asked the Minister for the Environment the number of travellers' families in need of housing in County Dublin; and the steps he will take to meet these needs.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Travellers' Housing Needs.
20.
Primary responsibility for the housing needs of travellers in County Dublin as in other areas, rests with the local authority concerned. A survey carried out by the local authority early in 1984 indicates that out of a total of 332 families on the roadside in the County Dublin area, 128 expressed a preference for houses, 176 wanted halting sites provided and 28 had no interest in any accommodation. As indicated in the statement of Government policy in relation to the travelling people, issued on 20 July, the Government have accepted the recommendation of the Travelling People Review Body that primary responsibility for the accommodation needs of travellers should remain with local authorities but that this responsibility should be more clearly defined and provision made to ensure that it is carried out.
A circular letter issued to local authorities on 13 September drew their attention to the terms of the Government statement; stressed the need for local authorities to adopt a systematic approach to the housing needs of travellers, as an integral part of their ordinary housing operations; asked that local authorities should review their letting schemes to ensure that they are not prejudicial to the housing prospects of travellers; and drew their attention to a number of specific suggestions about the housing of travellers and the provision of halting sites which had been made by the review body and requested that these suggestions should be incorporated into the on-going procedures of individual authorities.
The Minister says that responsibility rests with the local authority concerned, but have the Government made a decision that the responsibility shall lie with the county manager and that the role of the elected councillor has been changed in some way? The impression has gone abroad from a statement which issued that no longer would elected councillors be involved in the decision to provide facilities for travellers but that it should be solely a managerial function. That would be very detrimental to local democracy.
That statement is not correct. When local authorities fail to adopt what I have listed as priorities for the placing of itinerants, the county manager will have the responsibility to do that work.
Is that not the same thing? Is the elected councillors' role being changed? When providing facilities for travellers it is important that there be consultation, discussion and negotiation between all the interested parties. The Minister can be assured that he will get the fullest support from this side of the House in pursuing a policy of providing proper housing facilities for all travelling people.
That is not a question.
I wanted to give the Minister that assurance. The problem remains that the Minister is making a fundamental change which could have serious repercussions and could affect the progress of housing these people.
I have clearly stated that where it was obvious that there was a lack of co-operation to deal with the problem, the county manager would be asked to use his powers to house or to create halting sites for itinerants in his functional area. I am very pleased to have the backing of the Deputy and his party in solving this problem.
I would like permission to raise on the Adjournment the efforts the Minister for Industry, Trade, Commerce and Tourism is making to find a replacement industry for the Storage Technology industry. You agreed to allow this on the Adjournment yesterday.
Are you repeating yesterday's request?
Yes.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
Would the Minister give a more detailed explanation of the role he now sees the county manager playing vis-à-vis the elected councillors?
I have given a very wide view of the matter.
Now the manager can ignore the decisions of the council.
No. The Deputy cannot have it both ways, He says his party are in full agreement with the provision of halting sites for travelling people and the solving of this problem.
Very much so, but it is not simple.
Indeed it is not. That is why this small change was made. Where local authorities have fallen down on their responsibility to provide halting sites, the county manager has the power if he sees fit to do it himself.
Is it not true that the manager has authority, and sole authority, for the allocation of local authority houses? At present that is a managerial function. Therefore, is it not within the remit of the county manager to allocate local authority houses to travelling families at present?
That is quite correct.
What change is the Minister introducing?
The Deputy is aware that the function of local authority members is to provide funds for various activities, and one of them could be the provision of a halting site.
Could it not be that the manager is falling down on his responsibilities when making decisions on the allocation of new tenancies? As this question deals with Dublin, how many local authority houses have been allocated to travelling families by the Dublin authorities in the last year or two? Has that number been increased in recent years?
By June 1984, 210 families in the corporation and county council areas had been accommodated ——
May I have the annual figure please?
I will give the figures I have available. Following a meeting with the Minister of State and the city manager on 25 June a document on housing travelling families in Dublin was presented by the manager. A summary of this document shows that by June 1984, 210 families in the corporation and council areas had been accommodated in chalets, bungalows or halting sites; 123 families had been offered standard housing in the county council area; 15 families had refused the offer; 26 families had vacated their houses; 18 families were awaiting keys to houses. A total of 367 families, 332 in the county area and 35 in the city area, were still on the roadside. That is the information I have up to 1984.
Is the Minister aware that the number of houses being constructed by Dublin Corporation and Dublin County Council runs into many thousands each year? The number he has given me is over a period greater than one year. The Minister did not say how many years the figure covers. One would take it that it was from the foundation of the State from the way the Minister worded his reply. The number seems to be very small, under 200, whereas in actual fact thousands of houses are being built each year. It is clear from that that the county managers have not been diligent in fulfilling their obligations to the travellers who are applicants for houses like any other section of the community. Very few of them have been granted houses by the county managers in the Dublin area.
Since the Government policy statement on 20 July of this year in regard to accommodation for travellers, three group housing schemes for travelling families in the Dublin area have been approved. These schemes comprise ten, eight and 12 houses in Dunsink Lane, Deansrath and Fortunestown, respectively. In addition Dublin County Council approved a programme of 17 halting sites, five in 1982 and 12 in April 1984. The only site proposal actually submitted to the Department for approval at Bally-coolin has been approved by my Department. Plans for a further six halting sites are awaited by the council. That is the up to date position.
Can the Minister tell the House the number of halting sites which were actually provided as distinct from approvals, the number of new tenancies which were granted to travelling families as against any other global figure on an annual basis? If he cannot give me that information now that time is running out here, would he be prepared to give it to me in the form of a letter?
Yes, indeed. I have given the information available to me.
The remaining questions will appear on next Tuesday's Order Paper.
I endeavoured by way of Private Notice Question to draw the attention of the Minister for Industry, Trade, Commerce and Tourism to the threatened closure of Burlington Industries in Gilloge, County Clare, with a loss of in excess of 250 jobs and the possible effect on other small companies in the region.
I pointed out to the Deputy that that was not in order.
I want to draw the Minister's attention to the crisis in that company and to ask him what efforts he is making to find a solution.
The Chair received two Private Notice Questions on that topic today and ruled both of them out of order on the grounds that they did not meet with the criteria of urgency as it was clear from a statement — and I am going a bit further than I usually do — that nothing drastic would happen for a number of months and there is ample time to put down an ordinary question.
I do not wish to dispute your decision but this is a very serious crisis in the industry and every effort will have to be made ——
This is disorderly. The Deputy is trying to steamroll himself and his question over the Chair's ruling and that is not permissible. The Deputy can put down an ordinary question.