Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 20 May 1992

Vol. 419 No. 10

Private Members' Business. - Establishment of Greater Dublin Authority: Motion (Resumed).

The following motion was moved by Deputy J. Mitchell on 19 May 1992:
That Dáil Éireann, mindful of the problems which have now reached acute proportions in Dublin, namely—
(1) a crime rate treble that of the rest of the country,
(2) unemployment of up to 70 per cent in certain areas,
(3) the collapse of the housing programme for 8,500 families on waiting lists and many in substandard local authority flat complexes,
(4) the continuing depopulation of its inner city areas with the dereliction and the huge adjustment problems this has caused,
(5) traffic chaos caused by a lack of coherent transport and road policy,
(6) the passive, under-used and even decaying amenities of the bay, the docks, the canals, the zoo, and the assets of our heritage,
(7) the very poor level of education advancement achieved by some of its children,
(8) the lack of any proper community involvement in decision making;
calls for a complete overhaul of city government which would
(i) establish a single Greater Dublin Authority to achieve coherent planning for the whole Dublin area,
(ii) confer on that Authority new executive powers over local job creation, transport, tourism and urban renewal,
(iii) confer new powers of scrutiny in relation to other Departments and Public Authorities making decisions affecting the economic and social progress of Dublin and
(iv) develop a second tier of Government with devolved responsibilities which would encourage greater community participation in decision making about their area.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann" and substitute the following:
"mindful of the action which has already been taken by the Government to initiate comprehensive reorganisation and reform of the local government system in the Dublin area;
noting the emphasis on sustained economic growth, increased employment and social advancement in the Government'sProgramme for Economic and Social Progress;
and welcoming its specific programmes in relation to areas such as urban renewal, housing and transportation;
calls on the Government to continue its balanced, integrated approach to securing the future economic and social development of the Dublin area".
—(Minister for the Environment.)

Deputy Mervyn Taylor was in possession. I understand that the Deputy has agreed to share his time with a colleague. Between them they have some 25 minutes remaining.

With the consent of the House, I should like to share my time with Deputy De Rossa.

Is that proposal satisfactory? Agreed.

When the debate adjourned last evening I was talking about the Labour Party strategy in last year's local elections. I was about to indicate that the key elements of that strategy for Dublin were the following: the provision of public services which would put the public first; inner city living; quality public transport to get Dublin on the move; conservation of the city fabric and the green belt; the cleaning up of the planning system; the tackling of the housing crisis that faces so many low-income families; and the making of Dublin a safer place in which to live. I believe that those are widely shared needs. Indeed, many of them are incorporated in the motion we are debating tonight.

The first point I wish to make in relation to those needs is that it appears that the Government have already abandoned any intention to create the tier of real local government that was promised and envisaged only a year ago in the Barrington report and other documents. The revitalisation of Dublin cannot be achieved by diktat handed down from the centre, it needs real local democracy. Natural communities such as Tallaght and Clondalkin need their own district councils, a privilege enjoyed already in areas such as Bray and Sligo, which have only one-third the population of Tallaght or Clondalkin.

We have argued that a radical approach must be taken to empowerment in Dublin to enable every citizen of the metropolis to have a major input into the decisions that go into building the city of the future. Specifically, we have already called for the following. First, a democratically elected greater Dublin council to take strategic decisions on planning and transport services for Dublin as a whole. We are looking for district councils that would serve natural communities of between 50,000 and 100,000 people, which would bring local services into the heart of the local communities. We have called for the devolution of local administration to a network of local offices in neighbourhood shopping centres where people could deal under the one roof with all council and local authority services— roads, planning, parks, housing grants and so on. Those offices would become one-stop shops as it were, dealing also with social welfare, health and community information. We have promoted the use of modern communications to end the runabout that people face when having to deal with the proliferation of different public service offices, all in different locations. We say that the public have to be given a structured role in decision making through users' councils for different public services. We are asking for the streamlining of local bureaucracy and that frontline staff be given a voice in planning services. We are looking for the involvement of local communities in decisions that affect them. We seek the harnessing of municipal and community enterprise to create jobs, as was shown very effectively by the Sheffield Council and the London Enterprise Authority. We want a much stronger emphasis put on community development. Finally, we have called for resources for community groups, to include making public premises available at nominal cost; help with administration, including shared facilities; group insurance policies, to be arranged by local authorities to bring down costs, and so on. All these things constitute major improvements to local residents' and tenants' associations struggling to improve the facilities, amenities and needs of their local areas.

The next realistic issue that must be addressed is that of getting Dublin on the move. The present balance between public transport, at 30 per cent, and private transport, at 52 per cent, into Dublin city centre must be reversed to get Dublin on the move again. To do that, Dublin must have a quality public transport system to serve the consumer well. In that connection we welcome the various commitments of Government Ministers about the possibility of significant progress towards a proper rapid transport system to serve the whole city and especially the western suburbs. Nonetheless, I hope the speeches and press releases on the subject, of which we have had plenty, will soon begin to be translated into action. If it would help I would be happy to make available to the Government the Labour Party's detailed plans for light rail transport which have already been well received by the European Commission.

It has to be said that that, in itself, will not be sufficient. We have advanced detailed proposals already on a range of other changes necessary, such as new lines to Tallaght and Clondalkin, the reopening of the Harcourt Street line, new port access routes for lorries along the disused railway through Drumcondra, a democratic Dublin Transport Authority with power over public transport, road planning, traffic, parking for all of Dublin; consumers to be directly involved in planning and monitoring public transport services; a "nipper" bus network for the inner city encouraging commuters to park and ride; prepaid bus/DART tickets to permit route transfers; cycle paths along the canals and the Dodder and Tolka linear parks; the ring motorway to be completed and to be toll-free. These are only some of the ideas we have already put forward.

The population of the city between the canals has halved since 1960. With over 160 acres of derelict sites in inner Dublin and pervasive urban decay time is running out. The success of Glasgow's urban renewal, achieved mainly through housing associations, gives Dublin a model for redevelopment if the Government are prepared to provide the resources for such an undertaking. The time has come to put a complete halt to rezoning for outward expansion of Dublin in order to focus development on the inner city.

We must recognise that housing is the key to inner city renewal. Low income families in Dublin in particular know well there is a major housing crisis. There are now nearly 10,000 on official housing lists as a result of the virtual halt to public housing construction in Dublin since 1987. It is essential that a crash housing programme be initiated. In this connection, flexibility in the type of housing to be constructed must be a key feature. The practice to date of building an overwhelming majority of only three bedroomed units must be varied. For example, one and two bedroomed units and maisonettes have an important role to play; their numbers must be increased substantially. In addition, new lettings must be provided in areas where people want to live. Tenants must be given a real say in their neighbourhoods. We cannot revitalise Dublin without an active public housing programme aimed at clearing the housing lists over four years. This should include the restoration and conversion of vacant buildings, new housing and house purchase. It should also include a major expansion of the role of housing associations in the provision and refurbishment of housing and a "homesteading" programme to provide housing at nominal cost for individuals who renovate decayed housing to an agreed standard.

