Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

SELECT COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 29 Nov 2000

Vol. 3 No. 14

Estimates for Public Services, 2000.

Vote 25 - Environment and Local Government (Supplementary).

On behalf of the committee I welcome the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dempsey, and his officials. The meeting has been scheduled to consider a Supplementary Estimate amounting to £121 million under Vote 25 - Environment and Local Government.

I remind members of the committee that we are considering the Supplementary Estimate only. Members may not suggest increases or decreases and the debate should be confined to the specific subheads referred to in the brief on the Supplementary Estimate. A copy of this brief was circulated with the agenda and additional copies of it, together with the Supplementary Estimate, are available if required.

On a point of order, the documentation received last week is different from the documentation we have just received. For example, regarding savings under subhead B1, the figure has increased to £50 million. In the previous documentation, it was £27 million. There is also a new item under subhead B1 in relation to expenditure for maintenance on local authority housing. Perhaps the Minister could explain the difference between the documents circulated last week and those circulated today. This would help members in terms of their comments.

I will deal with those matters during my opening contribution. I thank the Chairman for his welcome. As I said yesterday, the Government has committed itself to providing an infrastructure appropriate to a modern economy so that the economic success and the progress made in recent years can be maintained. In bringing forward the Supplementary Estimate, which is directed mainly at accelerating investment in national roads, we are delivering on the undertakings given in relation to the national development plan.

Overall, the Supplementary Estimate of £121 million represents an increase of more than 7% on the net expenditure provision in my Department's Revised Estimate. It will fund the provision of an additional £80 million for the national roads network, £45 million for the water and waste water services programme and £30 million for the Exchequer contribution to the local government fund. They are the principal spending increases for which the Supplementary Estimate provides, but it also caters for other items of a technical nature such as the new subhead of £2.8 million for partnership in local authorities.

A further new subhead has been opened to defray expenditure of £800,000 on the national spatial strategy. These increases, which amount to more than £158 million in total, will be partially offset by savings of more than £37 million on the social housing and urban renewal programmes. This leaves a net figure of £121 million. The briefing document has been circulated and I will deal with detailed questions in that regard later.

The national development plan will involve investment in national roads of more than £5 billion at current prices. It provides a clear strategy for the development of the national road network to the high standard necessary to support the continuing economic and social development and to facilitate regional development. The expanded scale of the national road investment programme also makes it possible to plan for the development of the road network in a more integrated manner than has been possible heretofore. The money is available and the challenge now is to implement the strategy.

This is a massive task for the National Roads Authority, but it has geared itself up to meet it. It has made significant progress already in delivering on the national road network improvement targets. The requirement for an additional £80 million coming on top of an historically high allocation means we are on course to achieve this.

During the year we have had significant progress on many major road schemes, including the M1, Dunleer-Dundalk, the N9, Moone-Timolin, the N4, Mullingar-Mc Nead's Bridge and the N20, Croom by-pass, all of which are expected to open by year end some six months ahead of schedule. The N7 by-pass opened in July and was almost 12 months ahead of schedule and the N25, Kilmacthomas by-pass, is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2001, again six months ahead of schedule. Progress is also being made on other major road schemes, such as the N11, Glen O The Downs, N50, the Southern Cross route, the N20, Patrickswell-Limerick. Favourable weather conditions allied to the strengthening of on-site management practices by the larger construction firms have had significant impacts on the progress of the major projects which are under way at present.

That level of activity, represented by the national development plan, will also require considerable acceleration of the road planning and design process. The year has seen continued progress in bringing major road projects to construction in the fastest possible time thereby reducing the traditional long lead in time which is averaged at five years. Efforts are being made through better and earlier public consultation and through comprehensive EIAs to reduce the potential for objections to projects. Furthermore, the Planning and Development Act, 2000, will help that. The money for advance design of projects has increased from about £9 million three years ago to just over £40 million this year.

In relation to water and sewerage services, I am seeking an additional £45 million for capital investment in the water and waste water services programme. The expected outturn of the programme for 2000 is £335 million which represents an increase of 16% in the corresponding figure for last year. The additional Exchequer expenditure will boost the major schemes element of the programme by £36 million and the balance of £9 million will be used to underpin measures which have been introduced to upgrade rural water supply systems.

There is a number of very large waste water treatment projects under way in our major cities - Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Galway - and they will absorb a considerable proportion of the overall provision. These schemes are required for compliance with the EU Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive. Other schemes will provide for water conservation in Dublin along with new supplies in Tuam and Swords. These schemes alone represent approximately 25 % of this year's expected outturn. The expenditure at this level is evidence of the progress being achieved in major schemes and the level of investment required to maintain momentum in the programme.

The rural water programme, for which £9 million of the Supplementary Estimate will be earmarked, is funded from the overall water services provision and consists of a range of measures aimed at redressing quality and capacity constraints in rural water supplies. Earlier this year I introduced an enhanced package of grants and subsidies focused on addressing the water quality issues in privately sourced schemes. New regulations require group schemes to meet all the health related water quality parameters by 2003.

A new national water quality monitoring programme will involve the testing, continuously over a 12 month period, of private water supply sources. The tests will be used to match the recent technological advances in water treatment and disinfection to individual schemes with new grants and subsidies available to groups to pay for the water treatment. All counties will have agreed strategies in place by the end of 2000 for the rationalisation and upgrading of rural water supplies.

