufficient to conserve, maintain and present the property to the public. The proportion of the State's contribution will diminish as more properties are acquired by the trust and the trust establishes itself sufficiently to maximise its fund-raising capabilities. The donors of properties to the Irish Heritage Trust can avail of a new tax relief announced by the Minister for Finance. This relief is available only in respect of the Irish Heritage Trust and is capped at €6 million in any one year.

I thank the committee for its attention. The Minister of State, Deputy Noel Ahern, will make a further contribution.

Mr. O’Dowd

We have an agenda, but how long will the meeting go on for?

Chairman

Is the Deputy referring to the Vote or the length of the Minister of State's contribution?

Mr. O’Dowd

The Minister has made a long contribution. Are we going to hear two more? We would like to tackle the real issues. I do not want to hear speeches. I would prefer to go through the material.

Mr. Roche

We are giving more than what is in the Vote.

Chairman

Do both Ministers of State have contributions?

Mr. Roche

Yes.

Chairman

Perhaps the contributions could be brief. The proceedings have been delayed at this stage.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Mr. N. Ahern)

How long should I take to contribute? I am in the Chairman's hands.

Chairman

We can review the time as the Minister of State proceeds.

Mr. N. Ahern

Briefly, our social and economic development in the past ten or 15 years has been extraordinary. The performance of the housing market in that period has been remarkable. That is owing to a buoyant economy, dynamic demographics, very low interest rates, high employment, increases in real disposable income and high rates of immigration. These factors have all led to an unprecedented demand for housing. The challenge for the Government has been to respond with financial commitment and implementation frameworks for necessary policy, which we have in place.

It has been mentioned that we launched a new policy document, Housing Policy Framework — Building Sustainable Communities. Last year, in response to issues raised by the NESC, we set up the affordable homes partnership to co-ordinate and accelerate the delivery of affordable housing in the greater Dublin area. We have been working with local authorities and developed five-year action plans for housing programmes, covering the period up to 2008. The local authorities have helped and we are currently reviewing the plans, as we are at the mid-term stage, bringing forward adjustments in light of performance to date.

The Government makes a large amount of resources available to housing, and since 1997, some €7 billion of Exchequer funding has been spent on the range of housing programmes. The provision for this year is €1.4 billion in capital and current expenditure, and that rises to €2 billion when non-Voted expenditure is included. The local authority housing programme is the main source of social housing provision, with just over €830 million available this year. In the voluntary and co-operative sector, €145 million is allocated.

Since 1997, some 36,500 local authority houses have been produced, with approximately 10,000 extra in the voluntary sector. The affordable housing and shared ownership schemes have made an important contribution to easing the problem of affordability. In the eight-year period, some 14,500 transactions were completed. With Part V coming on board, the figure will be more significant in the future. To date, Part V is delivering just over 1,900 units, with 1,400 of those delivered last year. Some 2,500 Part V units were in progress at the end of that year.

An important indicator is the results of the 2005 housing needs assessment, which showed a decrease of almost 10% in the numbers on housing waiting lists compared with the figure from three years earlier. One can gauge the strength of the existing programme when one sees that over 10,000 social houses were under construction at the end of last year. That momentum will carry into this year, allowing local authorities to start some 6,000 units under the main programme. There will probably be 500 extra from the regeneration schemes. The completion figures for this year will be approximately 5,500, which is an increase over recent years.

The new housing policy framework outlined the Government commitment for the next few years, showing that 23,000 new social homes will be commenced between 2006 and 2008. There will be 15,000 affordable homes. In addition, there will be the rental accommodation scheme. In total, approximately 50,000 households will benefit over the next three years from an Exchequer investment of €4 billion.

The overall theme of the Department and Government's strategy is to increase supply. Including social and affordable units, the level of production — last year building 81,000 — is extraordinary, particularly when compared with the early 1990s, when we used to build between 21,000 and 22,000 houses per year. The figure has gone from low in the 20,000 range to over 80,000 per year. Price increases clearly remain a concern, but we must continue with a range of balanced measures to increase overall supply. It is only through increasing supply that prices can be controlled. At the same time there should be a number of targeted schemes to help people less able to buy their own property or who require social houses.

In the overall budget there is the local authority build, with over €800 million; the voluntary sector, consisting of over €100 million; and over €200 million on regeneration schemes, which puts right schemes carried out in previous decades. The central heating programme for local authority housing spends around €30 million per year. Over €40 million per year is spent on Traveller-specific accommodation. We are also committed to the needs of older and disabled people which is demonstrated through disabled persons' grants and essential repair grants. Following the review of these schemes we will introduce more streamlined arrangements to cut down on bureaucracy and make them more accessible.

We will build on the experience of local authorities that have prioritised spending through means-testing and standardised costs. Last week I announced the combined allocations for the two schemes of €65 million and an additional €17 million is available as special housing aid for the elderly. It is intended that this scheme will operate alongside the disabled persons' grant and essential repair grant to provide a more seamless set of responses to the needs of disabled and older people.

Through the €65 million allocated last week local authorities received 100% of the funding they requested. Last year this figure was 89%. Last year a number of local authorities did not spend the funds allocated to them and there were additional allocations during the year for local authorities in need of further funding. For the last 18 months local authorities that provide disabled persons' grants for their tenants have no longer needed to take such funds from finances set aside solely for that purpose, since they may take it from their main capital programme. Some local authorities receive 100% of such funds from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, rather than 66%, yet some local authorities do not differentiate. Either they do not provide such funding to tenants or they have not sought to save themselves money. We estimate that €7 million will be spent on extensions for tenants, which gives an overall figure of €72 million. If local authorities need further funding, they can have it, but they are receiving 100% of requested funding.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Mr. B. O’Keeffe)

On local improvements schemes, an additional €10 million is being provided from the Vote this year to supplement the local government fund allocation of €15 million. The total allocation for the scheme this year is €25 million — double the 2005 allocation of €12.5 million. This improves the quality of life of people living in houses off laneways, two of whom must be involved in agricultural activities. This has been successful and the relevant local authorities will spend the money in 2006.

With regard to waste management, an additional €20 million capital is being provided this year, €10 million to improve recycling infrastructure to supplement what is being funded by the environment fund and €10 million for landfill remediation. Waste management is a key area of the Department's activity and it has been at the top of the Government's agenda since 1998. There is now a coherent legal framework for waste management and an integrated set of policies, which have been completed with the publication of the national strategy on biodegradable waste. The policy framework is grounded on the internationally accepted waste hierarchy which prioritises waste prevention and minimisation, followed by reuse and recycling, recovery and, finally, safe disposal.

We have made significant progress in implementing EU directives on producer responsibility initiatives. In 2005 Ireland was one of the first member states to transpose the directive on waste electrical and electronic equipment and work. This is proving successful, despite reservations at the time, and already over 50% of the 2008 target has been reached. Prices have not increased, businesses have remained open and it has been extremely successful. The local authorities have the statutory responsibility for waste management planning, generally on a regional basis. Most regions have completed their five-year reviews and adopted revised plans. At the heart of these plans is the need to ensure that the necessary infrastructure is in place to manage our waste properly. We are all aware of the difficulties that have been experienced in delivering infrastructure in key sectors. I welcome the fact that significant thermal treatment and landfill projects are now being progressed, and it is essential in particular that we have in place the waste to energy plants.

While this type of heavy infrastructure is funded from user charges in accordance with the polluter pays principle, my Department is very active in grant-aiding local authority recycling facilities. Some €90 million has been committed since 2002 and communities throughout the country are seeing the benefit and helping us meet our ambitious recycling targets.

There are of course those who persist in disposing of their waste illegally. Local authorities and the Office of Environmental Enforcement have been taking a very robust approach to such criminal activity, for which I commend them. The EPA has reported that large-scale illegal dumping is no longer taking place and the occurrence of illegal cross-Border movements of waste has significantly reduced.

We are now beginning to see the fruits of the approach taken to waste management by the Government and the local authorities, with excellent co-operation from the public. In 1998 we had a recycling rate of just 9% but this had risen to almost 34% by 2004, just one point short of our national target set for 2013. Our recycling of packaging waste over the same period rose from 15% to 50%, construction and demolition recycling is at a high of 85% and landfilling has fallen by 9% in the last four years. The Government is determined to build on these achievements to create a recycling society supported by appropriate infrastructure.

The national litter pollution monitoring system measures the extent of litter pollution nationwide. In recent years, there has been an increase in litter-free and moderately littered areas. The number of litter black spots is declining and while we still have a long way to go, the trend is moving in the right direction.

The anti-litter initiatives under the litter action plan are having a positive effect. The plan recognises that the litter problem will only be solved through a partnership approach in which all sectors — business, community groups, residents associations, schools and individuals — play their part. Local authorities working alone and in isolation are not the answer. The initiatives supported by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local government encourage this partnership approach. The Department grant-assists the Irish Business Against Litter League. It also provides funding for National Spring Clean, which is based on a partnership between my Department, An Taisce, commercial sponsors, local authorities, community and voluntary groups and members of the public who give generously of their valuable time. Every year anti-litter awareness and education grants are made available to local authorities. Support is also given to the green schools programme and the tidy towns competition.

A series of meetings have been held with a view to developing action plans to tackle the problem of litter associated with the chewing gum and fast food industries, and the banking sector. An agreement was reached with the chewing gum industry in January. This involves the industry committing to a three-year programme to tackle gum littering. A pilot awareness raising campaign on gum litter will commence in Dublin, Cork and Bray later this summer. The national programme will be rolled out in the New Year, following review and assessment of the pilots. The negotiations with the other sectors are at an advanced stage.

The vast majority of the busiest fire stations in the country are modern, up-to-date buildings with the necessary facilities required by today's fire brigade standards. The front-line fire fighting fleet is comprised entirely of modern, purpose-built appliances. Some 47 fire station projects have been completed, in the last ten years. In 2005 three new fire stations were completed, in Kinsale, Blessington and Killybegs, and 22 new fire appliances were delivered to fire authorities together with some previously owned vehicles and emergency equipment. At the end of the year work was in progress on further new stations at Ardmore, Bunclody, Cootehill, Dungloe, Dunmore East, Edenderry, Freshford, Glenties, Granard, Roscommon and Waterford. In addition, approval issued during 2005 to fire authorities to invite tenders for 25 new class B appliances costing approximately €280,000 each.

The substantial progress achieved to date will continue and it is envisaged that in 2006 up to 11 new stations will be approved to construction stage. Upgrades or extensions to a further seven stations are also proposed. Local authorities will be approved to procure an additional 23 fire appliances with a view to delivery in late 2007 or early 2008. In addition to the fire station programme, it is also proposed to allocate funding for the upgrade and provision of training centres. The fire authorities have a computer-aided mobilisation project, CAMP. Three mobilisation and communications centres handle all fire brigade emergency calls, and some health board ambulance calls have been developed to cover the country on a regional basis, in Limerick, Dublin and Castlebar.

In regard to water services, the Minister has already mentioned our concern about the cheaper schemes and the bureaucracy that surrounded them. We decided that all schemes up to €5 million should be operated directly by the local authorities. We are confident this will see a dramatic improvement in the number of schemes being fast-tracked. There will be realistic appraisal at the initial stage and responsibility for completion of projects will then be given back to the local authorities. Public water or sewerage services simply cannot be extended to every single household in the country, no matter how remote. There has to be a balance that takes some account of economic considerations. On the positive side, we are now pilot-testing a range of new, low-cost solutions to village wastewater needs in seven locations in Tipperary. I am very confident that these systems will provide a way forward that will allow us greatly to extend the scope for putting public wastewater services in place for rural communities in a cost effective way.