The Housing Finance Agency should be reinstated to fund voluntary and co-operative housing developments on sites to be made available by local authorities who already have them in their possession. In addition, community-based maintenance programmes can give a new deal to public sector tenants. There is also need for a planned programme of environmental improvements for public housing estates, especially flat complexes, with private garden space being provided for the latter as far as possible. All too often improvement projects on the part of Dublin local authorities in that regard have been held up for an unduly long period, sometimes indefinitely, in the Department of the Environment, another thing that has to be deplored. We contend the time has also come to consider the notion of community-based management of public housing with majority tenant involvement. That is one form of privatisation that might well contribute a lot to the task of community building.

Dublin's rapid housing growth over the last 20 years has not been matched by the growth in essential community facilities. In spite of great vitality new communities face many obstacles, such as lack of resources, unemployment, isolation from extended families, isolation from local services and centres of power. If we are to address the crisis in many communities some of the essential ingredients would include the following: first, the establishment of new local councils for Tallaght, Lucan, Clondalkin and Blanchardstown with power and resources to tackle local problems in those areas; second, the IDA to target unemployment blackspots in the Dublin area; third, public resources to be targeted at areas of greatest need, for example, those identified in the CODAN report. There must be a planned programme to complete unfinished areas and provide basic community facilities. Fourth, the new local councils themselves must act as landlords for all local authority housing in their respective areas. For example, the present ridiculous position of one local authority owning and purporting to administer substantial housing stocks within the functional area of another local authority makes no sense, should be abrogated and put right as a matter of urgency. Fifth, there is no reason why there should not be a programme to bring natural gas to all areas of Dublin. Lastly, we are seeking an active youth and sports policy.

Tackling crime and vandalism must be a high priority. Women must be free to walk our streets. Old people must not be prisoners in their homes which all too often, are invaded. The high cost to the community of vandalism and crime must be tackled on two fronts — through more effective policing, and tackling the circumstances in which crime breeds.

We cannot address that problem, one of the most urgent confronting this city, without recognising certain priorities which include more gardaí on the beat, a major overhaul of Garda desk and court work. Effectively the cutbacks within the Garda Síochána have been telling increasingly as the years have rolled on. One can cut back so much but eventually one finds the results we have today, with crime rampant on the streets of Dublin, so many people being terrified, gangs running wild, no gardaí on the beat in essential areas. We public representatives hear daily that people are in fear of their lives, property and homes. That is just not acceptable.

There must be a major offensive against drugs since clearly we are not making the headway that is essential there. The drug problem is worsening by the day. More resources will have to be thrown at that very serious and dangerous problem. In addition, secure units for young offenders are essential, with an active emphasis on rehabilitation. There must be effective action taken against cider parties, including the provision of attractive alternatives for young people, tackling the root causes of crime, through targeted action, thereby helping young people at risk of becoming offenders.

In overall terms the key issue to be addressed is that of joblessness. The jobs crisis is at the heart of Dublin's crisis. It is at the core of the poverty in the inner city and suburbs, the increasing incidence of family and community breakdown, the outbreaks of violence and other disturbances that render parts of our city unsafe and dangerous at night.

Deprivation has many faces in the Dublin of 1992 but, in the inner city communities, it wears not only the mask of unemployment, which affects young people and adults alike, it also wears the mask of educational neglect, homelessness and a complete lack of personal safety and security in many homes. What we have in our inner city communities is the mask of human want which is generations old in many cases. Poverty is transmitted through the vicious cycle of poor education, low self-esteem, negligible employment prospects and, finally, permanent unemployment. In most families who have experienced even one generation of stable employment and a decent regular income assets, such as a family-owned house as well as the inestimable value of a nurturing family environment are passed on to the new generation. However, for many families in the inner city, the exact opposite is the legacy which the new generations inherit.

There is a simple description for what is taking place here: it is organised inequality and injustice. I say "organised" because the failure of the State to organise effective intervention, combined with the indifferent attitude of the market sector in most cases, amounts to a conscious choice among those who have the power to ignore what is happening here. The real crime is that those with the power could make it totally different.

Unemployment stands at 20 per cent of the labour force. This is a staggering figure. It is the highest in Europe and more than twice the European average. That is a record we cannot boast of nor should we tolerate it. The unemployment rate in some communities in this city is less than 5 per cent, but in the inner city and some of our satellite suburban housing estates it stands at 50 per cent, 60 per cent and even 80 per cent and 90 per cent in some cases. The creation of unemployment ghettoes is not some tragedy of nature; it is totally manmade and is the product of greed, neglect and indifference to human dignity. The Government and the private sector, if they were of a mind to do so, have the power to make major inroads into that ill which so tragically affects many thousands of families in this city and country.

The real point is that we should not analyse this problem and expect solutions to automatically arise out of understanding. We must make the political choices which make a real difference to the life options of those currently living in our inner city communities. Of course, many would challenge the use of the word "living" and say that they are surviving in spite of the daily trials they must endure.

In summary, there are a great many measures of a very specific kind that can be taken to begin to address the problems and potential of Dublin. In the short time available to me here I have only been able to address a very few of them. Unless and until we address the heart of the problem — the unemployment crisis — which has turned Dublin into Ireland's biggest unemployment blackspot, Dublin will continue to be blighted, and many of its families and communities will see no reason to hope or to build for the future.

Dublin is a city in deep distress and in need of democratic revitalisation. The greater Dublin area which is now home to one-third of our population is a ravaged victim of neglect and abuse, inflicted by both national and local government for the past 25 years. Dublin has suffered so much for so long that its citizens have become almost numb to the cumulative damage. Since the late sixties this city has taken a sustained battering from the speculators eager to cash in on land prices and too many local councillors who have been equally eager to help them.

The same sharp practice which blessed the demolition of so much of the city's architectural heritage and crushed it under the bulldozer to make way for quick profits, has wheeled and dealed with another generation of developers, blatantly reversing planning decisions on green belts and amenities and savaging city streets and squares for major road links, which all lead elsewhere.

