I should like to mention the Minister's announcement in relation to the increase in loans and the raising of the ceiling for supplementary grants and loans. I should like to hear the Minister indicate that money will be available to meet the demand that now appears to be stimulated and which has, according to the Minister's figures, increased substantially over the past year. It is very heartening that more people now tend to purchase their own homes. The only regret I have is that more tenants of local authorities, particularly of Dublin Corporation, have not up to now purchased their homes. However, the tenants' organisations are responsible to a large degree for inflicting severe hardship on quite a number of tenants. In the early stages of the scheme, there was a desire on the part of political parties and individuals in this House and in Dublin Corporation to ensure that the tenants of corporation houses would have an opportunity of purchasing their homes at a reasonable price. At that stage a very attractive scheme was launched by Dublin Corporation. Many people availed of it but not as many as members of the corporation at that time hoped. The tenants' associations indicated that people should delay the purchase of their homes. It is regrettable that many of these people are now asked to pay £1,000 more for their homes than they would have had to pay if they had purchased earlier. This is due to the stupidity of the tenants' organisations at that time, who tried to ensure that the scheme would be a failure. The people who listened to them are now at a loss of something in the region of £1,000. That is quite a substantial amount of money for a corporation tenant to pay out of his own pocket. Nevertheless, many of these people have now decided to purchase at the higher price because they consider there is still an amount of good value to be obtained.
I want to say to the people who have made their applications to Dublin Corporation in the last few days, prior to the closing date, that it is in their interests to complete the purchase of their homes as soon as possible and so become owners of their homes and no longer hear the cries of people who wanted to wreck this scheme and deprive people of an opportunity to purchase their homes, namely the tenants' organisations. I am sure many of these organisations have had second thoughts now. Many of them are aware of the stupid mistakes they made and are aware that they created a great hardship for the weaker section of the community, the people who were offered houses at very good value at that early stage. I want to say, nevertheless, that there has been a substantial number of applications for the purchase of houses in the corporation schemes which have been widely publicised recently, before any further increases take place. As a public representative I would urge them to accept as soon as possible and ensure that they get this particular service and the opportunity to purchase their own homes at a reasonable rate.
It is regretable that this happened. Every effort should now be made by responsible public representatives to ensure that when local authorities introduce realistic purchase schemes the tenants are advised of the merits of the schemes before it is too late, taking into consideration the type of situation which has been brought about by people who tried to wreck a particular scheme.
It is heartening to see so many people trying to purchase their own homes and to see the local authorities with this house purchase schemes. The one which was launched by Dublin Corporation recently has, I understand, attracted several thousand applicants for the houses available on small deposits. This further increase given by the Minister will make the position even more attractive to corporation tenants, people on the approved waiting list and young people getting married in the future will have the opportunity of having a realistic loan available to purchase a house together with the other aids of the the local authorities and the State.
It is necessary to point out in the city at the moment the operation of the land bank which has been of great benefit. I hope it will continue and that it will get further support from the Minister. Every effort should be made to ensure that a substantial land bank is available so that there can be continuity of the housing programme. Some houses now on the land bank are being sold at £4,700 and £4,800. People on the local authority waiting list, or existing tenants, have the opportunity of receiving a special grant of £200 and a special reduction of £200 in regard to the site. They will also have the supplementary grant, which in general is £243, plus the larger loan which is now available. This leads to a small deposit on houses started in recent times or on those about to start. Deposits in the future will be in the region of £600 to £700 for modestly priced houses. I believe a number of those will be built. The Minister should urge the city manager and Dublin Corporation to purchase more land which will be available for houses. There will thus be continuity in the building trade and we will have houses at a reasonable rate for those who need them.
I would like to say, however, that the loan increase is a little bit late. With the rise in wages which is likely to take place in the future this may be a way of short circuiting the situation because many people will get wage increases in the next few months and they will only qualify for the additional house facilities which are now given. It is in the interests of those people who will qualify for a short period, for houses built between now and the time they get the increase, to ensure that they make their stand and purchase their own homes. Those who feel they will go over the limits now set have at least the opportunity of assessing the situation and purchasing at this stage. While the increase was a generous one I would like to have seen it come some months ago.