Mr. O’Dowd

The purpose of this meeting is to go through the budget in terms of the changes, overruns and so on. We have been listening for nearly an hour to political speeches which do not address the key issues. One of the key issues about politics today is transparency and openness within Departments. Opposite me today there are nine people, three politicians and six officials, if I have counted them correctly, representing the administration within a Department.

In preparation for this meeting I sent, some months ago, an FOI request to the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government seeking information in regard to the budget documents. I was told first that the request was being refused. I pointed out to the person with whom I was dealing in the Department that a similar request to the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs was fully facilitated. The Minister of State at that Department, who is here today, knows how important such two-way traffic in information is. In the absence of those documents, in respect of which I was told yesterday I could have an oral refusal, I make the charge of lack of transparency and openness within the Department in refusing to provide me with them. The precedent for their provision was clearly established some weeks ago. It is corporate arrogance to refuse to give me the documents.

There is no legal requirement on the Department to give the documents to me. However, there is an obligation under the Freedom of Information Act to supply them. In the context of a debate in regard to such a massive Department, it is shameful and disgraceful not to provide that information and I very much regret it. The Minister and his officials may have briefcases full of documents but the fact that they have not provided me with the key elements of the background to decisions is unacceptable. This is a charade. I know it is what Departments do and what they have done. However, in the interests of transparency and openness those documents ought to have been provided and there is no excuse for not doing so.

Having listened to the three Ministers talking about the various great things they have done, I must point out that their legislative programme is in tatters. The Water Services Bill, which was to be dealt with by this committee, has disappeared from the agenda. The Building Control Bill, in respect of which we have had meetings, has also disappeared. There is no sign of the building societies Bill which is awaited by many people throughout the country. The Ministers have been very ineffective in bringing legislation before the House. I will challenge them throughout the day on various issues inasmuch as I can with the information I have.

In regard to housing development issues and first-time buyers, the Government has failed abysmally. In the Minister's constituency and throughout County Dublin, there are very few young people who can afford to live in Dublin any more. The surrounding counties are full of people with longer and longer commutes, young families who never see their parents, unsustainable development in terms of traffic, lack of strategic infrastructure to carry them to and from work or to work in other locations. The national spatial strategy is in tatters because the Department is not putting investment into the regions in order to sustain growth and development in those areas.

The Government talks of a five-year plan. If I were a young person, I could save for five years but there is no way I could keep pace with the massive increase in house prices. It is stated in a recently published report that the average price of a house in the greater Dublin area has increased by more than €18,000 in the past year. It is not realistic for young people to expect to get a home. That is the reality under this Government. Its policies in regard to social and affordable housing, of which it makes much, are in tatters.

The Government talks about Part V schemes. I acknowledge these are implemented by the different local authorities as they meet or do not meet their requirements. Many local authorities are implementing such schemes as a cost benefit to the local authority rather in the context of providing homes. Dublin City Council is very committed to the concept of Part V schemes, as is Louth County Council. They want the houses and they do not want any equivocation in regard to that. The Minister could go around the country to each local authority and do an inventory of Part V schemes and insist that local authorities honour their obligations in regard to them by ensuring the houses are delivered. There is nothing more important than reassuring the many thousands of young people around the country that there is hope for them.

On the question of Part V schemes in the context of senior citizens — I have examined surveys in regard to these — more elderly people die in Ireland than in comparable countries in Europe. In a study comparing Norway and Ireland the only explanation was the difference in the thermal efficiency of their homes. More elderly people in Ireland are living in very poor accommodation they cannot maintain themselves and that are thermally inefficient. One way of using Part V schemes would be to target them at elderly people to get them to move into highly thermally efficient homes. That is a strategy that could reasonably be adopted.

The purpose of this exercise is to put the Department under scrutiny. We will not be able to do that today because we do not have the documentation.

I am concerned about the reduction in some headings. In the Estimate, with which we can deal later, water and sewerage programmes show a reduction of 5%. What is the reality in that regard because I understand the Department did a survey throughout the country some years ago which indicated that some of the structure was in poor condition — it is crumbling in many towns and urban areas — and needs massive investment, which will not be available if it is cut back? I would like clarity on that. I will reserve my other questions until later but I am very unhappy. This is a charade because I cannot get the facts I need. I will not have them today to examine the matter in a proper, constructive way. I have always been constructive as Opposition spokesman but we cannot do our job. This Department is a little like the Kremlin — it has a fine facade but inside there is only arrogance, lack of concern and no transparency or openness.

Mr. Gilmore

I share Deputy O'Dowd's disappointment that what we got earlier was a series of three self-serving contributions from the Minister and two Ministers of State. I want to make some general points and pose a number of questions in the course of doing that.

Money is no longer an issue. We now know that the country's finances are very healthy. Very high levels of revenue are coming into the State's coffers. We get repeated reminders of the increased amounts of taxes being collected each year. There is no shortage of money, therefore, and it should not be a surprise to anybody that a very large amount of expenditure, and increased expenditure, is being committed by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, which has primary responsibility for much of the infrastructure — non-national roads, water, sewerage, local government, community facilities and housing, where it must pick up the shortfall in housing provision for people who cannot afford to buy now.

It does not come as any surprise that given the significant development in the country in the past ten years or so, with approximately one third of the total housing stock constructed, we should see a corresponding increase in the amount of money being spent by the Department. Comparisons, therefore, such as those the Minister has made — 1996 to date — and presented in a way that somehow this was great largesse on the part of him and his Government colleagues, do not cut any ice because that expenditure is part and parcel of the way the country has increased its level of development in the past ten years.

In circumstances where money is no longer the obstacle, we are down to issues of policy and management and I would like to raise a number of areas from these Estimates. I was surprised, despite the fact that we had almost an hour of speeches from the Ministers, that none of them mentioned decentralisation. On 3 December 2003, the then Minister for Finance, Charlie McCreevy, told the House that this Department was one of eight that would be totally decentralised, in this case to a number of locations in the south east within a period of three years. That means that by 3 December next, six months from now, this Department, according to the then Minister, would have been relocated to various locations in the south east. We have had no mention of that today. I cannot find any reference to it in the Estimates documents with which we have been presented. I do not see any item or heading in the financial Estimates we have been presented with which refers to decentralisation.

I have a number of questions I would like the Minister to answer. Is the decentralisation of the Department going ahead as planned and, if so, what will it cost? What provision, if any, has been made in the Estimates for it? What risk assessment has been carried out by the Department on the proposed decentralisation? What cost benefit analysis has been carried out? What examination has been done of the cost of retaining in the capital the 600 of the Department's 630 staff who are not prepared to move to the south east? What will it cost to rebuild the Department almost from scratch in four different locations in the south east?

The second issue I want to raise is that of housing. There are some terms we are now allowed to use in the House. One of them is where somebody tells one something that is not true or where facts are distorted in such a way that they belie the reality. On the issue of the housing figures, both the Minister and the Minister of State — perhaps it was in briefing notes we got — indicated that there had been a 10% reduction in the number of people on the housing list between the 2002 and the 2005 assessments. That is not the case, and the Minister knows it. What happened is that the method of counting people in 2005 was different from the method of counting in 2002. In 2005, the Department rightly decided that it would exclude those who were being double counted. In other words, if an applicant applied for housing to, say, Cork County Council and Cork City Council, and perhaps even to Mallow Town Council, that counted as three applications in the 2002 figures but in the 2005 figures it was counted as one. I agree with that. There should not be double or triple counting in the system but it does not mean, as the Minister has implied, that there was a 10% reduction in the number of people on the housing list because the two sets of figures are not comparable, as they were not done on the same basis. When the Minister attempts to represent that as a reduction and, somehow, an achievement on the part of Government in that he has reduced the housing figures, he is not telling the truth to the committee and he should not continue doing that.

The second issue I want to raise with the Minister in respect of the housing figures is one I cannot understand and on which I would like him to comment. According to his figures there are 43,000 applicants for local authority housing in the country based on the 2005 figures. Also according to the figures produced by the Department of Social and Family Affairs and which were recently commented on by the Comptroller and Auditor General, there are over 60,000 people in receipt of rent allowance. To qualify for rent allowance one must be on a local authority housing list. How is it that 60,000 people are supposed to be on a local authority housing list and qualifying for rent allowance, yet the Department can count only 43,000 of them? Can somebody explain to me the difference and how that arises in respect of those figures? Presumably — I know this from my own knowledge of these matters — there are people who are on the housing list who are not on rent allowance and therefore the figure would have to be 60,000. The real number of people who are in need of housing must be the 60,000 who are on the rent allowance plus all of those who are on housing lists and who do not qualify for rent allowance such as those, for example, who are in full-time employment.

On the Kyoto Protocol, there is a figure of €23 million in the Estimates for the carbon fund for 2006. The carbon fund is the Government's way of buying its way out of its commitment under the Kyoto Protocol. We are required to ensure that our carbon emissions are at 13% over the 1990 level by 2012 at the latest. They are currently at 24% or 25% over the 1990 level. Rather than reducing our carbon emissions, the Government is preparing to buy out our commitments under the Kyoto Protocol. This carbon fund is being set up to provide the wherewithal to do that in 2012. It is a policy of pollute now and pay later. It is not the right policy for the environment or for this country.

In the contributions we have been informed of the considerable investment in water services in respect of public water supplies and group water schemes, which I welcome. The Minister introduced a Water Services Bill in the Dáil, which passed Second Stage almost two years ago. It will provide for the privatisation of the water supply and for the reintroduction of water charges. We have not heard further about that Bill, given that it has not been scheduled for referral to our committee. It appears the Government has decided to put that controversial Bill and its plans to reintroduce water charges into cold storage until after the general election.

On the question of electoral issues, we have heard nothing about electronic voting machines. The game has long been up on the electronic voting machines and that is a reality the Minister and Government must face. These machines will not be used. Is it planned to sell them? The best move the Government can make at this stage is to cut its losses and the liability the cost of their storage imposes on the taxpayer.

The Minister of State, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, said that he welcomes the fact that significant thermal treatment and landfill projects are now being progressed. I would like to hear more about that. I would like the Minister of State to advise us to what thermal treatment and landfill projects he was referring. Will he indicate the specific thermal treatment projects and the anticipated timescale for their completion? I refer specifically to the toxic waste incinerator in Ringaskiddy, with which I am sure he is familiar, the municipal waste incinerator at Duleek and the proposed municipal waste incinerator at Ringsend. The Minister of State said that these are being progressed and I would like to hear, in practical terms, the extent of that progress.

Chairman

I call Deputy Cuffe next, as arranged.

Mr. B. O’Keeffe

I have to leave to attend an official function, but the Minister, Deputy Roche, will answer Deputy Gilmore's specific question.

Mr. Gilmore

With the permission of the Chair, I would be happy to hear the answer to that question now.

Chairman

That is up to Deputy Cuffe.

Mr. Cuffe

I would also be happy to hear the answer to that question.

Mr. B. O’Keeffe

The Minister has the details.

Chairman

The Minister might answer that question.

Mr. B. O’Keeffe

The Minister will answer it in detail.

Mr. Gilmore

We can take the answer to it now.

Mr. B. O’Keeffe

I apologise. I was due to attend an official function at noon and I am now five minutes late. In deference to Deputy, I waited to hear his contribution. In deference to me and given that I have an official function to attend, the Minister will give the Deputy a detailed answer to his question.

Mr. Gilmore

No, I am——

Chairman

There is no provision for answering questions at this point. We are hearing from the spokespersons and I ask the Ministers to answer the questions posed when we come to deal with the various subheads.

Mr. B. O’Keeffe

I will return as soon as I can.

Mr. Cuffe

Is it extraordinary that the Minister of State has an engagement to attend.

Mr. B. O’Keeffe

I informed the Chair of it.

Chairman

The Minister of State informed me of it and I pass that information on to the committee.

Mr. Cuffe

I want to concentrate on four issues, namely, housing, waste, planning and climate change. In each of these areas——

Mr. McCormack

Is there only provision for the party spokespersons to contribute?