What have Dubliners gained over the last two decades? The answer can be given in stark figures. During the seventies there was a net increase of 33,000 jobs nationally, yet Dublin, the most heavily populated and industrialised part of the country got just 3 per cent of those jobs. During the eighties when Government policies led to the loss of a staggering 42,000 jobs between 1981 and 1989, a massive 64 per cent of these were lost in the capital. The fact that Dublin got so few new jobs in the seventies and had to bear almost two thirds of all job losses in the eighties provides irrefutable evidence of a policy of deliberate discrimination which must now be reversed.

The blunt truth is that successive Ministers in all Governments have elbowed each other aside over the years in a stampede to put whatever money was available into their constituencies, and left behind them a blighted capital, pock-marked with derelict sites, stripped of its industrial base and robbed of its old communities. The Dubliners who were uprooted 20 and 30 years ago have made new homes and new communities against all the odds, in housing estates that were planned heedlessly as little more than outskirt wastelands. Even now many of these neighbourhoods have only the skeleton of resources available to them in shops, schools, parks and medical facilities.

Over the years the people of Dublin have argued, fought and begged for the facilities for which there is such a crying need — a cheap and efficient transport system, a network of regional technical colleges to educate their children and a fair share of the jobs. However, they have met with the most cynical form of Government manipulation by the "lick and a promise" method — a touch here, some window-dressing there, and a virtual sandstorm of promises at every election campaign.

Dublin has survived on a diet of assurances that once this or that was secured boom times would follow. But where are the boom times? The Custom House Dock development which we were told would regenerate the old docks area of the city has come to nothing for the beleaguered people who live and work there. The Temple Bar scheme, one of the most hopeful and imaginative inner city plans, offers inducements for entrepreneurs but no provision for housing people which would give the area character and continuity.

Urgent action is needed in several areas if the process of decline is to be reversed and Dublin restored to its place of pride as our capital city. Clearly an urgent job creation programme for the city is the most immediate need, as so many of the other problems arise directly from unemployment and poverty. There must also be a massive housing rescue plan to tackle the growing housing waiting lists and a comprehensive housing maintenance programme to upgrade existing housing stock.

The harsh reality of life in Dublin as we approach the end of the 21st century is that many of our citizens live in constant fear of crime. To deal with this we need to establish a closer relationship between the Garda and communities in which they work, more gardaí on the beat and more patrol cars to target vandalism black spots such as open spaces, bus stops, DART stations and shopping centres where the greatest level of petty crime and vandalism occurs. We need to improve the juvenile liaison officer scheme to deal with crime and vandalism among teenagers and, in particular, pre-teen children. There should also be a proper remedial detention centre for young offenders who need custodial care.

The level of traffic in the city also requires attention. The city is being strangled by the 55,000 cars and commercial vehicles which stream across the 25 canal bridges every morning between 8 a.m. and 10 a.m. and which return again in the evening. We need a vastly improved public transport system with a light rail system as its centrepiece. Such a system should be priced and scheduled so as to encourage people who use cars at present to leave them at home.

I would like to share my time with the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Deputy Callely.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

When I heard that a motion was being put down by my colleagues in the Fine Gael Party in relation to a greater Dublin authority I thought it was a good idea but on reading the motion it is almost meaningless. It is very wooly and contains no suggestion as to what such an authority would cost or what advantages it would have. It is a ridiculous motion.

Shame on you.

We will spend the next few hours talking about a motion on which, if it had been put together properly, we could have offered very good suggestions in terms of what might be in the best interest of Dublin. When one mentions a Greater Dublin Authority one could be talking about anywhere. As the Minister asked earlier, are we talking about areas on the outskirts of County Dublin, as far as Bray, Kildare and Meath? We are not talking about a cohesive unit or about local democracy. Some Members on the other side have regularly spoken about the lack of local democracy, but here they are suggesting a huge unwieldly authority. It is difficult enough for the councils to operate in Dublin city at present, but from the proposals in this motion, it would be even more difficult for a Greater Dublin Authority to operate. In the past 12 months very little work has been done by Dublin Corporation.

Let us consider the work carried out by the previous council, of which the Deputy opposite was a member. The inner city was brought back to life. The Financial Services Centre and the Custom House Docks were developed, sites which up to then were derelict. There was no life whatsoever on the quays, as far as the Point building, but that building and other areas along the quays were developed in that period. Much urban renewal work was also carried out. In Phibsboro new houses were built by the private sector while houses were refurbished in the inner city by the local authority and old blocks of flats were renewed. This is the type of work that can be done by local democracy. Some people may say that the Minister should have less control and that we should not have to go to the Minister for approval for every penny spent. However, it is the Exchequer that pays in the end and there must be some regulation. I have often criticised Departments and said that we should not need their approval but at the end of the day it is the taxpayer who pays for the work that is carried out.

At present the area of the quays and Christchurch Place is buzzing with activity. There have been more visitors to this area this summer than was the case two years ago. The whole place has been revitalised. When the previous council were elected O'Connell Street was like Saigon before the war, with signs all over the place. It was a most dreadful looking street. The councillor opposite together with the other councillors encouraged the people who owned the property in the area to take down some of the signs in order to improve the city. That whole area has also been pedestrainised. It is wrong to say that our city is falling apart. It is coming back to life and is a great capital city. I agree that there are problems — it would be foolish to say that no city has problems — but in the county and city councils there are 130 councillors and I believe that number is sufficient to do the work.

There is a crime problem in Dublin, as in all capital cities. We should be concerned about petty crime in Dublin city because it causes misery to many people. We are tackling the problem although not as fast as I would like. This House has set up a Joint Committee on Crime, of which I am a member, who are considering ways and means of combating crime. A Greater Dublin Authority would have additional knowledge in this regard. Would they suggest that we introduce a separate police force, the Baile Átha Cliath Garda? I certainly would not support such a move. The crime problem must be tackled in an overall sense.

There is high unemployment in parts of Dublin city — it is the major problem in the country — including my constituency, but I do not believe that a Greater Dublin Authority would solve that problem any better than we can. If there is more that can be done I would certainly try to do so. The day this country solves the unemployment problem is the day it will be the greatest country in which to live. The only black spot is that many of our sons and daughters cannot get jobs.

The only black spot.

However, another level of bureaucracy will not help solve that problem. Education in the Dublin area is excellent. I have suggested in this House that there should be positive discrimination towards the inner city. Various Ministers have said that they would appoint extra remedial teachers, and they have done so. Perhaps these is still not a sufficient number, but extra appointments cost money.

I have already mentioned housing. As a Dublin city councillor I never want to see the building of vast housing estates again. At the time these estates were built it was a good idea but that is not the case now. There is a new programme of refurbishment of our present housing stock and that is where we should start. We should build up our stock. The Minister introduced a social housing programme and one of its best proposals is the shared housing scheme which will allow people to live where they wish. Under the present structure it is very difficult to transfer local authority tenants. We need flexibility. We can be proud of the new houses we are building for senior citizens in the Sheriff Street area of Dublin. They are beautiful. We can also be proud of the refurbishing of houses at the Five Lamps off Dunne Street. Beautiful new homes are being built on old properties.