I do not know if the supplementary grant will be increased. I have no more information than what I read in the paper. It did not indicate any increase in the supplementary grant. I hope this aspect of the situation will be reviewed from time to time and that it will not be allowed to drift on a long-term basis. The last review was not too long ago but nevertheless there were substantial increases in living costs and also in the wages of the applicants. There were some people outside the scope of the scheme because of that. I hope the houses will be within the reach of people who could not purchase them before. I fully support the corporation scheme for the purchase of houses and I urge people to avail of it.
In relation to other factors there is the question of the planning authorities and the problems that impede this kind of development of which we have a number. The most important is in relation to a two-months period which must elapse before the planning authority give a decision. Some decision could be arrived at in 24 hours or 48 hours. I do not see any reason why local authorities insist that they must take two months to consider a planning application. Some planning applications should be considered within the two-months period. The situation which has developed of looking for additional information makes the whole planning situation farcical. If they are not able to cope with the situation further personnel should be employed. When there is greater production of houses and there is the desire of builders to build more houses they should not be impeded by the planning authority.
The Minister should take serious consideration of the situation which has impeded many people. Two months makes a big difference to a small builder but it also can make a difference to a big builder where sites are at stake. If a man is held up for two months, and then a further two months, because of additional information being required, the price of the site can go up considerably. We often find that for some frivolous reason a planning application is turned down because two officials in the same Department do not see eye to eye with each other. The person who makes the planning application suffers because of this. The consequence of that is that the price of houses rises simply because of a disagreement between two people working in the planning office. One person does not want to go to the other in relation to some problem and it is knocked right away. The whole situation in relation to planning applications should get urgent attention. The situation where two months is insisted upon, together with this additional information, which now becomes part and parcel of the whole set up, makes the whole position, as I said before, farcical. Where small builders are concerned two or three months can be very damaging. Attention must be given to this point. Local authorities which have their own land banks and who are the planners in an area, where permission has been given to develop, should be able to give permission in hours rather than months. The period for objections would be the only relevant one in such a situation. Legislation should be introduced to ensure that where local authorities decide on a land bank project, where they own and develop the land, and lease it to small builders on a local authority basis, the housing concerned should be regarded as local authority housing and the third party objectors should not be able to impede the developments.
In this city there were cases where people objected to every single planning application made in certain areas. Every application was opposed by one or two individuals for the purpose of impeding development or because a petty hobbyhorse of theirs was not getting the attention they felt it should get. Where third party objections are deliberate, the result is to keep people out of homes. The Minister should ensure that this cannot happen. People who need homes have been adversely affected by such third party objectors. Where land banks are concerned, the Minister should ensure that third party objectors should be treated in a different manner to objectors to ordinary planning proposals. Where there are land banks the land development is usually complete. A lesser period of objection should be laid down where local authority housing is concerned. The longer period of objection results in a situation in which a person may have an unfair opportunity to object to some development because he does not like a particular contractor or a person who wants to carry out an addition to his home. Amending legislation should be brought in to eliminate such delays.
Dublin Corporation have made great progress. People have criticised their developments in recent times but they have a substantial programme under way. At present they are building 2,194 houses. It is desirable that we should indicate the type of progress being made in Dublin with the assistance of the Government, the Minister for Local Government, the city manager and the housing department. The situation is somewhat in hand. I had hoped that the number of tenancy developments would have increased somewhat. Nevertheless, the corporation have a fairly creditable record. At the moment there are purchase schemes in three areas—Tallaght, Donaghmede and Finglas. They represent a total of 1,024 dwellings. Tenancy houses are being built at Kilbarrack East, Tallaght and Kilbarrack West 1 and 2. They are also being built at Holylands, Rathfarnham and at Tallaght East and at Howth 4 and 5. They are being built in Finglas and at Kilbarrack 3 (a) and Kilbarrack West. A total of 2,316 dwellings is involved. There are flat schemes at Tallaght East and North Circular Road, Grangegorman, Fenian Street and Popular Row. They account for another 358 dwellings. That makes a total of 3,698 dwellings. That is a fairly creditable record which indicates clearly the progress made since many of us who were members of the corporation tried to ensure that people who were unable to purchase houses of their own would have an opportunity of getting homes from the local authority.