Chairman

Prior to the Deputy's arrival we agreed a programme for this meeting and we are taking opening statements from the spokespersons. This has been agreed by the committee. We will then go through the various subheads and at that stage it will be open to all members to contribute. That was agreed.

Mr. Cuffe

On these issues of housing, waste, planning and climate change, I am concerned at the direction in which the country and the Department's policy is heading. Local authority housing waiting lists have doubled nationally in the past ten years and in that period they have trebled in the constituency I share with Deputy Gilmore. While the reply to a parliamentary question I submitted did not reveal any change in the methodology used in that respect between 2000 and 2005, it appears that a liberal dose of snake oil was applied to the figures. It is important that we have meaningful statistics. I am perturbed to say the least at the detail exposed by Deputy Gilmore in this respect.

While housing output is at a high, we are building twice as many holiday homes as local authority homes. Every second home purchased denies someone or some family of a first home, yet we are using fiscal policy to promote the purchase of second homes. We should be doing a great deal more to promote the construction of first homes. Part V of the planning legislation, which heralded what we thought was a brave new dawn, was short-lived because those provisions were filleted. To date it has delivered only a fraction of the overall output. By filleting those provisions, we are directly increasing ghettoisation and creating segregated communities. In regard to housing, I ask one simple question, namely, when does the Government intend to reinstate the provisions of the Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as first enacted, or will the Government continue with the buy one's way out clause that denies people the right to a home?

The second area with which I wish to deal with is that of waste. One need look no further than to the European Environment Agency's state and outlook report 2005, which points out that we are worst but one in Europe for the creation of waste. Despite all the razzmatazz about recycling and the great schemes in place, the factual position is that out of 30 countries in Europe we are second from bottom. The Minister is not doing enough to address that position. When does he intend to regulate to reduce the amount of waste created in the first place? It is fine to talk about recycling but what is more important is to reduce the amount of waste created. Even in the short term, does the Minister intend to double the plastic bag levy, given that the levy is no longer fulfilling the purpose for which it was originally intended? Plastic bags are beginning to be seen on trees throughout the country. The Minister needs to change the law in that regard. When will that happen?

The third area on which I want to touch is that of planning. The Minister and his colleagues scuttled the national spatial strategy a few years ago by opting for the pork barrel politics of decentralisation. Does he not see that decentralisation will increase transport times, energy use and greenhouse gas emissions? Is he not worried about the disconnection between the national spatial strategy and the decentralisation programme? What will he do about it? Is it going to be a case of more pork, or will the Minister deliver on the national spatial strategy? It is a crucial question. As we are considering the next national development plan, we need to know where development will take place. If former Deputy Charlie McCreevy's announcement is the yardstick, it is a recipe for disaster. Where stands decentralisation?

The final issue is climate change. The European Environment Agency has pointed out that we are 28th out of 29 European countries for climate change emissions. The Minister could be doing a great deal but what will he do about the increase in long distance commuting and tightening the building regulations? For years the UK has had much tighter building regulations than this country. Condensing boilers are mandatory in the UK. People there are also talking about grey water recycling. There is no sign of those in Irish building regulations.

As the Minister of State often points out, we are building 80,000 homes per year. In the next six years we will build 500,000 new homes. If the Minister took the initiative now to tighten the building regulations, he could make a dramatic reduction in our greenhouse gas emissions. The average house emits eight tonnes of carbon per year. The Minister could tweak the building regulations and reduce it to two tonnes. In 2012, therefore, when the Kyoto Portocol comes into effect, the Minister could be saving 2 million tonnes of carbon per year simply by tightening the building regulations now, not in six years. It does not take much effort but would produce a level playing field because everybody would have to conform to them. At present, however, we are building 80,000 homes per year that are way behind the standards that apply across the water or in the North. It is in the Minister's power to tighten up the building regulations. What is he afraid of? Why will he not update the regulations? When does he intend to do it and to what degree?

With regard to the allocation for non-national roads, the Minister said some local authorities are cutting back on spending on those roads. Will he expand on that? Which ones are cutting back on spending? It poses a question as to what is happening in that regard.

When will Part V be back? What will be done about reducing waste? Will we implement the national spatial strategy or decentralisation? Will the Minister make a decent effort at reducing our greenhouse gas emissions? Ireland is second last in Europe in this regard and the Minister could do a great deal to rectify it.

Chairman

The Minister can answer any outstanding questions as we go through the various subheads.

Mr. Roche

May I quickly deal with the points made? Deputy Gilmore and Deputy O'Dowd indicated that they had to leave. They raised substantial general issues. Could I deal with both at this stage?

Chairman

Yes.

Mr. Roche

Deputy O'Dowd has mentioned to me privately his concerns about transparency. I am concerned that we be as helpful as possible. There is a statutory timeframe for handling freedom of information requests. In fact, a formal negative response was drafted. That issue was discussed in advance with Deputy O'Dowd by offering an alternative overview note by way of assistance. The offer was rejected by Deputy O'Dowd and he was within his rights to do so. He rejected the Department's formal position but asked that we not issue a formal response until we had had the opportunity to consider the outcome of a similar request which had been made to the other Department which he mentioned in 2003. Deputy O'Dowd stressed that there was no problem in terms of the length of time the process might take.

It was a complex issue because files had to go from one Department to another. The other Department supplied the Department with the files at the end of March and an e-mail issued to the Deputy stating that the substantial background papers were to hand and that the matter would be dealt with as soon as possible. The e-mail also offered to discuss any queries he might have. The Deputy did not respond to that e-mail until his telephone call on Tuesday this week. That is regrettable. My attitude is to be as helpful as possible, particularly to spokespersons. As Deputy O'Dowd is not present, there is no point going through the detailed note in his absence but I will communicate further with him on it.

The Minister of State, Deputy Noel Ahern, will deal specifically with housing output but Deputies Cuffe and Gilmore voiced their concerns about housing in their constituencies. They have every reason to be concerned about it and both of them could be helpful in this area. The Deputies' constituents are not being served by the fact that between 1994 and 2004 their housing authority, in which they have some control because their combined parties have a majority on the local authority——

Mr. Cuffe

I have to argue with that. My party is not in the governing majority.

Mr. Roche

We are not either.

Mr. Cuffe

We are in opposition, like Fianna Fáil.

Mr. Roche

I am pleased the Deputy has clarified that. It means the other two major Opposition parties are in a majority on that local authority.

Mr. McCormack

The Minister is in government.

Mr. Roche

The corncrake has woken up. We will deal with him in a few minutes.

Mr. McCormack

The Minister will not deal with me. I did not ask any questions. I resent that, Chairman.

Mr. Roche

I accept Deputy Cuffe's point that his party is not part of the majority on that local authority. Fine Gael and the Labour Party are in control in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown local authority and between 1994 and 2004, that local authority was authorised to build 1,967 houses. It completed 1,264 houses. For every 100 houses it was given the authority to build, it built 64. As the national average is 94%, shame on both parties.

Mr. Cuffe

Did it have the funding?

Mr. Roche

Yes, it had the funding. The local authority has produced a situation where for every 100 people on the housing list who could have been housed, it housed only 64. It is getting worse in that constituency. Therefore, the Deputy is right to be concerned. Between 2000 and 2004, the local authority was authorised to build 992 houses. This was when the council was dominated by other parties. The allocation was 992 but only 493 houses were built, which is 50%. The national delivery at that time was 87%. Deputy Cuffe is correct that there are challenges for local authorities in finding sites. South Dublin County Council, however, achieved 92% delivery of its programme.

The Minister of State will deal with the issue in more detail but this Government is putting the resources in place and local authorities which are controlled by other parties are not delivering. What will be helpful is that I intend to publish a league table of performance for all local authorities, covering a decade, to show which ones are doing well and which are not. This is not a points-scoring exercise but I ask Deputies to ensure that their councillors are more ambitious in delivering the programme. I am aware that there are difficulties in Deputy Cuffe's constituency.

Mr. McCormack

We will regret abolishing the dual mandate yet.

Mr. Roche

The dual mandate has nothing to do with it. The Fine Gael Party supported its abolition, as Deputy McCormack knows.

Mr. McCormack

No, we undertook a High Court case to stop it.

Mr. Roche

One of the party's Deputies did.

Mr. McCormack

I supported it.

Mr. Roche

The Deputy is not only interrupting me but is being mendacious in his interruptions. As he knows, Deputy Ring was very courageous in this matter. He is a man for whom I have a particular regard.

Mr. McCormack

I support him.

Mr. Roche

The Deputy's party did not.

Mr. McCormack

I did.

Mr. Roche

The Deputy should not suggest his party did something which it did not do.

Mr. McCormack

I did. We will rue the abolition of the dual mandate and the Minister knows it.

Mr. Roche

Maybe, but that is not what we are discussing here.

Mr. McCormack

It is what I am discussing.

Mr. Roche

With regard to specific questions, the building societies Bill will be published before the summer. Deputy O'Dowd asked about it. There was also a question about the building control Bill. In addition, Deputy Gilmore asked about the Water Services Bill. We are waiting for a date for Committee Stage, as it has been passed by the Seanad. It is important legislation and I hope the Dáil will be co-operative in that regard. Deputy Gilmore is clearly labouring under serious misapprehensions, however, because the Bill will not privatise water services and will not change the existing system with regard to charging for water to private homes.

Deputy Gilmore asked why decentralisation was not mentioned here but not everything is mentioned in detail. There has been a lot of discussion on the matter of decentralisation both in parliamentary written questions and oral questions in the Dáil. To summarise the position, the date for Wexford is the third quarter of 2008, which has been the target from day one. I announced recently that we had a site. Work has been continuing on site identification in New Ross and the date is in the earlier part of 2009. The date for Waterford is also 2009 and site discussions are ongoing.

There were a number of parliamentary questions but rather than delay the meeting, if the Chairman and other members wish, I can circulate the parliamentary replies, if that would be helpful. I will make sure this material is on the website. It is in our interests, as it is an important issue.

Deputies mentioned the question of waste and there have been significant improvements.

Mr. Cuffe

May I return to the housing list methodology for 2002-05?

Mr. Roche

The Minister of State, Deputy Noel Ahern, will deal with that issue. As Deputy Gilmore said, the housing methodology is much more appropriate now than it was then. I will let the Minister of State deal with that, if that is all right.

The Kyoto Protocol was mentioned by Deputies Cuffe and Gilmore. The Kyoto Protocol arrangements allow for a cost-effective way of dealing with the matter of carbon emissions. It is disingenuous to suggest that Ireland is rampantly out of control in this regard. In the last year for which consolidated figures are available — 2004, at a time when the economy of this country grew by virtually 5% — the figure for carbon emissions was up 0.16%. The Deputy knows that it would be nicer if it were down 0.16% but that means that as a nation we have successfully decoupled carbon emissions from economic growth. If we look at some of the more mature economies in Europe, particularly the UK and others, some serious questions are now beginning to emerge about the way they calculated the figures. The Government has signalled that it would be prepared to purchase carbon allowances, as is permitted under the Kyoto agreement.

I am sorry that Deputy Gilmore is not here because there have been some extraordinarily exaggerated claims, particularly by him, as to the cost of buying carbon credits. There are two options. For example, a carbon tax was once mooted by Deputy Cuffe's party, although I am not sure if they are still arguing for that. One can take that route and there is an arguable case for it, or the State can assume responsibility for purchasing some of the carbon credits. I want to show just how alarmist the figures are that have been suggested. In was suggested in the House that carbon credits would cost €30, €40 or €50 per tonne. At close of business yesterday, carbon credits on the open market were €16 per tonne. The actual indicative figure for government-to-government carbon credit trading, which was used by the consultants ICF London and Byrne O'Cleary, was €15. It goes to show that their predictions are far closer to the reality than some of the alarmist suggestions that have been made.