What about the waiting lists?

Of course, there is a waiting list. The housing problem has changed dramatically and the city council, and the Government, are taking that into account. The Minister brought forward the idea of social housing in order to help people.

I am sure the Deputy will be happy to know that a husband, wife and three children in my area were——

Acting Chairman

Deputy, so far, we have had no interruptions and I would appreciate if the Deputy would desist.

There must have been bad representations.

We are solving the housing problem. Deputies should consider the amount of money we are spending in Ballymun. We have a few lifts which open on the same floor and there are no problems once they are looked after properly. We have the same situation in Darndale. Following my visit to Darndale I can report that the refurbishment work on the houses there is second to none. Dublin housing is the envy of local authorities throughout Europe.

That is nonsense.

We have a problem but we are sorting it out.

With regard to the transport problem, the Government have looked at it and have agreed to implement a proper public transport system. There is consensus on that issue. When in Government Fine Gael and Labour suggested a greater Dublin authority. They might as well have thrown a pack of cards in the air and watched them fall because we ended up with nothing. Under the 1991 Act three new authorities were formed, following discussions with the city manager, and we now have three county councils plus Dublin City Council. I would not like to see anything happen to the city council and I will never support the abolition of Dublin Corporation. They have made the city what it is. To do away with Dublin City Council would be to do away with local democracy. Local democracy is very important. The ordinary citizen can speak to me as a councillor and as a TD. I would not like the council to be turned into some super authority answerable to some third House of the Oireachtas. It would be ridiculous.

I have been actively involved in Dublin throughout my life and I am proud of what has happened in the past few years to bring it back to life. One could instance the Royal Hospital Kilmainham, the Custom House Docks site, the Custom House, the Casino in Marino which is a most beautiful building and the Memorial Gardens which were restored. Those improvements were carried out in most cases by the Government.

With national lottery funds.

That does not make any difference. The money came from the Exchequer and was spent in the city. I do not have any worry about spending money on a city because there will always be a return.

Mountjoy Square?

I will come to that in a minute. Regularly we hear criticism about Government Buildings but it is a beautiful building. The Government's Derelict Sites Act is being used to good effect. In a few months the Gardiner Street development will commence. Development is also taking place along the Quays. How many times have we tried to get something going in Mountjoy Square? What other incentive could we give? When the first building goes up in Mountjoy Square under this new regime that area will blossom. When that building is completed the area will benefit and return to its former beauty.

One swallow does not make a summer.

The Derelict Sites Act allows us to take over derelict sites for development, in most cases by private developers. If people wish to develop sites in designated areas they should be encouraged to do so. We have an excellent opportunity now to encourage developers. There is not any sense in being critical when something good is being done.

Acting Chairman

I would remind the Deputy that the House agreed to him sharing his time with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Andrews, and Deputy Callely. The Deputy has a little more than ten minutes remaining.

Take all the time you want, Deputy.

In relation to roads, much work has been done in the outlying parts of Dublin, for instance on the Shankill by-pass, the Western Parkway, the Blanchardstown by-pass, the Chapelizod by-pass and so on. Those excellent schemes have helped Dublin. I support a port relief route to relieve traffic congestion in the centre of the city. When, with my colleagues in Fianna Fáil, I put forward this idea we were accused of not doing the right thing.

I thank the Minister for sanctioning the £3 million for traffic planning measures.

That was thanks to this motion.

We are also delighted the Minister will allow us use any money from parking fees and so on to implement traffic control measures.

Crime is a problem in Dublin. Unfortunately, it is by no means a problem peculiar to Dublin or to any other Irish city. This is a worldwide phenomenon, a feature of urban areas with high population densities.

As a third or fourth generation Dubliner whose father wrote a very interesting book on the city, Dublin Made Me, the words of Deputy Stafford put the matter into perspective. This motion deals with the crime rate and so on but at the same time it is fair to compare Dublin of yester year with the Dublin of today. What I see happening in Dublin, particularly in the city centre, gives me great heart. The Dublin of 20 years ago and the Dublin of 1992 are totally different cities. There has been tremendous development in the centre of the city.

Tackling crime is a stated priority of the Government and of the Minister for Justice. This has been shown in recent years by the extensive resources and support provided for the law enforcement agencies, by the many anti-crime initiatives and by the ambitious legislative programme which has been pursued. I would refer the House to the law enforcement package published in December 1991 which outlines the approach and the measures the Minister for Justice is taking this year to preserve law and order and to protect the community against crime. The package deals with vitally important measures such as neighbourhood watch, the development of Garda community policing arrangements, the Garda schools programme and the juvenile liaison officer scheme. Specifically in relation to urban crime, the package provides for an increased emphasis by all the agencies under the aegis of the Minister but in particular for gardaí and for practical measures to deal with crime problems being experienced in certain urban areas. In addition it provides that Garda assessment of policing requirements in areas with greatest difficulties will be updated on a continuing basis so that effective responses can be provided as and when required.

Despite the best efforts of the Garda Síochána, the indications are that crime levels increased in Dublin last year. Immediate steps were taken by the Garda authorities to address the problem as soon as it became apparent that this upward crime trend was emerging. These steps included a highly targeted use of resources to deal with crime problems in different areas. This involved the stepping up of Garda activity on the streets, the use of uniformed and plain clothes patrols on foot and in marked and unmarked cars, and covert surveillance of known criminals in areas of high criminal activity.

No effort has been or is being spared in reviewing, assessing and improving those Garda anti-crime strategies. The indications are that they are beginning to prove effective. The level of crime in our community is determined by those who choose the way of crime. Unfortunately they are for the most part juvenile. While law enforcement on its own will not stop young people offending, the range of interventions for young offenders is widening and becoming more effective every day. For example, the services and special projects provided by the probation and welfare service has been extended. The Garda juvenile liaison officer scheme has been totally revamped. The Garda have embarked on an innovative schools programme and additional detention facilities for young offenders have been and will continue to be provided. These services alone cannot provide the climate of caring, guidance and responsibility which is required to keep young people out of trouble.

Community support for this type of approach is there. The experience of the Garda community relations section is proof of this. Over the years the gardaí have experienced an overwhelming community response to the introduction of a number of community-based schemes. The community policing schemes have put the members of the force in closer contact with the community they serve and home and property are better protected through the development of neighbourhood watch schemes in urban areas. The Minister for Justice is convinced that the way forward in dealing with crime is through increased community involvement. I share this view and I look forward to participation of all sectors of the community in helping the gardaí to deal with crime in Dublin.