There is a population problem in the city. The housing reports show that housing due to commence at Kilbarrack and Baldoyle accounts for 306 houses and 16 houses respectively. Building tenders submitted to the Department of Local Government in respect of Gardiner Lane and Francis Street relate to 24 flats. Building tenders were also received in respect of 20 flats at Power's Court and in respect of 37 flats at Convent View, Cabra. There are plans for 12 flats at North William Street and for 12 flats in Rathfarnham. There are plans for 60 dwellings at Rathfarnham and for eight dwellings at Cappagh, Finglas. Plans exist for 102 dwellings at Rutland Street and for 66 at Kilbarrack. There are plans for site developments in two stages at Darndale 1 and Darndale 2 for 469 and 359 houses respectively. Development works are due to commence in Finglas and the South Tolka Valley for 1,445 houses. There are development plans for 344 houses at Cherry Orchard and for 612 houses at Ballycorus.
This represents several years' work for operatives in the building trade. The corporation development ensures workers of continuity of employment for a considerable number of years. There are CPOs before the Minister in connection with the acquisition by the local authorities of other lands. People who work in the building trade know that there will be work for them for years to come. Additional sites will be made available. Developments will take place. People in the building trade need have no worries about the construction programme of the Dublin Corporation. There will be a reduction in the waiting lists shortly.
The population of Dublin in 1966 was 795,000. The forecast for 1986 is 1,125,000. That represents an increase of 42 per cent. The money spent on housing should be increased on a pro rata basis. Dublin is carrying a large load from other counties. I do not wish to see the amount of money allocated to other counties reduced, but Dublin will require a very substantial amount of money to meet the housing needs for the population which has been forecast. It is agreed that the forecasts of population are realistic. We must get an assurance that money will be available to Dublin for the development of the city. With a greater population we will need more money in order to meet the housing needs. From the figures I have mentioned for private site development we see there is a very substantial programme in progress here, but with the population change the effectiveness of this programme will diminish if it is not stepped up further. Certain Deputies here like my colleague, Deputy Seán Moore, have devoted much time and energy over the years, together with other members of Dublin Corporation, to this work of ensuring that the weaker sections would have homes in five or 10 years by long-range planning. I hope we shall have the assurance of the Minister that this long-range planning and stepping up of production will not be impeded for lack of finance. If he does not give that assurance there is a doubt about ever reaching the stage of easing the housing problem at local authority level.
Short-term housing schemes have their usefulness and meet the requirements of the times. We have one such short term scheme in Ballymun which met the requirements of a particular time. It is regrettable that some people come into this House and condemn a scheme in relation to present-day requirements and pressures. The pressures today are completely different from the pressures of that time. The efforts of the Minister and the Department to relieve the situation which resulted from the demolition of a substantial number of derelict houses in the city, when there were 3,000 families on the waiting list, met the requirements of that time but people who at one stage applauded this scheme under certain conditions now condemn it by reference to present-day conditions. I do not think that is justifiable. Experience has shown us that short-term schemes are not always the answer and that schemes must be on a long-term basis.
There are a number of other ways in which building is impeded at the moment. The ESB are the biggest blackmailers in this country in relation to building development. They apply all sorts of pressure on builders before service will be provided. This is something the Minister must examine in great detail. House prices have been increased as a result of these pressures, and I hope the Minister will ensure that monopolies like the ESB cannot blackmail people by providing fittings and services that are not required. In Tallaght a person has been living in a house for two months without electricity, notwithstanding the fact that the house had been finished for six months. There is another case in Nutgrove, Rathfarnham, where not so long ago Deputy Moore and myself were told that a builder wanted a supply line to houses in order to let tenants in; on one side of the road there was a group of ESB workers putting in a temporary supply line at a substantial cost to the builder, which the people who went into the houses had to pay eventually; while on the other side of the road another group of ESB workers were working on permanent power lines to the same houses. This is a farcical situation and is one of the things causing distress among people who are making an effort to solve the housing problem. If this is a scheme designed to derive further income for the ESB, the Minister should tell them to halt and provide the service for which they are being paid. If they are not getting enough for their services they have the remedy of increasing the charges but not blackmail of this type.