With regard to the general issue of whether it is right and proper to buy carbon credits, the Kyoto agreement has a built-in flexibility which allows a nation to deal with the emissions issue. This can be done by a variety of specific steps to cut carbon emissions, which is happening in this country. We must accept that countries within the trading sector have done remarkably well. The pressure on them is high because there is a real financial and business inducement to cut their carbon credits. A dramatically growing economy such as ours will inevitably come under pressures in this area. That is not to suggest that we should resile from our responsibilities — we should not. The arrangements allowed within the protocol are being observed in this country.

Deputy Gilmore raised a general question concerning the envelope for the water and sewerage services programme. To explain the figures, that is an envelope into which cash is put and money is allocated as needed. The figures quite properly reflect the demands at the time the Estimates were prepared. That is why there is an apparent fall there. There is another reason for that too, of course. Once one has put a €350 million scheme in Cork and a scheme that cost several hundred million euro in Dublin, one does not need to build them every year. We are moving towards much smaller water treatment schemes. Having done Dublin, Cork, Waterford, Limerick and Galway, one must then deal with the smaller schemes. The only large scheme that is still outstanding is Arklow, which is interminably stuck in planning. The scheme in Waterford is still under way.

A comment was made about the infrastructure in Louth but I will leave it because I think it was more a constituency point than one of policy.

Chairman

Perhaps the Minister of State will hold off until we get to the housing programme. We should try to stick to the agenda we set for ourselves earlier this morning. We will go through the subheads A.1 to A.7, which concern the administrative budget. Are there any comments or questions on them?

Mr. McCormack

What was that?

Chairman

I would appreciate it if members could listen to what we are trying to do here this morning. Nobody is paying the slightest bit of attention to anything I am saying and everybody is interrupting. Nobody knows what we have agreed to already. Nobody is following the structure we have agreed. I will repeat it. It relates to the administrative budget, subheads A.1 to A.7. Do members have any comments or questions on them? If not, we will move on to subheads B.1 to B.4 concerning the housing programme. Perhaps the Minister of State will take up some of the questions that have been asked about that programme.

Mr. N. Ahern

There were questions on housing needs assessment. The basis on which that operates is fairly standard. It is more or less the same, but it has been more rigorous or comprehensive——

Mr. Cuffe

I want to get precise information on this. I tabled a parliamentary question and was told that there was no change in the methodology. Will the Minister of State explain the "less" part of his reply?

Mr. N. Ahern

I am trying to answer. We get the information from local authorities and it is co-ordinated through the local government computer services board. The basic system has been the same. There was always a manual attempt to try to shake out double applications. As the Deputy knows, in Dublin many people might be registered with the city council and with one of the other local authorities also. A number of people apply to more than one local authority. It was always the practice to sit down and do the double counting manually. That is standard and it was always done. That would have been more accurate this time and because we used PPS numbers it certainly helped. There was a greater accuracy in establishing the double counting.

It is not a case, however, that we brought in something new that would have helped us to identify a small number of extra instances of double counting that the manual system might not have done. It is nothing like 10% or a drop of 4,000 but it would certainly have helped us to identify some more of the double counting or the double applications to different local authorities. It was always done manually and sometimes one might find a Ciarán Cuffe or a Noel Ahern at a different address. People change address and may move to another local authority. Using the PPS numbers certainly helped to make the list more accurate, which is the whole purpose of doing it. It helped in a small way to make the list more accurate than it was previously. If we did not do that, the figures would not have been up and it would be most misleading to think otherwise.

Deputy Gilmore asked how, when there are 60,000 people on rent allowance, only 43,000 are on the local authority lists. The local authority lists are an assessment of people in need of long-term housing. If a person has a short-term need, a local authority will not put the person on its list. What we get is the accurate data from the local authorities. I agree it has been more comprehensive this year, and its being computer based has certainly helped.

There has not been an overall 10% drop, as an opinion poll across different counties might suggest. The level has very much been up and down. Some local authorities' needs were up, while others were down. When one then looked at the local authorities which were good in achieving output in recent years, one saw that there was almost a direct correlation between the local authorities that did well with their ten-year list or four-year multiannual list. From memory, a few local authorities such as Cavan and Longford, and perhaps Galway County Council, that were the best achievers — Cavan achieved 142% of its output aims under the four-year multiannual programme whereas Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown achieved 48% — in delivering local authority housing were also the best at achieving a decline in their numbers on the waiting lists. There was also a direct correlation between output and falling waiting list numbers. Certainly, the accuracy of computerisation did help in a small way.

Mr. Cuffe

While the Minister of State said that the methodology had changed, in a reply to a written parliamentary question he stated it had not. He could afford us the respect of giving a precise answer when a precise question is asked in the form of a written parliamentary question.

Mr. N. Ahern

The methodology has not changed.

Mr. Cuffe

The Minister of State just said it had. He just stated he used PPS numbers and he did not previously.

Mr. N. Ahern

In checking, yes.

Mr. Cuffe

That is a change in methodology. Will he admit it?

Mr. N. Ahern

No, it was——

Mr. Cuffe

If the Minister of State does not give us the correct data and if he obfuscates on the issue in a reply to a written parliamentary question, it is a case of "garbage in, garbage out".

Mr. N. Ahern

There is nothing secret or new about this.

Mr. Cuffe

The Minister of State stated in a reply to my written parliamentary question that there had been no change in methodology.

Mr. N. Ahern

I have been speaking about this.

Mr. Cuffe

The Minister of State stated in a reply to a written parliamentary question within the past two months that there had been no change in the methodology.

Mr. N. Ahern

In the overall structure of the way it was done, there was not.

Mr. Cuffe

The Minister of State has just stated he uses PPS now and that he did not previously.

Mr. N. Ahern

Certainly, in checking the double counting.

Mr. Cuffe

What the Minister of State is saying is at odds with his reply on a formal policy.

Mr. N. Ahern

If the Deputy will refer me to the question number, I will look it up. The checking of double counting was always done and must be done — Deputy Cuffe will be aware that many people are registered with a couple of local authorities — on a manual basis but the PPS numbers have certainly helped.

Mr. Cuffe

That is a change.

Mr. N. Ahern

I ask Deputy Cuffe to show me the reply.

Mr. Cuffe

I will. I am upset about this and I will show it to the Minister of State.

Mr. N. Ahern

It is a change, not in the basic overall structure or methodology but in the checking and the identifying of people who are on the list of more than one local authority. Certainly, there is more accuracy this year.

Mr. Cuffe

I am sorry to dwell on the issue but precision is useful.

Mr. McCormack

The Minister gave an unsatisfactory reply to the query raised by Deputy Gilmore. A requirement of availing of rent supplement is that one must be an applicant for local authority housing, and yet the figures supplied by the Department show that there are 43,000 applicants on the waiting lists for local authority housing and 60,000 on rent supplement. That reveals a difference of 17,000 for starters, apart altogether from applicants for local authority housing who might not be on rent supplement because they work and do not qualify for rent supplement. The difference is, therefore, far greater than 17,000. The Minister skipped over that.

In my first opportunity to ask the Minister a question, I ask him not to waffle or filibuster, but to answer a question clearly. When it is a requirement to qualify for rent supplement that one must be on a local authority housing waiting list, how can there be 60,000 on rent supplement and only 43,000 on local authority housing waiting lists?

Mr. Roche

What Deputy McCormack has said is not true.

Mr. O’Dowd

However, the person must go to the local authority with the application form.

Mr. Roche

There can be people receiving rent supplement who are not on the housing list.

Mr. McCormack

It is a requirement and the Minister knows that is so. In any case I asked the question of the Minister of State because the Minister, Deputy Roche, interrupted me a couple of times and used slighting remarks when speaking to me. I asked the Minister of State and I want him not to skip over it as he did previously. I want an answer to the question.

Mr. N. Ahern

They are two different Departments. I answered the question. I know there are 62,000 people on rent allowance. These figures refer to those from the local authority housing waiting lists, which in turn refers to a long-term need for housing. That is what we speak of. It may well be that there are others with a short-term need, but this is not a new law or a new interpretation. That has always been the case, that local authorities look after people with long-term needs.

I am sorry if the number on waiting lists has fallen by 10%. Deputy McCormack would like it to be up 50%.

Mr. McCormack

I do not want it to be up. What the Minister of State is saying is ridiculous.

Mr. N. Ahern

It would help his line, but the position and the basis of calculation is the same. One goes to a local authority, not with a short-term housing need due to a short-term problem or between jobs, but with a long-term housing need. That is what local authority housing lists always were, that is what they still are and that is what these figures reflect.

Mr. McCormack

The Minister of State is admitting that 43,000 is not the correct figure for people on the local authority housing lists.

Mr. N. Ahern

It is. It is the number who are in long-term need of housing.

Mr. McCormack

No matter what the Minister of State says, it is a requirement in both local authorities of which I was a member and with which I deal, that one cannot get rent supplement except when one is on the housing waiting list. In any case several people's applications for rent supplement are being held up for weeks until their case is examined to see are they on the housing waiting list. There are at least 60,000, if not many more, on the local authority housing waiting lists and the Minister of State is simply trying to bamboozle us with incorrect figures.

Mr. O’Dowd

As I understand it, in my local authority in Drogheda a person must present his or her rent allowance application form to the local authority. Sometimes people do not submit the application and return stating they are getting rent allowance for a certain number of years and asking what has gone wrong that they are not on the housing waiting list. There may be such slippage. There are people who think they are on the list, who go to the local authority thinking that they are on the list because they are getting rent allowance, whose form is stamped by the local authority but who, in fact, are not on it. I would agree with Deputy McCormack on that issue.

How often is this survey done? Is it done every three or five years?

Mr. N. Ahern

Every three years.

Mr. O’Dowd

I checked with my local authority in Drogheda. My county, Louth, is one of those in which the figures are up. The local authority officials have told me that since January the figures have increased by almost 100%, that there seems to be a new trend. I do not quite understand it. The number of applications has risen significantly. In order to inform policy issues generally, I put it to the Minister of State that this survey ought to be done quarterly — certainly, at least annually — to pick up trends as they happen. There is a significant change in my local authority on this issue. Will the Minister of State change the survey process? While he need not require completion of the large 20-page surveys, if he sought returns from local authorities he might be better informed of the needs.

The second issue on the subhead is the local authorities which are not producing the houses required. Some local authorities are not using the budget given by the Department to build the housing needed. I would be interested in the Minister of State's views on that. As he stated, some local authorities are excellent with their throughput, others are not. When they have the budget and do not use it, surely it is time to take that power from them. It is not good enough that they can get away with not building the houses needed and not spending the money given by the Department. Subhead B1 relates to the rental accommodation scheme, RAS. Last year €19 million was allocated for the scheme, the same amount has been allocated this year and, by 2010, €47 million will be invested in it. While I accept it is a good scheme for specific clients, a number of local authorities are failing to implement it because the Department will not permit them to pay the rents being demanded in their areas. For example, the same rent threshold is applied in Drogheda and Ardee, County Louth. The towns are near each other but the rents charged in both towns are completely different. The scheme, therefore, is not working because the local authority cannot meet the rents demanded by the market locally. How much of last year's allocation for the scheme was not expended? How much of this year's allocation will not be spent? Will the Minister of State review the scheme? In the greater Dublin area, more significant market forces are at work than in other parts of the State. What is his view on that?

Mr. N. Ahern

The three-year needs assessment is provided for in statute. It is a major project and it will not be undertaken more frequently. Trends could be examined in a simpler way by taking the figures from the various local authority lists.

Mr. O’Dowd

That is needed.

Mr. N. Ahern

More people are applying to local authorities for housing and those lists must be scaled down. I am sure this happens in Drogheda. For example, people from Balbriggan apply to Louth and Fingal county councils for housing.