One of the problems of particular concern to urban communities is public disorder by young people, about which the Minister for Justice feels strongly. To deal with such situations, the Minister for Justice intends to update the law in relation to certain public order offences. The proposals which he is considering include the creation of offences relating to (a) persons being found drunk or under the influence of drugs in such circumstances that they are a danger to themselves or to others; (b) the use of threatening, abusive or insulting behaviour in a public place and (c) disorderly conduct as, for instance, shouting, singing or boisterous conduct between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. in circumstances which cause annoyance to other persons in the neighbourhood. These new offences would carry the power of arrest and liability to substantial fines. If drink were involved the gardaí would have power to confiscate it on the spot. Presumably that would not include drink consumed.

In addition the Minister is giving priority to the preparation of a new Juvenile Justice Bill which will update and replace existing legislation. These legislative reforms will considerably strengthen the hands of the gardaí in dealing with juvenile crime. It is important that we do not fall into the trap of seeing crime in a one-dimensional way. Crime is a multi-faceted problem with roots which are both deep and extensive and we must begin to look at how the response to crime can be expanded to provide a more broadly based approach.

Urban crime is a complex problem which calls for a response from many agencies and Departments, as well as from the gardaí and the criminal justice system. This is why an inter-departmental working group are involved in preparing a special report on crime in areas which have been hard hit by criminal activity. It is expected that this review will be completed shortly and will be of major importance not only for the law enforcement agencies but for all the key Departments, including the Department of the Environment.

The Minister for Justice intends to act on that report as a priority. The crime position is being kept under constant review by the Garda authorities and all appropriate action has been and will continue to be taken by them effectively to tackle crime in Dublin.

We all recognise Dublin as famous in history and in culture. I am very proud to be a true Dubliner and to have been a member of Dublin City Council since 1985. I do not believe that the proposed authority would meet the needs of Dublin. If it did, I would wholeheartedly support it. I am pleased I am speaking after my colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, who has adequately covered the concerns of most people in relation to crime. Crime is not unique to Dublin or to any capital city.

Deputy Jim Mitchell referred to urban decline. Much work has yet to be tackled in Dublin but it will not be tackled by what is proposed this evening. We can recognise the authorities that are in place and give them more powers and resources. The appointment of a regional director is essential and this proposal is being looked at by some bodies such as the Chamber of Commerce and others who have requested such an appointment. The authorities can work effectively within the existing structures if they adopt a co-ordinated approach. Dublin City Council of which I am a member have done trojan work over the past number of years. We have enhanced and improved our city and we are continuing to look at ways in which we can improve the quality of life for the citizens of Dublin.

With the permission of the Chair I wish to share the 30 minutes remaining with Deputies Richard Bruton, Cosgrave, Owen, Currie and Gay Mitchell.

Acting Chairman

The Deputy has 15 minutes.

As I have 15 minutes, I wish to share my time with Deputies Bruton and Cosgrave, the other Deputies can work out the details later.

Acting Chairman

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Having listened to the Members opposite, let me say, as the late Deputy John Kelly would have said, while I am very fond personally of Deputy Stafford his complacency about the problems facing the city is staggering. Equally staggering was the presentation by the Minister for Foreign Affairs on the justice problems in the city. In the very short time available to me I will confine my remarks to the problem of juvenile crime and the problems young people face.

The Minister indicated that a small number of additional places were provided for juveniles, but the sad fact is that it is actually easier for a child in need to get a place in a home for young offenders than to get a place in care which might prevent him coming before the juvenile justice system. There is a serious inadequacy in our provisions for children who are in stressful situations at home and may become offenders if they are not caught early enough. This is one of my priorities. Fine Gael wish to raise many issues on this motion but I wish to concentrate on unemployment.

Deputy Stafford said that while Dublin has a large unemployment problem, it is the same all over the country. In fact, it is worse in Dublin. It is a statistical fact that the average percentage rate of unemployment in the country is in the low twenties, the average rate of unemployment in the greater Dublin area ranges from 33 per cent to 35 per cent. The Deputy knows and I know — we both represent northside constituencies — that in parts of our constituencies, and in parts of the west and south sides of the city, the rate of unemployment ranges from 70 per cent to 80 per cent. It is important that in this debate we should put it firmly on the record of this House and put it firmly in the minds of policymakers on the Government side, that Dublin more than anywhere else in the country is suffering from the highest level of unemployment. Dublin suffers very seriously from the effects of emigration. If you examine the sixth year cohorts in the past year from particular schools you will find that perhaps two out of 30 are still in this country, and this applies even in privileged areas of the city. The city has a higher rate of unemployment than anywhere else in the country and this is inadequately acknowledged and addressed. I would like to see the IDA acknowledging this and devising policies to meet the problem.

I believe a properly constructed Dublin authority would be able to argue this point. If the local authorities were given the types of powers suggested in this motion, they would be able to address the problem a great deal better. I am particularly concerned about the level of unemployment in certain areas of the city. We have looked for designated area status for the shopping centre in Ballymun but although this status was given to Tallaght and the inner city areas and had the desired effects. Ballymun, an area of high unemployment, has been refused. The Department of the Environment are committed to spending in the order of £50 million on refurbishing the estate but are refusing to grant the shopping centre designated area status, which would have a net cash impact on the estate of hundreds of thousands of pounds. If designated area status was granted it would mean that the area would have a viable shopping centre which would provide substantial employment, as has been the experience in Tallaght. Although the shopping centre would not be anything near the scale of the Tallaght centre, it would be enormously important for the locality.

I am sorry the Minister has left the House but I know the Minister of State, Deputy Wallace, will ensure the Minister is informed that I made this point particularly because I know he will look at it further and I hope he will pay particular attention to this local problem.

I believe Dublin can do better, and far better than it is doing at present under this archaic, creaking Government with what passes for city government doled out under the present administration. What other capital city in Europe would accept a situation where the elected city representatives have no say in the bus and rail services in the city; no role in promoting the city as a place in which to do business; no say in how many houses should be built for the homeless or no say in the running of a major recreational park, the Phoenix Park? What other capital city would allow three separate development plans, three separate road authorities to administer one city? The reality is that Dublin is a city where no one is in charge. Authority is scattered through every conceivable agency in the Department but the pieces of the jigsaw which are so vital to creating a coherent approach to solving Dublin's problems are scattered and they will never come together in a coherent approach to any issue facing the city.