There are many other factors impeding building, and I am quite sure the Minister is aware of them; they have been mentioned all too often in many places up to now. I have not seen any action taken and I hope action will be taken now. One impediment is in relation to sewerage services. I refer particularly to the Grand Canal in my own constituency. I am glad the Minister has indicated that the scheme will now proceed. All that the delay in commencing this scheme has done is to keep more people out of homes for a greater period than was necessary, at a colossal cost to the State. Whether the canal could be maintained or not was another matter. If it was used at that period it could have been reconstructed in a much better and more substantial way than at the moment. I hope the Board of Works who are to take it over will do a better job than has been done by other authorities in recent times.
It is a disgrace that this scheme should have been delayed for ten or 15 years. There were two types of people involved. On the one hand, there was the person with the fur coat and the pleasure boat and, on the other hand, there was the person with no home. I would back the person with no home every time. These people got their way to the extent that the scheme has been delayed, and now that it is about to start I hope there will be no further impediment to the development which is both necessary and desirable if we are to have more homes. The same delay occurred in relation to the great industrial development in Ballyfermot, Walkinstown, Bluebell and Tallaght, merely because of the cries of a few people. This is one of the disgraceful features of the fifties, that a small group of people who were comfortable themselves, who did not live in a two-room or single-room flat but lived in nine or 10-roomed mansions, probably far removed from the city, could influence people to hold up a desirable scheme of this nature. It was held up by those people and by a few politicians too.
This had a big bearing on people in my constituency from an employment point of view. In the Ballyfermot industrial estate and the industrial estate in south County Dublin only certain types of industries could be developed. Many industrialists examined the sites. The sites were suitable and there was a large force of suitable labour in the Ballyfermot, Inchicore and Drimnagh areas. When they discussed the matter with the planning authorities or the local authority, the industrialists found that the amount of space available in the sewer was not large enough to meet their requirements. If it was an industry with a high acid content in the waste it could not be developed in that area. The industrial estates in Ballyfermot and on the south side in general have a low employment content because of the type of industries that had to be set up there. Far more people could be employed nearer to their homes had they been developed on a long-term basis. There is no use providing sites unless services are provided.
The same applies to the future development of large housing estates. In a very short space of time it will not be possible to get into Tallaght or Blanchardstown and other areas because of a lack of roads. Unless the roads are there to take the traffic generated by large scale industrial estates and housing developments, the position becomes unreal. I am quite certain that within the next 12 months the road from Tallaght into Templeogue will be unable to take the traffic and we will have large traffic back-ups. We now go to work by radio rather than having a free and easy passage along the highway. We have to switch on the radio to find out where the traffic jams are. Unless roads are provided on the perimeter of the city, immediately and as a top priority, all these schemes will be ineffective and transport costs will be increased. To get to and from industrial centres it is necessary to have roads. The Minister should examine the decision on the by-pass road from Tallaght and have this work started at an earlier date than is now anticipated. I understand that it will be several years before this by-pass road is provided. Several thousand dwellings are being erected in an area at the moment and what have they to service them? One small road.
We do not want a situation in which newly-built roads have to be ripped up week after week by the ESB, the Post Office, the Gas Company or other concerns which are supplying services. We should ensure that when the roads are provided they are not tampered with, making some of them very dangerous, as they are at the moment. New roads which were provided six months ago now have to be cut with mechanical cutters to lay services that should have been laid when the road was being laid. This is a farcical situation. Who suffers? The people living in the houses. The roads are lifted up in front of their houses and there is large scale disruption for a considerable time. The Minister should pay particular attention to these by-pass roads. Sometimes people have to live in houses without electricity for two months. Perhaps in two months time I will have to tell the House that people have been living without electricity for four months. This should not be allowed to happen.
Normally they are told: "Your application is lost. Did you put one in? There is some mix-up somewhere." You ring up another department and you are told: "No, we do not deal with that." I rang this morning the station that should service the Tallaght estate and I was told: "As soon as we get word from the people above we will be able to proceed." I asked: "What is their number?" and the answer was: "He is not in today so there is no point in ringing him. Ring him tomorrow." This is not the type of thing that leads to comprehensive development. These people should have their services dovetailed. They should ensure that their services are provided without blackmail. I should like to impress upon the Minister that roads are just as important as sewerage, water supply and the other services necessary for large scale developments. If we are realistic about it these developments will take place in conjunction with one another. I understand that it will be several years before there is sufficient development in Tallaght to meet the problems there.