Mr. O’Dowd

That is not permitted. One must be domiciled in the local authority area in which one applies.

Mr. N. Ahern

That is not a national rule.

Mr. O’Dowd

It is the rule in County Louth.

Mr. N. Ahern

I do not blame a particular cohort or category of people for problems or issues but a number of local authorities have placed asylum seekers in one category and when they are granted asylum, they are eligible to apply to join the housing lists and they comprise a significant number of recent applications.

Mr. O’Dowd

That is not the answer in this case.

Mr. N. Ahern

That has made a significant difference in a number of areas. Asylum seekers are looked after by the Irish Reception and Integration Agency and when they are granted the right to stay, they are eligible to apply to local authorities for housing.

Mr. O’Dowd

That is not the reason.

Mr. N. Ahern

I have heard this from a number of local authorities.

Mr. O’Dowd

That may well be the case but this will not inform how the Department allocates its resources because, as the Minister of State correctly pointed out, trends differ around the country and the underlying trends have changed significantly since January, which he will not pick up on unless he goes after those figures.

A total of 200,000 immigrant workers, as opposed to asylum seekers, have entered the State in the past few years and many of them are on low pay. If they have the correct stamp on their passports or if they are from an EU member state, they have a right to housing and, therefore, there will be a significant number of new applicants for housing shortly. Does the Minister of State account for them in his budget provisions? This will be an important issue in terms of resources.

Mr. N. Ahern

Our plan, which was approved by the Cabinet, is to provide 23,000 new social units and 15,000 affordable units over the next three years. The Deputy asked about money allocated to local authorities that is not expended. Local authorities receive an allocation, not money.

Mr. O’Dowd

It is out of the Department's budget.

Mr. N. Ahern

They get an allocation and if they do not spend it, they cannot use it for anything else.

Mr. O’Dowd

Houses are not built.

Mr. N. Ahern

The houses are not built and the money is allocated elsewhere. We have tried to perfect that in recent years and, year after year, local authorities say they will build 500 houses but they know in their heart and soul that they will not do so. It is a wish list rather than anything else. We work closely with them to ensure they have secured sites, planning permission and so on. The most recent initiative was the four-year multi-annual programme where we examined what the local authorities delivered based on what they said they would do. Cavan County Council achieved 145% of what it said it would provide while other local authorities only achieved percentages in the low 40s. Some councils are poor at estimating their capability to deliver, which is supposed to be based on their housing lists and strategies.

The Deputy referred to RAS. The scheme was announced 18 months ago and, initially, eight local authorities were involved. They are taking it up in different phases and it will be a slow process. Of the 60,000 families in receipt of rent allowance, it is estimated 33,000 have long-term need. In other words, they have been in receipt of the allowance for more than 18 months. It is the intention to make them the responsibility of locals authorities over the next few years. It is, however, proving slow. When the scheme was introduced, rents had reduced by 8% or 9% between 2002 and 2004 but they are on an upward curve again and landlords are a little reluctant to commit to a long-term rental. The local authority can satisfy their needs by making a deal with landlords, offering them other private rented accommodation or by providing them with a council house. One of the greatest problems is that when local authority officials visit recipients of the allowance, the accommodation is so inferior that they will not touch it. The standard of the accommodation is the most significant sticking point.

However, RAS has major benefits. It will take a few years for them to feed through. Only 1,200 people have been accommodated under the scheme, which is fewer than we estimated. It will be a very good scheme in time. The rent allowance for lone parents in private rented accommodation is €950 or €1,100 per month and they will not return to work because their allowance will be reduced. However, under RAS, they will be in receipt a payment similar to a local authority differential rent in time. There would be great benefits if those with long-term accommodation needs were covered by RAS, but that will not happen in a year or two.

Mr. O’Dowd

Of the €19 million allocated for the scheme last year, how much was spent?

Mr. N. Ahern

A sum of €700,000. I would not attach real significance to that because a great deal of work is still being done on establishing this scheme, formulating templates, recruiting staff and so on. I would not make a judgment yet but I agree there are problems.

Mr. O’Dowd

Let us deal with the facts. The Minister of State invested €19 million in the scheme last year, of which only €700,000 was spent. The same amount is allocated this year and the allocation will double in the next three or four years. What is the Minister of State doing about local authorities which say the market demands higher rents than the Department is permitting them to pay? That is a major reason they cannot spend the money. The Minister of State will not give it to them.

Mr. N. Ahern

That is an old chestnut.

Mr. O’Dowd

It is not an old chestnut.

Mr. N. Ahern

It has been a feature of the rent allowance system that the same allowance level has frequently applied throughout a health board area, in other words, the same allowance might apply in Salthill as in Gort or in Ardee as in Drogheda. This approach tends to be built into the system.

I do not contend a problem does not exist but the strong increase in demand for housing in the past 12 months has resulted in the ongoing increase in rental prices. I accept that since the rental allowance scheme was launched landlords have become reluctant to commit to a four or ten year deal because rents are increasing again. Those are the two big issues.

Mr. O’Dowd

The big issue is that the Department will not allow the money to be paid.

Mr. N. Ahern

Another speaker indicated there is no shortage of money. It is taxpayers' money and we zealously guard every penny we receive.

Mr. O’Dowd

The Minister of State accepted that people are living in appalling conditions.

Mr. N. Ahern

The Department will not lash out large sums to anybody.

Mr. O’Dowd

Let us return to the issue. The Minister of State indicated that people have been found living in the most appalling conditions and local authorities have refused to provide support for these persons while they remain in such conditions. This is a fair position to take but if market forces demand an increase in rent supplement, is it not necessary to implement such an increase to allow people to move from appalling conditions into better conditions? The impact of the Department's policy of refusing to approve the necessary increases has been that €18 million has not been spent and assistance is not being provided to those it states it wishes to help.

Mr. Gilmore

I wish to follow up on the Minister of State's comment that the reason the rental allowance scheme is not expanding is that local authorities have found dwellings and apartments to be below local authority standards. By definition, the local authorities are inspecting apartments in the newer developments being constructed around the country. What does this say about the quality of the apartments built here in the past ten years and the planning, design and building control mechanisms in place? Some of these apartments have benefited from tax relief. Is it the Minister of State's contention that blocks of new apartments around the country are so badly designed and built that the local authorities will not take responsibility for placing tenants in them?

Mr. N. Ahern

The Deputy is deliberately misinterpreting my comments.

Mr. Gilmore

In that case, the Minister of State should explain them.

Mr. N. Ahern

Some of the accommodation provided to those on rental allowance has been found to be inferior to the standards local authorities are willing to accept. This is not the case with new apartments. Deputies will be aware from speaking to constituents that some of those in receipt of rent allowance are living in excellent accommodation, including the most modern houses and apartments. The problem is most pronounced in the single person category. Some of the accommodation provided to those living in bed-sits and receipt of rent allowance is not great whereas the new accommodation provided to lone parents is perfect. The problem is to be found elsewhere.

Of the 43,000 people on local authority waiting lists, 42% or 43% are single people, many of whom would not have been eligible for inclusion on local authority waiting lists 20 years ago because of their age profile. At one stage, local authorities would not place anyone aged more than 55 years on the waiting list. Many of those currently on the waiting list are separated men who are not living in the best accommodation. The local authorities do not have a large stock of suitable units for this category because their traditional focus has been on building three bedroom semi-detached houses. Nowadays, the focus has shifted to meeting the needs of those on waiting lists.

Mr. Cregan

On subhead B2, the allocation has been substantially increased, with particular emphasis placed on the disabled person's grant, DPG, and essential repairs grant, EPG. These are important schemes which enable disabled people to have their homes adapted to provide decent living accommodation or, as in the latter case, to carry out essential repairs to prolong the life of a home. Both types of grant are effective.

Speaking to the Minister at a recent meeting, he reiterated that many local authorities are not spending their full allocation under this subhead and are failing to provide additional funding from their own estimates. It is shameful and wrong that a local authority will not expend the funding that has been allocated to it, although the problem does not arise in my local authority, Limerick County Council, where these two grants have always been given priority because they frequently benefit vulnerable people.

Mr. N. Ahern

Deputy O'Dowd referred to older people. Life expectancy in Ireland has increased from 75 years to 78 years over the past seven or eight years. Across the country older people are being looked after much better than previously and standards of living are improving. The Government is investing a great deal in the disabled person's grant, central repair grant and housing aid for the elderly.

Deputy Cregan is correct to point out that of the €75 million the Department allocated to the DPG and essential repair grant schemes last year, only €65 million was drawn down. I could list figures from some local authorities. Carlow County Council, for example, was reallocated €960,000 but only used €515,000. The figure for Louth County Council was fine, whereas Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council spent only €1.6 million of the €2.2 million reallocated to it under the subhead. This year, the council has asked for only €1.4 million, although I am certain a large number of elderly people in Dún Laoghaire would like to have a stair lift or other housing aid installed. The problem for the local authorities is that they must provide one third of funding from their own resources. For this reason, some of them regard the scheme as a priority while others do not. The Department asks local authorities how much funding they want and this year allocated 100% of the figure requested.

As I indicated, until two years ago funding from this scheme was to be used to for private houses and dwellings occupied by tenants. Since last year, however, the Department has insisted that a local authority which provides a tenant with an extension, stair lift or other assistance can fund the project from the major capital building programme. This approach leaves authorities with more money to spend on private housing. It appears from the returns, however, that some authorities do not bother to use this facility.

Members consistently raise with me problems they have encountered securing disabled person's or essential repair grants. The figures indicate that local authorities do not regard these schemes as a priority. The Department's allocations are based on the funding requests submitted by local authorities which have failed to deliver on the funding they have received. Last year, one county did not approve many of the works to be carried out under these schemes until October. Approval should be given in January to ensure that at least some of the work is done.

Mr. O’Dowd

Is this not another case of not being able to trust local authorities to do the right job? While I accept that many local authorities can do the job, with a departmental carry-over from last year of €3 million under this heading, it is clear that many of them are not doing their job. It is time they were kicked off this job because they are not able to it.

On resources, the process in County Louth — it may differ in other places — is that an applicant submits an application to the county council which then consults the health board. A specialist is then brought in to examine the circumstances of the household in question.

Mr. N. Ahern

County councils do not have to consult health boards.

Mr. O’Dowd

The procedures I outlined, which is followed in some counties, demonstrates that the process is hidebound in bureaucracy. If one compares the system in place for housing aid for the elderly with that which applies for disabled person's grants, which I accept are different and require different levels of work to be done, the former requires applicants to fill out a one page application form and a much more proactive approach is taken. If certain local authorities are not doing their job, it should be transferred elsewhere. They are not good enough. Is there a case for the centralisation of applications?

Mr. N. Ahern

I was a member of a local authority.

Mr. O’Dowd

They are not doing their jobs.

Mr. N. Ahern

It depends on which side of the fence one is on. Any time the Government makes a change, local authority representatives scream from on high that power is being removed from them, etc. There are many good people in local authorities but some are not delivering. In the case in question, it is the job of the councillors to pass the estimates and agree the rate. They should make this input and make the application at estimates time. They tell us they make the allocation but somehow do not seem to spend the money thereafter. Obviously management must therefore raise the allocation.

Mr. O’Dowd

Should the Department not be much more proactive?

Mr. N. Ahern

It is.

Mr. O’Dowd

No, it is not spending the money. If the councillors are not doing what they should, they should be told they are not getting the job any more and that it will be put out to contract. If the councils are not looking after the people in their communities with disabilities by way of allocating the money with which the Department provides them, they are not fit to do the job.