The greatest problem facing us is unemployment. Few people realise the extent of the decline of Dublin over the past ten years. One-third of the industrial jobs in Dublin have gone over the past ten years. Half of Dublin's building workers are out of work and the key sectors which were the economic backbone of working Dublin have almost disintegrated in the heart of Dublin. The reason up to 70 per cent of people in certain corporation and local authority estates are unemployed is that those vital sectors have been allowed to decay. There is no authority trying to promote Dublin and trying to secure employment for Dublin. The reality is that Dublin faces immense handicaps — Dublin port is in decline and the Government have no policy to deal with the decline of the port. Over the past two years we have also had huge losses in the aviation industry because Aer Lingus are hampered by artificial restrictions on the possibility of opening up the US tourist market.

Fewer children in Dublin go on to third level education than in any part of the country. Everyone knows that people who have third level education have immensely better opportunities in the job market. Dublin is systematically losing out in this race. Traffic congestion in the city costs £100 million a year and crime is costing £80 million each year in the loss of and damage to property.

Last night the Minister for the Environment made a most frightful response to this debate. He scoffed at the idea of a greater Dublin authority and derided the idea of setting up local democratic bodies which are closer to the people. The reality is that the Minister's dismissive response would be similar to those who some years ago scoffed at the idea of a united Europe and that decision-making within a united Europe could be delegated down to local communities. Although this Minister and his Department occupy the most prestigious building in the city, the Custom House, they have no appreciation of the city's problems. Let us look at their social housing programme which was introduced supposedly to address the problem of the 8,000 homeless people in Dublin. The report to Dublin Corporation shows that only 19 applications under the shared ownership scheme have been processed and only 36 sites have been approved — yet we have to cater for 8,000 homeless families.

Members complain repeatedly about the democratic deficit from Brussels but the Minister for the Environment, Deputy Smith, and the staff in the Custom House could tutor the most equivocal Eurocrat about how to keep the people and their representatives down in a place of supplication and subservience. It was depressing to see Fianna Fáil giving the people of Dublin, during a recent local election campaign, the idea that Dublin was to be promised direct access to moneys from the EC Structural Funds. It was to have a local housing construction programme maintained; it was to be given a role as an enterprise agency offering grants to industry; Garda numbers were to be increased by 1,400, most of whom were to be in the city of Dublin; Dublin's councils were to be given a role in education and in the fight against crime. These were solemn promises made by Fianna Fáil prior to the local elections. Not only were those promises not honoured but this Government have turned their back on the whole concept of devolving power locally.

Fine Gael stands for the idea of devolution, of putting power back into the hands of people so that they can tackle in a meaningful way the economic and the unemployment crisis which is tearing Dublin apart. Dublin needs a radically new Government structure, it needs a greater city authority, a Lord Mayor with real authority based on election by the people and much better top management with the ability to make and deliver decisions in a meaningful way. If we could implement the concept of a Single Greater Dublin Authority dealing with its transport and economic problems we would be going a long way towards resolving the huge crisis facing Dublin at present.

You can do that when you are in Opposition.

I shall be brief because I am anxious to allow Deputy Owen in afterwards. Fine Gael's purpose in putting down this motion is to highlight the serious and ever-increasing cycle of violence affecting our city and its suburbs. My contribution this evening will illustrate instances of serious crime, vandalism and general terrorisation of residents by youths in our communities who seem to have access to unlimited amounts of alcohol and drugs leading to a complete breakdown of law and order.

Empty beer cans and cider bottles litter some of the laneways in my own constituency, a consequence of very poor planning over the years. This litter is evidence of hard nights drinking by thugs who seemingly get their kicks from terrorising residents. Mothers and fathers are prevented from getting young children to sleep, those in employment are prevented from having a good night's sleep and thus cannot get to work in the morning. Older residents, particularly those living alone, fear for their lives while these thugs shout and scream wildly out of control and play their loud music.

In one such estate in my own constituency, not far from my own home in Baldoyle, this weekend residents had their windows smashed, their walls torn down around them and they were verbally abused by drunken youths. This problem has reached crisis proportions and the Minister for Justice will have to provide an immediate remedy. In my opinion there are two solutions to this problem: one is for the Minister for the Environment to introduce legislation granting enabling powers to local authorities to close the laneways where these youths congregate in such large numbers. This would mean that rigid and time-consuming planning procedures could be by-passed. Second, in order to combat this unsocial behaviour, a dramatic increase in the number of Garda foot patrols is urgently required. At present gardaí who are carrying out their duties to the best of their ability find their efforts frustrated due to the lack of manpower on the beat. In my own area, which is policed by Howth Garda station, we have 31 gardaí and we have been constantly seeking more gardaí. They cover an area larger than Tralee, yet in Tralee there are 12 or 14 extra gardaí. The garda on the beat can deter crime and that is what we need in the area.

The DART line which runs right through my constituency of Dublin North-East is used as a conduit by youths and criminals who break into homes adjacent to this line. The line itself is not protected from trespass and as a result stolen goods, beer and cider supplies to under-age drinkers are regularly transported along the DART line. It also provides a ready-made escape route for such criminals. I am calling on the Government and Iarnród Éireann to introduce, as a matter of the utmost urgency, proper security fencing and a transport police force to protect this line in order, once and for all, to put a stop of this litany of vandalism and what can only be described as wanton destruction. Measures must be taken to protect the staff of Iarnród Éireann who on a regular basis have been victims of beatings and have been threatened with shotguns and knives. Recent reports indicate that last year 32 armed robberies took place on the line and 22 hold-ups have occurred in the area of Kilbarrack and other DART stations. The serious lack of custodial places for criminals of all ages and especially juvenile offenders must be addressed and when sentences are imposed they should be fully served.

In this and other matters there is a need for an overall approach to Dublin city. Local government reform in Dublin County Council is progressing at a steady pace and the three independent local authorities in Dublin county have now been set up. In my own local authority area — the Fingal area — there is a serious and ongoing housing crisis with 682 persons on the housing list. This causes intolerable burdens on families due to overcrowding and with the high rate of unemployment they see no way out of their predicament. These people will readily tell you that Government and local authorities have generally let them down. The cost of providing housing to the people in my constituency would amount to £25 million. The Government should declare a housing crisis and immediately establish a Single Greater Dublin Authority with an overall supremo who would co-ordinate the efforts of the local authorities and whose task should be to root out the evils that affect our city.

I understand the order is changed in so far as Deputy Gay Mitchell who will be replying is not being called until 8.20 p.m.

That is correct. If possible I should like to give a minute or two of my time to Deputy Currie.

I would be happy to give Deputy Currie a minute or two of my time also.