The traffic problem to which the corporation have given quite a considerable amount of attention in recent times is made more difficult by another section of the corporation or the local authority. One section are devoting all their time and energy to keeping the traffic flowing and another section, because of a lack of long-term planning, are ensuring that the first section are kept going at full speed at all times because of their backlog. This is unreal. Maybe there is consultation but there should be more consultation. The long-term needs should be examined to see how all the problems should be dovetailed.
This sewer will satisfy me because it is in my constituency. It will service the land adjacent to my constituency and it will enable people to work near their homes. While that may satisfy me, there are probably Deputies in other areas who will have the same problems in five or six years time as I have now. I hope they will ensure that the services will be provided within the shortest time possible. I said that one goes to work by radio now. Soon, unless you have a radio in your car, you will not be able to get home at all, and everybody has not got a radio. You have to tune in in the evening to find out where the hold-ups are. They are many and they are fairly substantial.
The pollution problem in my constituency will probably be eased to some degree by this scheme which will take a couple of years to complete. In the meantime, people living close to the River Camac, which is an open sewer and a disgrace to our city, have to suffer. I understand from Dublin Corporation that the Camac will not be culverted because of the expense involved. The Department of Local Government should try to influence the corporation to carry out some sort of culverting on this open sewer. When I was a member of the Dublin Corporation, members had many motions before the council asking the corporation to ensure that the Camac would be culverted. The health of many people living on the banks of the Camac has been affected as a result of pollution. It is rather regrettable that the pollution from one local authority area can float in and be harmful to the health of those in another area.
The people in the areas of Inchicore, Mount Brown and right down to the Liffey should not have to endure the odour that comes from the Camac. On a hot summer's day if one set out from Leinster House one would not need a map to get to the Camac. One would get to it if one had any sense of smell at all. People over a wide area far removed from that river can get the fumes that come from this sewer in the hot weather. Foodstuffs have been contaiminated in the past.
I remember on one occasion asking the city medical officer to do something because of the high incidence of pollution. He had the matter examined and said that it was not dirty, notwithstanding the fact that there is no fish life there. I am certain that even the rats cannot live in it. The colour of the Camac is an indication of its high state of pollution, but the city manager told us at that time—notwithstanding the fact that the water had been examined by three different experts, both from this country and from outside it, and all agreed that it was extremely dirty— that it was not dirty; but the fact that there is no fish life there, that the water is blue in colour, that the banks are full of slime, coupled with the terrible odour from it, are indications of its state.
I do not think any community should have to suffer this condition and another effort should be made to ensure that this river gets the attention it deserves from the point of view of industrial waste. I do not want to see long-established industries closed down because of the discharge of industrial waste. I know that efforts are at the moment being made by the planning authority and the Minister's Department to ensure that new industries will provide adequate safeguards against the pollution of rivers but, nevertheless, I think that now, with the technical advances made and the services and knowledge available in other countries, some system could be made available which would eliminate this terrible problem in this river, and more especially so by reason of industrial pollution. Pollution of this nature breeds other types of pollution in that people have foul sewers and other materials are drained freely into the polluted river. If the Camac was not polluted, many of the drains and inlets to it, with their injurious materials, would not be there because they would be detected at an early stage, if the water was pure, and appropriate action would be taken to ensure that the water remained fairly free.
I would ask the Minister and his Department to have another look at the Camac. I can produce to the Minister a number of reports made to the corporation over a number of years which indicate that this work should and must be done. Notwithstanding these, the corporation have now decided to take no further action because of the immense cost. One should not measure in terms of money problems of health hazards and the local authority, and possibly the Government, should be generous in relation to these highly polluted streams such as the Camac and ensure that the hazard is eliminated. If it is not, I will be back again next year, le cúnamh Dé, and I will have much more to say on the Camac because I will come well prepared with the reports on this matter.