Mr. Roche

I wish to intervene. Deputy O'Dowd is making a point I have actually made myself. I am very frustrated to see that 100% of the DPGs is not being spent. Earlier this year I told county managers and directors of housing services that the people most welcome in my office will be those who will have spent the resources provided by the Oireachtas wisely and prudently and who will be looking for more. I have considered this issue and am sure the Minister of State was coming to it. There is a variety of aspects and Deputy O'Dowd is correct that there is excessive bureaucracy. It is not necessary to get an occupational therapist to confirm that a stroke victim who wants to sleep upstairs in his own house cannot climb the stairs.

Sadly, a number of local authorities have used bureaucracy as a way of preventing spending. To be fair to the local authorities, this may date from the time when resources were not available. We have leveraged a very significant amount of money into the scheme in question and it is very frustrating that it is not being spent.

The Deputy made a very good parallel point on the need for local authorities to be encouraged to spend the full allocation on social housing. It is very difficult to explain to the Department of Finance why we are seeking further moneys if the local authorities are not doing their job. It would be helpful to do what I proposed. I will provide the Deputy with a document listing the output of every local authority in this area over the past ten or 12 years. Information is power and the Oireachtas has the right to the relevant information. I do not want to heap opprobrium on local authorities but I want to encourage those which have been less than ambitious to be more so.

Deputy Cregan is correct that systems vary dramatically between local authorities. Limerick's authority is praiseworthy as it has introduced standardised costing, cut out bureaucracy and is delivering. If it can be done in Limerick, it can be done elsewhere.

Mr. O’Dowd

On the issue of best practice, could the Minister circulate some of that information? We could take it up with our own councillors.

Mr. Roche

In 1996-97, the total spend, between local and central spending, was approximately €5.6 million. This was due to a lack of resources. The resources made available in 2006 amounted to €48 million and therefore there has been a great increase in funding. It would be very helpful to me in my negotiations with the Department of Finance, on behalf of my colleagues and those I want to serve, if Oireachtas Members could encourage more ambition and delivery within the local service. I have done so and have been accused of laying the blame on local authorities. If they have a job to do, they should do it. Neither I nor Deputy O'Dowd likes the idea of taking power away from local government. A certain frustration sets in after a number of years. The Deputy has made his points well.

Mr. N. Ahern

Deputy Cuffe asked a question about Part V. There is no change of law due in this regard. Part V is delivering and we are certainly not going to row back on the changes in that the flexibility in question was very necessary. In some counties people are fulfilling their legal obligations but doing so with cash rather than sites. It is only done with the approval of the local authority. While we have delivered 2,100 Part V units to date, the number might be 20% or 25% extra, but not double, if there were no buy-outs.

We have data on local authorities and we will examine these to see if any of them is taking cash or sites more than others. It is only done with the approval of the authority and, in time, as the old planning permissions die out, we will see the real benefit of Part V. It has produced over 2,000 units, a number which will increase considerably in the next couple of years.

Mr. Cuffe

The Minister of State is not concerned about ghettoisation.

Mr. N. Ahern

The whole idea of Part V is to move away from ghettoisation.

Mr. Cuffe

The buy-out clause——

Mr. N. Ahern

We are spending €230 million per year on regeneration, in my constituency and others, and this sum is putting right many of the ghettoisation problems associated with vast housing estates of 500 or 900 houses. We do not construct these any more and the current policy is to have integrated development. Within new estates there is to be a mixture of local authority, voluntary, affordable and private housing.

Mr. Cuffe

That was at the heart of Part V, yet the Minister of State removed much of that——

Mr. N. Ahern

If there are two or three units of social housing worth €1.3 million on Shrewsbury Road, for example, they amount to tokenism.

Mr. Cuffe

The Minister of State should forget about Shrewsbury Road. He always uses that example.

Mr. N. Ahern

That is the extreme and nothing other than tokenism. If the money is paid in by developers in some local authority area, it is ring-fenced and used for housing purposes or for subsidising affordable houses.

Mr. Cuffe

It is not about Shrewsbury Road. When one is building local authority houses only in Cabra and Crumlin and forgetting about Ranelagh, Rathgar, Rathmines, Donnybrook and Ballsbridge, the problem begins to manifest itself. I am concerned that the Minister of State's watering down of Part V is such that local authority housing is not being built in affluent areas.

Mr. N. Ahern

That is what we are doing, that is what Part V involves.

Mr. Cuffe

It is a lot less than he had promised prior to the implementation of the 2000 Act.

Mr. N. Ahern

We are not going to pay €1 million for local authority houses. The concept is to have integrated living and it is working. If the Deputy considers the housing of today with that of 20 years ago, he will note that we no longer build vast local authority estates. We are now concentrating much more on integrated development. That is the way it is going and Part V is part of the process.

Mr. O’Dowd

I have a question.

Mr. Roche

I may be needed in the Dáil and the Chairman stated he might suspend in that event. I am quite prepared to return to go through the matter in detail and respond to the very good points being made. I need to cover the Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Bill in the Dáil.

Mr. O’Dowd

Does the Minister have data on the Part V arrangements of each local authority? If so, can he circulate them? If not, can he obtain them for us?

Mr. Roche

Yes, we have such information. Given that the Deputy asked a parliamentary question on the matter, I was under the impression that some local authorities were ducking out of their Part V obligations by taking large amounts of land and cash. The number is quite small, however. If the Deputy wishes, I can let him have a copy of the available data.

Mr. O’Dowd

I thank the Minister.

Chairman

We will move on to subheads C1 to C7, which pertain to the environment. The Minister answered some questions on the environment already. Are there any others?

Mr. Cuffe

I wish to raise two issues. The bulk of the funding is for water and sewerage services — it is an enormous sum. Does the Minister intend to consider updating the building regulations to provide for grey water reuse within buildings, for instance, or rain water harvesting? We are spending a huge amount on providing complete treatment for water in urban areas. One way of reducing the use of treated water significantly would simply be to extract rain water and use it for flushing toilets. This would, in the longer term, result in a lesser need for capital expenditure or current expenditure on water supply. Will the Minister change the regulations in that area?

There is a lot of detail on climate change funding. Will C7 be used to offset our obligations under Kyoto? Can it be used to reduce those obligations? It will be counted as official development assistance so is the Minister killing two birds with one stone on that?

Mr. Roche

We are talking about the clean development mechanism and the answer is "No". Deputy Cuffe asked about the building regulations. I published the 2006 guidelines in part L of the document yesterday, which deals with energy performance in new buildings.

Deputy Gilmore mentioned water saving, a valid point. In the course of the negotiations on the nitrates directive, I pointed out that if water from roofs was not allowed to run across farmyards, it would dramatically cut the storage capacity necessary. If waste water did not flow into yards, the bulk storage would not be needed.

I mentioned the dual flush toilets. They make sense and I will incorporate them in the regulations. The other technologies for the diversion and use of grey water are evolving. We must pilot them rather than regulate for them straight away. The Deputy and I are interested in the non-high tech treatment of waste water through willow beds and so on. We have some creative people in the Department and I have asked them to see if we can draft a regulation because it is much more efficient and eco-friendly. I have seen some extraordinary operations in Waterford where the county manager strongly supports this. The co-op plant in Kilmeaden is based entirely on a reed bed natural water treatment system. It makes sense and I have requested guidelines for that.

Some councils are more proactive than others and it could solve waste water treatment problems in small villages. There is an interesting operation in the Six Counties. The former president of the Ulster Farmers Union, Mr. Gilliland, has done extraordinary work. They take a lot of the waste water from the plant in Derry and treat it by reed bed. This could be a cost cutting synergy where we deal with that and at the same time produce material for wood chips.

The technologies are evolving. Some are easier than others, such as dual flush toilets, and we will test the other areas. The energy performance regulations in part L of the building regulations were published yesterday.

Mr. Cregan

Deputy Cuffe rightly referred to the large amount of money that has been put into the water and sewerage projects in recent years. I am, however, being hammered in my constituency by Opposition spokespersons who are saying the Government has not invested in west Limerick in water and sewerage projects. Nothing could be further from the truth. We have a number of schemes — up to ten — that are at different stages. I acknowledge that the Minister introduced additional efficiencies and eliminated much of the red tape because it makes no sense when a local authority makes an application. The Department official writes back and the county council has to reply again. It goes on and on and is very frustrating for the towns and villages that need the infrastructure.

We are trying to eliminate one-off housing in many cases and telling people to go into the towns and villages because services will be in place. Thanks to the huge investment on the part of the Government, particularly this Minister, we now have an opportunity to put those upgraded or new sewage treatment plants in place. I ask the Minister to continue his efforts to ensure the situation is streamlined. The Minister has introduced provisions lately that schemes up to a certain ceiling, once they go to local authorities do not have to revert to the Department, a welcome development. In some of cases, schemes are bundled for the sake of efficiency and to get a consultant who will take on three or four instead of one.

I welcome the investment and efficiencies put in place by the Minister and ask him to ensure we can bring these schemes to fruition as quickly as possible.

Mr. Roche

Deputy O'Dowd asked a question about the apparent reduction this year. It is not a reduction. The major schemes, Ringsend, Drogheda, Dundalk, Wexford, Limerick, Cork and Galway, have been completed so we will not spend the money again. The allocation we have made is to cover the schemes we envisage starting this year so it is a true allocation rather than a figure put in for the glamour. The new assessments will inform investments for 2007 and beyond. We are moving towards more of the smaller schemes instead of the large ones. Almost €276 million has been allocated for rehabilitation of water distribution systems.

This touches on the point made by Deputy Cuffe. We have enjoyed remarkable success dealing with wastewater leakage through the pipes. Almost 40% of supply was being lost in some areas because the pipes were laid in Victorian times. We are dealing with that. We have substantially increased the rate of investment in that area — it is up by 90% on the previous year. It was not an area anyone in any administration paid attention to. A total of 180 urban drainage systems have been assessed and technical implementation is being put in place.

We estimate that the threshold point should cut six months of administration, saving the taxpayer and central Government a lot of money. It also saves the local authorities money because it simply moved files backwards and forwards needlessly. It is still a culture shock for some local authorities which we told to go ahead. We are also providing money for dedicated offices in local authorities to concentrate solely on water schemes. I believe we should facilitate the production of clean water for all householders, as of right. There are problems with water supply, even in my constituency.

I am sure Deputy Cuffe made a mistake when he referred to Question No. 325 because the point he made was not in the reply, which stated:

In accordance with Section 9 of the Housing Act 1988 an assessment of need for local authority housing is undertaken every three years, the last of which was undertaken in 2005. The 2005 assessment was the most rigorous to date and was the first time that an IT database was used to gather, collate and examine the results of the assessment. The procedure involved each local authority transmitting their assessment results in an IT format to the Local Government Computer Services Board for validation and collation.

It was not that the methodology changed but that a more efficient administrative system was introduced.

Mr. O’Dowd

There were over 120 pages of data.

Mr. Roche

That is true because with the manually operated paper systems one could not capture certain people, for example, those in Bray who could apply to Wicklow County Council and Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, and would be on the Bray Town Council list. I know Deputy Cuffe did not intend to suggest that the position was otherwise, but that was the reply that was given to that question.

Mr. O’Dowd

Is it correct that there is a budget cut of almost €18 million under the heading of water services?

Mr. Roche

No.

Mr. O’Dowd

On page 103 the change from 2005 to 2006 shows a reduction of 5%. Last year the figure was €417 million and this year it is €398 million. That is a reduction.

Mr. Roche

As I have sought to explain to the Deputy——

Mr. O’Dowd

The Minister has not explained it to me.

Mr. Roche

I will explain it again.

Mr. O’Dowd

The Minister said it was glamourising——

Mr. Roche

I will explain it again.

Mr. O’Dowd

I wish to clarify this point. The Minister referred to a national survey of all the local authorities in the country. I do not have the document with me, but I can get it if necessary, which states that some of the figures given in the survey were estimates from authorities or consultants. It includes an estimate for a proper, complete survey of between €30 million and €40 million.