In this debate I am reminded of an old television show called "The Naked City" which related instances in the life of a person in a city. At the end of that programme a voice would say there are a million people in the naked city — this was one of them. There are a million inhabitants in Dublin city and county, all of whom, sadly, would have stories to relate of their own experience of the naked city. Except for the well-off I am afraid most of the stories would be sorrowful. There might be a story from one of the families on the 2,000-plus housing list of Dublin County Council, the young mother abandoned by her husband who has to divide up her children among her sisters and brothers and has to wait until the council can provide a home for her, many months later. In the meantime she lives in sorrow, separated and without her children. The story might be from a young couple who are forced to live in a ten feet by 12 feet room given to them by the family knowing that great anguish is created for the other members of that household where older brothers and sisters have to share box rooms. The story may come from one of the vast housing estates of Dublin West where unemployment figures as high as 80 per cent are not unknown and where there is bad or non-existent transport systems, where there are no health services, no schools, créche or community facilities, and where judicious use of the lottery could improve people's lives. There are many large estates where local authorities have had to abandon all maintenance programmes through lack of a decent rate support grant from this Government.

The story could come from the business person, or the job creator in our society, who is bowed down because of bad, outdated laws on valuation and by a 400 per cent increase in their rates, thereby necessitating the closing of the business and increasing the dole queues. The cry from many parts of the country is that: "Dublin gets everything" but at a recent seminar a senior trade union leader made it clear that Dublin is not getting its fair share. Per capita Dublin is getting three times less from the Structural Funds than the rest of the country. The Minister has an opportunity to use the Structural and Cohesion Funds to improve and create a decent environment for the many thousands of people who are struggling to make a living and bring up a family in this city and country.

Let us have a decision on a light rail system to improve transport out to the northside of the city — to the airport and to towns such as Swords — where most of the poverty exists. Let us see an improvement in people's conditions so that problems such as marriage breakdown, child abuse and wife battering are not exacerbated by the lack of employment and a decent quality of life. The problems in Dublin are potentially corrosive and explosive unless this Government do something about them.

I thank Deputy Mitchell for his generosity. I will concentrate on only one subject, and I hope to do it in two minutes.

The most frequent complaint made to me by my constituents is in relation to crime.

It is not just elderly. Every age group and every sector of society show the same anxieties and fears. The fears of Dubliners for their own security and that of their property is symbolised for me by the dog — the snarling dog at the side gate or behind the front door as you walk up the path; the dog walking the elderly man rather than the man walking the dog; the young girl relying on the dog for protection as she goes to the shops; the dog straining on the leash at the local store after closing time.

Man's best friend is now the symbol of his insecurity and his fear.

Unemployment, lack of housing or inadequate housing, poverty, bad planning or planning ignored, vandalism, traffic congestion, litter — all of these matters are a source of concern, to a greater or less extent, for all Dubliners. Improvement in social conditions will make their own impact on crime and the elimination of these injustices and inadequacies must of course be at the forefront of political action.

But for the great majority of Dubliners at present the chief objective is to have protection for himself, his family and his property.

There are 16,000 Dublin Corporation flats in the capital, 1,000 of which are senior citizen flats and mostly in good condition. Of the remaining 15,000 about two-thirds, or 10,000, are in need of major refurbishment. In fact they are a disgrace to Government — both local and national.

No Member of this House would aspire to live in these conditions, nor would we rest happily if our children lived in them. Yet we expect our citizens to reside in these deplorable conditions with dark, dank stairwells where drug pushers prey on vulnerable youth. Broken sewers, poor public lighing, leaking roofs, unheated flats, poor public spaces and dereliction are the order of the day. Why do we continue to allow this to happen?

The representations made by members of this House week in and week out for years has been ignored. Deputations to the corporation and the Minister are ignored. It will be too late when we have a Los Angeles type eruption in this city. People are already out in Marrowbone Lane every other week blocking the roads simply to draw some attention to the basic needs that they have and which are being ignored.

To spend £10,000 per unit, including common entrances and open spaces, would cost £100 million. To finance £100 million on the local loans fund would cost £10.4 million per year. Yet Dublin Corporation are spending £20 million a year on housing maintenance, much of it on these very flats. The most inefficient area of Dublin Corporation spending is the maintenance department. This has been highlighted in the Comptroller and Auditor General's report on maintenance generally by local authorities.

Why are we not prepared to take on this vested interest which is wasting tax-payers' money and put that money to use refurbishing inner city flats so that people can live in decent accommodation?

Poor planning, inefficiencies and lack of commitment by Government, which has now had two successive Ministers for the Environment from outside Dublin is at the centre of this housing horror.

Inner cities have shops, churches, schools, many now abandoned, and sewerage systems. It makes sense to keep living communities there, yet there is no action because there is no Government commitment.

The city of Dublin has not been totally abandoned by our leaders. In winding up this debate I want to take the opportunity, in view of the recent press comment, particularly by people who are not part of what I would call mainstream journalism, to pay a warm tribute to the religious leaders of all denominations — Catholic, Protestant, Jewish and Muslim — who tend their flocks in Dublin city both day and night. I am probably one of the few Deputies in this Parliament who represents all of those communities.

I want to say a special word of encouragement to the Catholic religious, both men and women, who may feel unappreciated in these times.

Those commentators, many of them not mainstream journalists, who gloat when they see an opportunity to kick the Catholic Church should be asked to acknowledge the great caring work done in every parish of our capital whatever the social standing of the parishioners.

These are the men and women who, though tempted with all the shortcomings of humanity that all of us have, have unselfishly dedicated their lives to something they believe in and have made huge human sacrifices in the process.

When State social services close on Friday, where do our communities turn in time of need? Who organises the youth clubs, women's groups and self-help groups? Who brings consolation to the bereaved and downtrodden?

The heroic contribution made by religious people to this capital city has gone unacknowledged.

For too long we have taken their vocational commitment for granted without as much as saying "thank you". I call on this House this evening to salute the army of selfless religious and lay people who have dedicated their lives to the service of their fellow citizens. One hundred thousand thanks to them would be an inadequate expression of our appreciation of their worth. If the State could match the religious and lay organisations in committing resources and time many of the dreadful problems this city faces might be well taken care of.

I feel in particular, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, that the State has not attempted to put its organisational power, its commitment or its resources to work in dealing with crime. What about reforming our legal system? What reforms have come out of this Government or its predecessors since 1987? They set up a committee on crime under enormous pressure to succeed the one on which Deputy Wallace and I were members until 1987. However they give the committee no powers whatsoever in a society where our capital is crime ridden, where people are living behind alarm systems and shutters. One cannot get out of one's car in this city without using an alarm or securing it with a lock. We have a city where loitering with intent is the order of the day. There are sometimes groups of up to 40 or 50 youths loitering in my own constituency and not just in one particular area but all over the place. It is commonplace to see gangs of people gathering and loitering with intent and interfering with the freedom of other people to leave their homes, old people and women in particular; young children cannot be sent to the cornershop for a message because of these go-boys who are interfering with their rights.

