asked the Minister for the Environment if he has satisfied himself that sufficient legal protection exists for the consumer where the consumer has bought a house or a site for a house on an estate which is supposedly developed by a developer but which is not in fact developed within a reasonable time; and if adequate means exist for enforcing the rights of the consumer to have the commitment to the full development of the estate fulfilled.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Estate Development.
26.
I consider that planning authorities have adequate powers available to enable them under the Local Government (Planning and Development) Acts to ensure that estates are completed to a satisfactory standard and in accordance with the terms of planning permissions. The enforcement of any contractual agreement between the consumer and the developer is a matter for the parties involved.
Would the Minister not agree from his recent rather unsuccessful perambulations through Dublin West that this non-completion of estates is a major social problem in developing areas and that many builders either have not the means, or alternatively have lodged bonds which through inflation have become insufficient, to enable them to complete the estates? Would he not further agree that action must be taken to change the law to stop this at the outset?
There is available legislation in section 26 of the 1963 Act and in sections 31 and 35 of the 1963 Act and that was considerably strengthened in the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act of 1976 which brought in, in section 27, that a planning authority or any other person may apply to the High Court where a development is being carried out without planning permission or in contravention of the terms of the permission for an order requiring the development to cease where it is being carried out without the required permission or to be carried out in conformity with the planning permission granted. That legislation also imposes controls with regard to bonds and in 1981 I introduced a scheme for cases where estates have not been completed and where the builder has gone "bust" or where, through the normal court procedures, the council still fails to have the estate completed, the State makes money available in the form of a grant of two-thirds of the cost to complete estates. Since I introduced it last year £630,000 has been expended.
Would the Minister not agree that the legislation, whatever it says on paper, is simply not working? Would the Minister indicate to me the number of estates that have been covered by the rather small sum of £630,000?
We are coming to that in the next question. I do not accept that the Act has not been working. Some councils have been particularly successful in having work carried out on estates. I accept that there are exceptions. I saw some of them myself in my own constituency. However, there is a general review of the whole planning procedures and planning legislation being undertaken in my Department.
Would the Minister not agree that private house builders are conning the public? They sell from a set of drawings a house at a price in an estate, the legal advisers of the purchaser investigate the planning permission and find that the entire estate has to be completed and that the house forms and integral part of it; the house builder subsequently absconds or disappears or, to use the Minister's own parliamentary language, goes "bust" and the people in the estate are left with no redress whatsoever. Would the Minister not agree there are deficiencies in the legislation at the moment? But there are political deficiencies in the Minister's party in that they are not prepared to tackle this problem courageously. Would the Minister give some indication to the thousands of people who have to live with this nightmare of what he is going to do about it?
There is very strong legislation there at the moment which local authorities should operate. In cases where the normal procedures of the legislation fail to cover the case involved, the scheme that I introduced last year for unfinished estates comes into operation.
Is the Minister seriously suggesting that he is satisfied with the legislation? Did I understand him to say that some local authorities are satisfactorily dealing with this problem whilst others are not?
I said some local authorities have been particularly successful in operating legislation and have received considerable co-operation.
Others have been less so.
The situation is as I have just said in my reply.
Would the Minister not agree that there are very many estates in County Dublin alone that have not been completed for upwards of ten years and that have still not been taken in charge largely due to the fact that the amount secured by the bonds has become derisory? Will the Minister take steps to ensure that henceforth bonds will be index-linked to give them a measure of reality?
The Deputy is a member of the local authority involved. I would suggest that he put that down by way of motion to the local authority. I accept that some of these bonds should be bigger.
Will the Minister sanction it if they agree to it?
It was because of the problem that the Deputy refers to, because of the number of these estates that have been left unfinished, that I introduced this scheme last year. It is totally unfair to the house owner, the purchaser. The largest single transaction in the life of most people is the purchase of their house and the least they are entitled to is to have their estate completed and put in order.
(Interruptions.)
That is why I introduced the scheme last year for unfinished estates. I am not saying it is the total solution but it is a major step in the right direction.
The Minister will agree that it may be a major step at the very tail end after years of haggling between the local authorities and the builders. But would the Minister agree that while the absconding builder is one problem another problem is the builder who stays in business and who has planning permission for about 300 houses, builds three-quarters of them and then moves on to another site not completing the previous site, not going bust? There is nothing in the law to get at him to finish the estate up to the standard that the three-quarters of the residents are entitled to.
The enforcement procedures are there. They do not have to wait for the completion of the estate. The enforcement procedures are there and they are being used by many local authorities.
The local authority will not take it over until it is completed.
It is not just private developers that are involved. We all had the experience—and it was referred to earlier—of the constituency that we all visited where one of the worst offenders were the Dublin Corporation themselves acting as developers in the area. I would like to put it on the record here that the Dublin Corporation should get their act together as far as the completing of estates is concerned.
Will the Department give them the money to finish it?
Is the Minister serious in saying that present legislation is strong enough to deal with this problem? Is he not acutely aware of the problems especially in County Dublin? If the legislation is strong enough what action does he propose to see that it is implemented and that there is no delay in taking estates in charge?
The implementation of legislation is a matter for the local authority and the county council. As to whether the legislation is strong enough, there is a review going on in the Department at the moment of the planning legislation generally and I will look at this matter as well. I do wish that local authorities would use the powers that are available to them rather than always looking for new powers.
Would the Minister not agree, particularly in the context of County Dublin, that that local authority who are faced with the largest growing area of population in the whole of the country have insufficient funds available to them to enable their officials to fulfil the functions conferred on them under the planning Acts to bring proceedings against developers who do not finish estates? Will the Minister consider making special financial provision available to Dublin County Council to enable them to fulfil their functions? Secondly, in the context of the question and the Minister's reply, would he not accept that one of the major difficulties of the local authorities in this area is that if a bad developer who has not finished a number of estates within a local authority area applies a new for a planning permission to build a new housing estate the local authority can have no regard when deciding on the application to the fact that the developer has not finished other estates? Would the Minister consider amending the legislation to enable local authorities to take into account the fact that some developers are not bona fide when they put in planning applications?
I accept fully the last point made by the Deputy. It would go a long way towards solving the problem if we had some control over developers finishing one job before going on to another. I will have that included in the planning review of legislation at present taking place. As far as the first part of the question is concerned, I do not accept that.
The remaining Questions will appear on tomorrow's Order Paper.
Because of the urgency of the subject matter of Question No. 112 on today's Order Paper and the fact that we will not get to it today, I wish to raise this matter on the Adjournment.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
I wish to raise on the Adjournment the problem which will arise in Tramore this week-end because of the influx of mods and rockers, and I want to know what steps the Garda are taking to ensure that law and order will be maintained.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
I wish to raise on the Adjournment the allocation of funds for the Regional Hospital, County Kerry, for 1982.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
Last Thursday week we had a discussion on the EEC farm price package during the course of which the Minister for Agriculture assured me that the new calf heifer scheme was "in the bag" but I understand from reports today that that may not be the case. Therefore, I ask leave to raise the matter on the Adjournment.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
I would like, written replies to Questions Nos. 270, 271 and 272.
I want a written reply to Question No. 417 and I understand Deputy Quinn wants a reply to associated questions.