In connection with the Housing Act of 1966, I want to mention a matter which I raised here on many occasions over the past five or six years. It is in connection with section 63 of the Act which relates to overcrowding in houses. It is about time the Minister amended this section because it is a section which needs to be amended. In fairness to him, I should say that I probably have not raised the matter with him but I did raise it with other Ministers. The section means that a person with a two-room flat who is sleeping in one room, a small room which is regarded as sleeping accommodation. can qualify for local authority accommodation while a person sleeping in one room of the same size as that room is not taken into consideration. There have been many occasions on which this section has been interpreted in this manner.
It is wrong that a person living in two rooms should be able to get accommodation as against the person living in one room, but this is what the Act sets out. We know that in tenement houses the person living in the large room there is also sleeping in it, eating in it and living in it and has no other accommodation. The size of that room is taken into consideration as being the room in which the family sleep. If, on the other hand, the person upstairs has a room, plus a smaller room, the smaller one is deemed to be the one to which the free air space relates. This seems to be completely ridiculous, that because a person sleeps in the particular room, having only one, he should be at a disadvantage as compared with the person who has two rooms.
This is completely wrong and the section should be amended at an early stage to ensure that justice is done to many people who are being deprived because of it. I was assured by Ministers in the past that an amendment would be made and I wanted to put down a Private Members' Motion at one time and I was told: "We will do that; you do not have to bother," but it is still not done and people are being victimised.
I want now to deal with a group called Associated Properties. In the area I represent, and particularly Drimnagh, we have an organisation which owns houses. Some of these houses are let and others are for purchase. If you purchase your house, you can put your car in the garden but if you are a tenant, you cannot. This type of discrimination arises from two distinct problems. One is the design of the area. It is a very high density area and one which is not suitable for present-day traffic because of the narrowness of the roads, particularly in the Upper Drimnagh area. It is not suitable for the volume of traffic or the traffic flow. It was badly designed, the density being very high. The developers at the time were certainly on a good thing. They got this high density and were able to let the houses but now with the development of the motor car and people being able to purchase them, and with motor cars being a necessity because of the positions they hold, it is regrettable that this organisation insists on cars remaining on the road notwithstanding the fact that those who purchase their homes can park their cars in their gardens. This is discrimination. Appropriate action should be taken to deal with the traffic hazard created, particularly in the Brandon Road area and the Upper Drimnagh area. This action should be taken, not against the tenants or the Garda authorities, but against Associated Properties. The Department should examine this matter realistically.
I put down Parliamentary questions about this matter and received the nonsensical reply that the elimination of the traffic hazard is a matter for the Garda Síochána and the local authority. That reply does not satisfy me. Organisations that have received State grants and local authority grants towards building development are under an obligation to provide reasonable facilities for their tenants. It would be impossible for an ambulance or fire brigade to get through in some parts of this area. I challenge the Minister to say that an ambulance or fire brigade could get into some of the culs-de-sac that are jammed with cars because Associated Properties will not allow tenants to park their cars in their gardens. Dublin Corporation decided as a matter of policy to put double gates on the gardens of their houses so that people can take their cars off the road where garages are not provided.
Not very long ago a man had to be carried a considerable distance to an ambulance which could not get near his house. If an ambulance was unable to get through, a fire brigade engine would be unable to get through. This is a serious situation. An association that has been drawing rents over a period of years is under an obligation to ensure the free flow of traffic. I do not want the people to be victimised. The people have to suffer the consequences of badly planned roads in a high density area. There is plenty of garden space which could be used to park their cars.
In the event of a major disaster the local authorities, the Garda Síochána, the Department and others will provide a remedy but in the meantime the people have to suffer. Vandalism occurs to cars parked on the road. There is parking on only one side of the road. When one writes to Associated Properties about this matter, if one gets a reply, it is to the effect that efforts have been made to relieve the situation at corporation level and departmental level. The Garda Síochána have been helpful on every occasion in remedying the situation to the best of their ability without causing any great disturbance. The Department in conjunction with the corporation, or the corporation of themselves, should be able to devise a scheme to ensure that irresponsible organisations who victimise their tenants will be dealt with. This is bad estate management. In one section of the Drimnagh area the corporation allow tenants to park their cars off the road because of the traffic hazard that might otherwise be created and in another section the tenants are not allowed to do this. It would seem that Associated Properties want to force tenants out of their houses so that they can sell the houses at a profit. The market value of the houses has increased.