What action are we getting from this Government? There is no action. Why are we not taking action against those loitering with intent when the rights of people are being interfered with? Why do we have to live in a city full of shutters and alarms?

Why is the drug epidemic on the way back again? Why is it being tolerated? Why is nothing being done to deal with it? Why is it that when we set up a crime committee to deal with it, we do not give them the powers they need? Why is it that in the parks of our city, stolen goods and drugs are being sold openly? Where is the law? Where is the order? Where are the crime committee's powers that this Government have been talking about? Where is the Dáil reform they have been talking about?

Why have we not taken on the task of dealing with joblessness? Why is it that our only answer to joblessness is the gimmick of setting up yet another toothless parliamentary committee consisting of backbenchers, which the Government will not participate in while denigrating others for not taking it seriously? Where is the reform? Where is the commitment? Where is the great input from the Progressive Democrats who have not even come into the House here tonight to listen to the debate?

This Government are a callous Government, a gimmicky Government, a Government too fearful to act. They have no sense of innovation because they have no sense of the deprivation that people have suffered. They are out of touch with reality.

They have no idea how to address the problem of transport in the city. Is it possible, for instance, that we could marry the cash rich agency of Aer Rianta with the cash starved agency of CIE and its subsidiaries? Is it possible to take up the suggestion I made some months ago and consider using Baldonnel as a second regional airport, which Deputy Lawlor kindly supported, that we might be able to use Aer Rianta to invest its cash in a rapid transport system that would connect those airport through the busy suburbs of this city, through the DCU, on out to meet up with the DART in Swords, with a similar connecting rail line on the south of the city? Is that not worthy of examination? Where are the new ideas and the innovation?

The Government are bankrupt of ideas and do not care about Dublin. If we look at the Government we will see that Ministers have been chosen for geographical reasons and not for their ability or because they care about Dublin. Dublin is going down the tubes and all members of the Government want to do is get their backsides into their chauffeur driven cars. I would not deny any Minister this facility but I expect them to earn it, along with their pay and perks as they are not rewards that go with office. The Government have an opportunity to serve but they have refused to take it and have let the people of Dublin down badly. They will be judged on this at the next general election. I urge the House to support this motion which I wholeheartedly commend to it.

The people of Dublin will not be fooled by the antics of the last two nights. I am sorry I did not have an opportunity to reply.

Amendment put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 68; Níl, 55.

  • Ahern, Dermot.
  • Aylward, Liam.
  • Barrett, Michael.
  • Brady, Gerard.
  • Brennan, Mattie.
  • Brennan, Séamus.
  • Briscoe, Ben.
  • Browne, John (Wexford).
  • Burke, Raphael P.
  • Calleary, Seán.
  • Callely, Ivor.
  • Clohessy, Peadar.
  • Collins, Gerard.
  • Connolly, Ger.
  • Coughlan, Mary Theresa.
  • Cowen, Brian.
  • Cullimore, Séamus.
  • Davern, Noel.
  • Dempsey, Noel.
  • Dennehy, John.
  • de Valera, Síle.
  • Ellis, John.
  • Fahey, Frank.
  • Fahey, Jackie.
  • Fitzgerald, Liam Joseph.
  • Fitzpatrick, Dermot.
  • Foxe, Tom.
  • Gallagher, Pat the Cope.
  • Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
  • Harney, Mary.
  • Hillery, Brian.
  • Hilliard, Colm.
  • Hyland, Liam.
  • Jacob, Joe.
  • Kelly, Laurence.
  • Kenneally, Brendan.
  • Kirk, Séamus.
  • Kitt, Michael P.
  • Kitt, Tom.
  • Lawlor, Liam.
  • Lenihan, Brian.
  • Leonard, Jimmy.
  • Lyons, Denis.
  • Martin, Micheál.
  • McDaid, Jim.
  • McEllistrim, Tom.
  • Morley, P.J.
  • Nolan, M.J.
  • Noonan, Michael J. (Limerick West).
  • O'Connell, John.
  • O'Donoghue, John.
  • O'Hanlon, Rory.
  • O'Keeffe, Ned.
  • O'Kennedy, Michael.
  • O'Leary, John.
  • O'Toole, Martin Joe.
  • Power, Seán.
  • Quill, Máirín.
  • Reynolds, Albert.
  • Roche, Dick.
  • Smith, Michael.
  • Stafford, John.
  • Tunney, Jim.
  • Wallace, Dan.
  • Wallace, Mary.
  • Wilson, John P.
  • Woods, Michael.
  • Wyse, Pearse.

Níl

  • Allen, Bernard.
  • Barnes, Monica.
  • Barrett, Seán.
  • Belton, Louis J.
  • Boylan, Andrew.
  • Bradford, Paul.
  • Bruton, Richard.
  • Byrne, Eric.
  • Carey, Donal.
  • Cosgrave, Michael Joe.
  • Cotter, Bill.
  • Creed, Michael.
  • Currie, Austin.
  • D'Arcy, Michael.
  • Deasy, Austin.
  • De Rossa, Proinsias.
  • Doyle, Joe.
  • Durkan, Bernard.
  • Fennell, Nuala.
  • Ferris, Michael.
  • Finucane, Michael.
  • Flaherty, Mary.
  • Flanagan, Charles.
  • Gilmore, Eamon.
  • Gregory, Tony.
  • Harte, Paddy.
  • Higgins, Jim.
  • Higgins, Michael D.
  • Hogan, Philip.
  • Howlin, Brendan.
  • Kenny, Enda.
  • Lee, Pat.
  • Lowry, Michael.
  • McCartan, Pat.
  • McCormack, Pádraic.
  • McGahon, Brendan.
  • McGinley, Dinny.
  • McGrath, Paul.
  • Mitchell, Gay.
  • Mitchell, Jim.
  • Moynihan, Michael.
  • Nealon, Ted.
  • Noonan, Michael. (Limerick East).
  • O'Shea, Brian.
  • O'Sullivan, Gerry.
  • Owen, Nora.
  • Pattison, Séamus.
  • Quinn, Ruairí.
  • Rabbitte, Pat.
  • Ryan, Seán.
  • Sheehan, Patrick J.
  • Stagg, Emmet.
  • Taylor, Mervyn.
  • Timmins, Godfrey.
  • Yates, Ivan.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Dempsey and Clohessy; Níl, Deputies Flanagan and Boylan.
Amendment declared carried.
Question: "That the motion, as amended, be agreed to" put and declared carried.
Barr
Roinn