Mr. Roche

I am no more sure of the figure than the Deputy.

Mr. O’Dowd

The Minister's job is to know the facts. This is a budget meeting where I expect the Minister to have the information. If he does not have it, the many officials behind him ought to have it.

Mr. Roche

I will get the information. There is no need for us to get tetchy with one another.

Mr. O’Dowd

We are not getting tetchy. I just want the facts.

Mr. Roche

I will get the information.

Mr. O’Dowd

I could have had the information earlier if my freedom of information request had been granted but that was not to be.

Mr. Roche

I dealt with that issue too while the Deputy was absent and I will not return to it.

Mr. O’Dowd

The Minister does not have to return to the point because he has already refused me.

Chairman

I do not wish to re-open that issue. We dealt with it definitively.

Mr. O’Dowd

I am simply making the point that the Minister either has the figures or not.

Mr. Roche

I have them. I will say it again as slowly as I possibly can since the Deputy seems to have been unable to take it in.

Mr. O’Dowd

My capacity to understand is not diminished by the fact that the Minister is speaking.

Mr. Roche

I am glad we have corrected that point. I made the point that the €399 million in the current year is down from €418 million in the previous year. I have, however, also made the not unreasonable point that having invested €350 million in Cork, for example, it is not necessary to do so every year. It is not necessary for the Government to repeat its investments in Cork, Drogheda, Dundalk, Wexford, Limerick, Ringsend and Galway.

The future requirement is for smaller schemes. That is not a cut. That reflects the fact that this Government has achieved its targets and invested infinitely more money than any previous Government has been able to put into this area. When we finish making the investment we do not need to continue making it.

As I said, maybe when the Deputy was absent, the 2006 allocation is adequate to cover the schemes we have envisaged for this year. That was my point about glamourising figures by pumping them up but they refer to the schemes we will advance this year. The local authorities have been asked to submit an updated list of their future needs by this summer. That will produce a new assessment for what in most cases will be much smaller schemes than the current ones and will determine the investment decisions for 2007 and beyond.

In this year €276 million has been allocated for rehabilitation of water distribution systems. The Exchequer rate increased to 90% this year, a lower figure than last year. A total of 180 urban drainage schemes are being assessed and a technical implementation group has been set up to carry out the assessment. A consortium includingPettit, Barry and Partners, White Young Green, and Babtie was appointed in late 2002 to undertake work on the national urban wastewater study at an estimated cost of €2.4 million. That study, which was published last August, is the most comprehensive study to date and we are working on it.

Mr. O’Dowd

That is my point. The study includes a figure of approximately €38 million to €40 million for an assessment cost rather than a construction cost. It states that this assessment is needed to identify the true total cost of all the work. Will the Minister deal with that issue?

Mr. Roche

The study acknowledges the record investment the Government is making.

Mr. O’Dowd

That is not the issue.

Mr. Roche

It also identifies several specific issues, including that which the Deputy raised. It refers to the general poor quality of wastewater infrastructure data and a request has been sent to the local authorities. A secondary recommendation was the need for a survey and analysis of catchments. The third point concerned the condition of the mechanical and electrical plant, particularly small plants. That is why there has been talk of design build operate schemes, DBOs, and bringing in more competent maintenance. That was in question.

The survey's findings are generally positive and reflect significant progress. A working group has been set up with the sanitary authorities, the councils and the EPA which must be involved. If we are to make further assessments this is a better time to involve the EPA rather than bring it in on top of the survey. The Department is also involved and is studying an implementation programme in this area. It is an arithmetic fact that the figure this year is lower than last year.

Mr. O’Dowd

I am glad the Minister acknowledges that but I am asking how much is the estimated professional fee, cited in that report, to assess fully the overall situation. It is not a construction cost.

Mr. Roche

The figure will become available only when the assessment is completed.

Mr. O’Dowd

I am asking about the sum required to finish the assessment. It is in the report.

Mr. Roche

We have given funds to local authorities.

Mr. O’Dowd

I know all that.

Mr. Roche

We have asked them to make their assessment and when that is complete we will receive an estimated cost. It would be foolhardy to do something in advance of having the analysis.

Mr. O’Dowd

The Minister has the estimate of the cost.

Mr. Roche

One cannot have the estimate of the cost.

Mr. O’Dowd

It is in the report.

Mr. Roche

The views of consultants are reported but not the views and responses of the local authorities. Before we set a figure, which will become part of public policy we must have the assessment of the statutory agencies, the EPA, the sanitary authorities and the Department.

Mr. O’Dowd

In the report, a figure of approximately €40 million was cited as needed to finalise the assessment. If the budget for this area is cut by €18 million, how can the work be completed when the amount recommended by consultants will not be spent?

Mr. Roche

The budget has not been cut. A cash amount of approximately €50,000 has been given to each local authority.

Mr. O’Dowd

What is the figure?

Mr. Roche

It is €40,000 to €50,000 for each local authority.

Mr. O’Dowd

What is the total figure?

Mr. Roche

We will do the sums for the Deputy in a moment.

Mr. O’Dowd

There are 29 local authorities.

Mr. Roche

There are actually 35 statutory local authorities.

Mr. O’Dowd

There are 27 planning authorities.

Mr. Roche

The figure is approximately between €1.25 million and €1.5 million. That is what the authorities have received to do the assessment. From the assessment it can be worked out how much capital funding and additional investment will be needed.

Mr. O’Dowd

I appreciate we are at loggerheads on this one. From what I understand, there is a large infrastructural deficit in this area. Some of the major parts of it have been assessed. A figure of €40 million is given in the report.

Mr. Roche

That is a figure for poor infrastructure.

Mr. O’Dowd

Is that money provided for in the Estimate?

Mr. Roche

No, it will not be provided for in the Estimate until the assessment is completed. To do otherwise would be to engage in a falsehood. The Estimates have to be based——

Mr. O’Dowd

From what I understand, it is an estimate of the cost to complete the assessment. This figure is purely for researching the issue.

Mr. Roche

The Deputy is asking about the cost of the cost of the research.

Mr. O’Dowd

Exactly. The figure is approximately €40 million.

Mr. Roche

We have given each local authority an allocation——

Mr. O’Dowd

I will come back on this issue with a parliamentary question.

Mr. Roche

An allocation of between €40,000 and €50,000 has been made to each local authority. This will allow them to complete the assessment.

Mr. O’Dowd

I will follow up with a parliamentary question on this issue.

Chairman

We must move on from this issue.

Mr. Cuffe

Like Deputy O'Dowd, I am also stuck into this issue. Regarding the house needs assessment, I do not have a copy of the written reply to this. Rigour is one matter and cross-checking PPS numbers is another. I believe this is a significant change in methodology.

Mr. Roche

Without going back over this, the reply to the parliamentary question is an honest and comprehensive one. There is no point in suggesting otherwise. I will give a copy to the Deputy now. It outlines precisely where the precision which was missing in previous years was introduced. To be fair to the local authorities, I have been pushing that IT is used to a better degree than it has been. Local authorities have taken up the challenge. Some local authorities are superb. As Deputy O'Dowd said, local authorities received substantial instructions to which they rose. That is why we have an assessment. If the Deputy wants to labour the point, I will give him a copy of the reply to the parliamentary question.

Mr. Cuffe

I would appreciate that.

Chairman

Any comments on subheads D1 to D5, dealing with local government?

Mr. O’Dowd

In subhead D2 in respect of grants for non-national roads, there is a €4 million carryover from 2004.

Mr. Roche

Carryovers arise for many reasons. There may be an underspend. A local authority may have started a process which it has not completed.

Mr. O’Dowd

This is for 2004.

Mr. Roche

It is 2004 to 2005. It is a continuing carryover. Allocations have been made and local authorities are spending on non-national roads. Several local authorities have made the point that considering the moneys allocated to them, they have difficulties rising to the challenges. That figure is a technical add-on in the Exchequer stream.

Mr. O’Dowd

I welcome the introduction of the Internet facility for the registration of car tax. Regarding subhead D3, I would have assumed that there would have been a reduction in the costs here, particularly as 30% of car-owners are using the online registration facility.

Mr. Roche

There has been much efficiency in this area. I am doing my best to ensure the local authorities have the funds rather than they are clawed back for another Department. Efficiencies have been introduced in this area. In Dublin, 50% of car-owners use the online system and in County Louth, it is over one third. It saves on local government administration costs.

Mr. O’Dowd

What has happened to that saving?

Mr. Roche

I am allowing the local authorities to hold it because there are other impositions. We are keeping a tight hand on local authorities, particularly with staff. In so far as there are efficiencies from newer technologies, I am encouraging local authorities to see that there is a certain bounty from being efficient. Although the figure relates to efficiencies in the Department and does not reflect those in the local authorities, the efficiencies in the system are significant.

I have spoken to several local authority managers where there are high levels of efficiency. For example, South Dublin County Council is making prudent use of new technology. There is a bonus to this and I am encouraging other local authorities to do likewise. Councils which use IT to a high degree in their planning process are not only giving a better service, but they are servicing their technical staff because they do not have to wait for the files to go through the system. There are some superb examples of good practice which I have encouraged local authorities to consider. South County Dublin Council, due to its manager, has a first-class IT system.

Mr. O’Dowd

Louth County Council has a first-class system.

Mr. Roche

The manager there has done great work. There is a group of managers who are really to the fore. We have been using their talents to establish a code of best practice.

Mr. O’Dowd

Will the Minister ring-fence these savings for a specific area?

Mr. Roche

No, I cannot do that. The Department of Finance is very conscious of any savings that can be incurred. I have to do battle for local government funding.

Mr. O’Dowd

The issue is that efficiencies are not subsidising inefficiencies.

Mr. Roche

Absolutely.

Mr. O’Dowd

I acknowledge the impact that has been made in local authority management. However, the Minister must ensure these efficiencies are not cross-subsidising inefficiencies.

Mr. Roche

I accept that.

Mr. O’Dowd

The Minister could ring-fence that money. IT savings could be used to further improve IT, or education programmes for staff. One could benchmark the saving.

Mr. Roche

I understand the point Deputy O'Dowd is making, but I will demonstrate that to micro-manage an individual local authority might not be the best thing to do. Dublin South County invested heavily in something in which I have a great interest, namely the training and development of reception staff. The council has a very good reception system and it would be worthwhile to observe it. Key reception staff can orient the customer. If customers know what they are looking for and to whom they must go, this gives a knock-on saving, because the customer gets better service and the local authority saves too.

Many years ago, before I went into mad and got into politics, I wrote a paper for the OECD.

Mr. O’Dowd

The Minister is still mad. Please take note.

Mr. Roche

Great efficiencies can be made, and not just from the point of view of getting frustrations out of the system, by having good reception services. The manager in that local authority reached that conclusion independently. I do not think micro-management would work, nor do I think Deputy O'Dowd is suggesting that.

Mr. O’Dowd

The local authorities should produce for the Minister a plan as to how they would spend the money, or having spent it, showed how they spent it. One must ensure that inefficiencies are not being subsidised.

Mr. Roche

That is a fair point. However, one will find that local authorities that have embraced change, particularly in the IT and technology area, tend to be the most efficient. We must establish templates for best practice and ensure others follow.

Mr. Cuffe

No doubt the Minister will apply the same ideas to FOI requests to keep Deputy O'Dowd satisfied in that regard.

Mr. Roche

Let that wound not be opened again.

Mr. Cuffe

I have a similar question. I see the point the Minister makes, that he wants to encourage local authorities. However, if we are not getting a substantial saving from computer technology, it begs the question why we are going down that road in the first place.

Mr. Roche

The area in which Deputy Cuffe has most interest, planning, is where the real bonus is shown. In some local authorities, an applicant cannot merely go online and get a general view, but I hope, in the very near future will access his or her own file, in effect with a PIN, see the technical reports and bring any errors to the attention of the local authority. There is a great benefit in that.

Mr. Cuffe

With regard to subhead D2, non-national roads, the Minister said in his speech that some local authorities have cut back in real terms in their allocations from their own resources rather than maximise the impact of the additional funds being made available. The Minister said that was unacceptable. Will he expand on that, and name and shame?

Mr. Roche

Yes. I have had words on this with the CCMA, the County Council Managers Association, and was trenchant in saying that if I go to the Department of Finance and fight for resources for non-national roads, and then see that the local authorities whinge about non-national roads and are actually cutting their own estimates, I will not tolerate that.

I will provide some figures. In 1994, the total allocation to non-national roads from the State was €139 million, with local authorities putting in €74 million. By the year 2005, we passed the €0.5 billion mark, with the Exchequer spending €501 million on non-national roads. The allocation from the local authorities that year was €161 million, and the previous year the comparative figures were €481 million versus €153 million. Accordingly, the proportion of local authority input was declining. This year, I have increased the figure to €558 million, and to be fair, the local authorities have bumped their figure up to €223 million, because I made it quite clear to the country managers that I would be quite ruthless, and if local authorities did not provide what was needed for their local roads, I would do precisely what both Deputies inferred in their contributions, and make the allocations accordingly.

I have made the same point to them regarding the LIS, the local improvement schemes, because I want to see significant cuts in the numbers outstanding for seven and eight years. Deputy O'Dowd would probably be more familiar with these schemes, though Deputy Cuffe also has some LIS in his area.

There is no point in the taxpayer at central Government level making the allocations if the local authorities cut them. That is the danger touched on by Deputy O'Dowd, because if this happens the local authorities become lethargic and sit back, and one does not know where the funding is going. I spoke at the various local authority associations and made it clear I would keep a tight rein. I am pleased with the result because there has been a phenomenal increase, with a total investment of €780 million in non-national roads. That is necessary because the traffic is greater, and much bigger and bulkier than on the non-national roads, than was ever the case.

Between 1994 and 2006, the own resources of local authorities put into non-national roads increased by just over 200%, and in the same period, the State grants increased by more than 300%. Accordingly one can see there has been a degree of lethargy there.

Mr. Cuffe

They might be looking for a commensurate increase in the rate support grant too.

Mr. Roche

They might be. They have got that too. I have been criticised for making this point. This year, local authorities will have, from all sources, close to €900 billion. Deputies Cuffe, O'Dowd, Cregan and I have been members of local authorities. When I entered the local authority system years ago, such monetary figures would have been completely unimaginable. I expect to see better service being given for such figures and will be quite ruthless in naming them and ensuring local council members know the services that are not efficient. I am not putting a gun to anyone's head but it is my job and the job of local councillors to ensure that resources provided are used.

In my own county, a perfectly valid request from a constituent about non-national roads got the usual response, that the authority did not get the money for them. If an authority could not have had the money to do some road works this year, when in the name of God would it have it? Every councillor, every Deputy and Senator has that same frustration.

Mr. Cregan

I am glad the Minister alluded to the local improvements scheme because it is important to give credit where it is due. There has been a major increase in this scheme. It is the only one whereby people living on private roads can have their roads resurfaced and maintained. Limerick County Council has a waiting list of approximately 150 applicants on the list. At the rate we were going, looking after about 15 roads per year, we had a ten-year waiting list. Now, thanks to the great increase in funding, I have been informed this morning that 50 roads will be attended to this year, so we have now gone to a three-year waiting list, and for the first time those people will see a real difference. I welcome that warmly.

Chairman

We will move on to subheads E1 to E4, heritage.

Mr. Cuffe

I welcome the increase in conservation grants, a healthy development.

Mr. Roche

There are some really exciting things happening in this area. It is one which has not got the attention it needs but some spectacular things are happening. Though I have a certain reputation as a hard taskmaster, I pay tribute. Some great work has been done in heritage. We have changed our national attitude on heritage.

I want to mention not just the extraordinary work of the Heritage Council but also the new Irish Heritage Trust we are creating. That will make a very significant difference. I am impressed by the figure put forward in that regard by the steering group chairman, David Davis, and I am anxious to see the body up and running. I am sure Members from all sides of the House will support it as it is a good idea. We did not have the resources for it in the past but the Minister for Finance, Deputy Cowen, has been very generous in the allocation of funding.

Chairman

We will move on to subheads F1 to F12, other services.

Mr. O’Dowd

I note that the 2004 Estimate was €7 million while the 2005 Estimate was €12 million. Much less was spent than was asked for. The outcome was €8.5 million last year but it will be doubled to €16 million this year. Given that the previous anticipated expenditure did not occur, will the Minister explain the increase?

Mr. Roche

Legal costs have not been coming through but are now doing so. As the Deputy knows, issues have arisen with regard to the level of legal costs and because people who were not co-operative disputed their costs. There is no doubt the legal costs are substantial. I hope we get value for money at the end of the process.

Mr. O’Dowd

Let us hope there will be fewer public representatives in the country if they are caught on the wrong side of the envelope.

Mr. Roche

If they are caught on the wrong side, they deserve what is coming to them.

Mr. O’Dowd

Absolutely. The figures suggest the Minister expects a doubling of cost.

Mr. Roche

Yes. The figures to date are for €52 million. There will be a doubling this year because bills which had not been presented recently are now coming through with a vengeance. This is healthy because we will now know the volume and the cost, and we can examine the effectiveness of the continuation of some of the tribunals. The fees are very high.

Mr. O’Dowd

A change in fees was expected.

Mr. Roche

That is correct.

Mr. O’Dowd

Has that happened?

Mr. Roche

No. I understand this refers to the 2007 figures for the payment of tribunal fees to barristers. Is it that to which the Deputy refers?

Mr. O’Dowd

Yes.

Mr. Roche

There will be capping with regard to a date in 2007.

Mr. O’Dowd

Is there a date on which the Minister expects the tribunals to finish their work?

Mr. Roche

It is hard to know. I can only make a guesstimate. There is no point in misleading the committee. The 2007 figure is tied to that fee-set. The tribunals were encouraged to complete their deliberations and work by mid-2007. Good speed to them.

Mr. Cuffe

On the same issue, the revelations from the planning tribunal in recent days and weeks leave a bitter taste in my mouth. Sitting Members of the Oireachtas forgot about payments which were twice what many of us spent on local election campaigns in the early 1990s. When I think back to the seat we missed out on and consider the funding going to the major parties, including the Minister's, I feel annoyed at what went on.

I do not believe there is strong support for planning from the Government parties. We will spend 50 times as much on the planning tribunal next year as is put aside for the national spatial strategy — €16 million compared to a mere €326,000. If the national spatial strategy is to work, it needs to have staff, resources and political belief that it will work. In the Netherlands, an entire government department is devoted to housing and planning. The Dutch are not ashamed of this. They spend much time considering where developments should be located and what kind of developments should happen. We have a much more laissez-faire approach, which is building up a huge cost for the years to come.

The Minister referred to increased traffic on secondary roads. He is planting the seeds of a significant future problem by not putting enough resources into planning. I am disturbed that we are spending more on water safety and 50 times more on the planning tribunal than on the national spatial strategy. We are not learning the lesson from the tribunal, which is that planning had become a debased currency, to use the words of the Minister's predecessor. We have to spend money to make it work. We must put people and public transport where the jobs are. We must put the right activities in the right places, and we will not do this if the Government is spending a mere €326,000 on implementing the national spatial strategy. This shows that the will is not there. I ask the Minister to reconsider the allocation of funding.

Mr. Roche

The figure refers to the Estimate of my Department whereas the national spatial strategy is delivered by a series of agencies. The Government's decision to have the next national development programme cast against the national spatial strategy counters the point made by the Deputy with regard to there being little political support for it. However, the Deputy is correct that a series of political and policy issues in regard to planning must be resolved.

It must be remembered that Ireland has a peculiar settlement pattern specific to it. We do not like high rise or high density developments, which would make it possible to live and work in a small area. With respect, the Deputy cannot have it both ways. I do not recall the Deputy arguing the case for high rise developments. He has certainly argued for higher density.

Mr. Cuffe

I have put submissions on the public record supporting high rise and in many cases high density developments. The Minister's party colleagues opposed me.

Mr. Roche

The Deputy will find that is not unique. It is one of the issues we have to face.

Mr. Cuffe

The Minister raises it time and again against me. He is wrong. I am probably one of the strongest supporters of higher density development and have been so in my professional and political life for the past 15 years.

Mr. Roche

I absolve Deputy Cuffe of any blame.

Mr. Cuffe

I thank the Minister.

Mr. Roche

I was thinking of other colleagues that wear the same party badge. The Deputy is correct. He has been logical in his contributions — I do not say this in a patronising way.

Sadly, across all parties and not just the Deputy's, there has been opportunistic behaviour by politicians throughout the country. They have done damage because opportunism damages the political process. Everybody knows that one can go three ways, namely, up, down — we are not rabbits and cannot live in burrows — or out. If we want to address the issue of sprawl, we have to deal with it in a much more honest way than we have done to date. While that comment does not apply to Deputy Cuffe, it applies across the political spectrum. It is a bit like the case of social housing. Everybody claims to want social housing but one then finds people nudging behind the scenes who do not want it "quite here". That is why there must be a different approach.

To return to the Deputy's main point on the national spatial strategy, the figures in this Estimate do not in any sense reflect a removal from the strategy. The national spatial strategy is real. It is underpinned by a series of changes made to planning. As the Deputy knows, we now have a basis for planning and the regional plans are in place. The strategy will inform the next national development plan and local area plans. We have put in place an architecture to support the kind of integrated planning at local, regional and national levels to which the Deputy refers.

Chairman

Are there any comments on subhead G, appropriations-in-aid? No. Does anyone have a final comment to make, or have we said it all?

Mr. O’Dowd

The next meeting will be tougher.

Mr. Roche

I thank Deputies O'Dowd and Cuffe for remaining at the meeting for what has been a positive exchange. Deputy O'Dowd and I would not like to admit to this publicly but we might as well say it within the confines of this room, given that RTE never covers these proceedings in any case. On issues such as efficiency — I am sure Deputy Cuffe shares my view and that of Deputy O'Dowd — it is important to acknowledge the good work done by local authorities. It is also important to recognise that there are authorities which could improve substantially.

Mr. O’Dowd

That is the case.

Mr. Roche

Deputy O'Dowd made an interesting point that we must consider with regard to the delivery of social housing. He reflects an issue I have raised privately and which I will state publicly, namely, I am not happy with the performance of some local authorities and am not prepared to sit around and posture for them. The time will come when we will have to get somebody else to perform for those local authorities which do not show they can perform. The Deputy is correct and I am pleased he made the point. At least between the two of us, there is some consensus in that regard and perhaps a lesson will go out. It is unfair, incorrect and improper. A local authority to which I provide funds to build 100 houses in order to remove 100 families from the housing lists and which, after a year, has only removed 50 or 60 such families, has a case to answer.

This is not a political point and we must decide to cut through such obstacles to achieve delivery on housing. I am pleased by Deputy O'Dowd's support and we should try to make progress in this regard.

I have promised the Deputy a list of all the councils' performances in respect of social housing since 1994, as comprehensive figures are available from that point. I will make them available to all members of the committee through its secretariat and am grateful for their contributions.

Chairman

This concludes the committee's consideration of the Revised Estimates for Vote 25 — Environment, Heritage and Local Government for the year ended 31 December 2006.

I thank the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche, the Ministers of State at the Department, Deputies Noel Ahern and Batt O'Keeffe, as well as their officials, for attending today's meeting of the select committee.

I remind members that it is intended to take Committee Stage of the Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Bill on Tuesday, 13 June 2006, depending on its progress.