It would be remiss of me not to mention to the committee that certain non Exchequer funding for the programme has matured more slowly than anticipated and this has contributed to the requirement for additional Exchequer funding. However, the Government has approved a policy framework for applying the polluter pays principle under which all non-domestic users of water and waste water infrastructure are required to pay capital contributions towards the cost of that infrastructure. As schemes in the investment programme announced earlier this year proceed to construction, I expect that this funding source will contribute upwards of £200 million towards the cost of the three year programme.

The local government fund introduced by this Government in 1999 has placed local authority finances on a firm footing for the first time in many decades. It is already delivering significant additional resources to local authorities. These are being used to meet the demands placed upon them by a society with diverse and expanding requirements. The fund has provided local authorities with a guaranteed source of income since its establishment and its funding base has been steadily increased annually. This year some £660 million has been made available through the local government fund to finance the cost of a range of local authority services provided by the sector.

In essence, local authorities are being provided with £195 million more for equivalent services than was the case prior to the establishment of the fund. This year a further £30 million is required to assist local authorities in meeting increased expenditure on a range of current spending items such as wages and salaries and costs related to the implementation of programmes under the national development plan.

The committee should be aware that the Exchequer contribution to the fund was determined at a time when the details of the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness had yet to be worked out and the £285 million provided this year did not take into account the additional cost arising from this source. A significant element of the additional amount to be provided by the Supplementary Estimate will be required in the context of the implementation of the PPF.

A small, but important, item in the Supplementary Estimate before the committee involves the provision of £2.8 million for partnerships in local authorities. This funding is part of a wider fund of £7 million provided by the Minister for Finance in his 1999 Budget Statement for developing partnership in the public service. The remainder of the provision will be utilised in health and education. The purpose of this provision is to provide a guaranteed stream of up front funding to enable the partnership process initiated in 1999 to be successfully implemented in the local government sector. Typically, this funding is used to provide appropriate training for management and staff and the overall process of bedding down change in local authorities is being assisted by facilitators and partnership committees which the authorities have appointed. Progress to date demonstrates that partnership has delivered results in a number of areas, such as service delivery, public image, health and safety and training programme.

The national spatial strategy acquires a new subhead of its own. The fundamental objective of that strategy is to achieve more balanced regional development while maintaining our economic competitiveness and seeking at the same time to promote the principles of sustainable development. In the main, the proposed supplementary of £0.8 million relates to the cost of expertise engaged by my Department in support of the second stage of the four stage process preparing the strategy for the end of next year.

The national strategy must deal with many complex issues. It must address the interrelationship between the location of population settlements, the location of economic activity and development, including industrial and commercial activities, and the infrastructural network such as transport, communications and services required to link our settlements and support their proper functioning. Overall, the strategy will provide a framework for the long-term co-ordination of sectoral policy formulation and implementation, including decision making on major investment in all forms of infrastructure, physical, social and human, for the country as a whole.

The savings of more than £37 million will be available to offset the additional resource sought through the supplementary. These arise on social housing and urban renewal programmes. Within the overall mix of the social housing programmes, capital savings are arising on the Ballymun regeneration programme, in particular, where appeals to An Bord Pleanála and judicial review proceedings by third parties have significantly delayed progress in carrying out the planned construction programmes. These are now out of the way and the output from the projects should accelerate rapidly.

Construction work is already under way on more than 400 houses of the 620 scheduled for the first phase of the project with the balance expected to commence over the next few weeks. Saving arising on the Ballymun regeneration programme in the current year will amount to £50 million. As an additional £23 million will be recouped to local authorities in respect of expenditure on emergency accommodation for homeless persons, including those seeking asylum, net savings of £27 million will arise within the overall local authorities and social housing subhead. During the debate in the Dáil yesterday a number of speakers expressed their concern that savings should arise in the area of social housing. As I have indicated, the savings have arisen specifically in relation to the redevelopment of Ballymun and on this project only. The funding provision of £312 million for the main local authority construction programme will be fully expended this year. We expect to achieve around 5,000 house starts this year, and house completions are likely to be in the region of 3,800 units. This could reach 4,000, but the recent prolonged spell of wet weather may hinder this.

Local authorities have been urged by my Department to front-load the construction programmes as much as possible. Uniquely, they have a carte blanche to start as many housing schemes as they possibly can. Funding for land acquisition is readily available from the Housing Finance Agency, and we are encouraging local authorities to embrace the public-private partnership principle by entering into contracts for the purchase of turnkey projects from private builders where they get a complete package of design-and-build on land owned by the developer. Local authorities have been assured that the necessary funding is in place under the National Development Programme to secure the entire programme. We are now one year into a four-year multi-annual local authority housing construction programme. The level of building activity is increasing, and I am confident we will see a much increased building programme next year.

While the main local authority construction programme is the biggest contributor to meeting the housing needs of those on the waiting lists, the voluntary housing programme is now making a significant contribution to social housing output. This year the voluntary sector will deliver about 1,000 units, which is twice as many as last year, and most of these will be let to people in need of housing and on the waiting list. The bottom line to all of this is that the Government is pursuing a determined policy to significantly increase the social housing output.

Savings of more than £10 million will arise in the area of urban regeneration this year. The simple reason for this is that the EU Commission only recently approved the relevant operational programmes. As a result the £10 million provided for the new programmes this year will not now be spent. I am confident that this lag in spending will be made good in full over the remainder of the programming period.

As the committee can see, the supplementary funding I am seeking will make substantial additional resources available for our roads and water services infrastructure, as well as providing support for the local authorities in implementing the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness and in continuing measures set out in the national development plan. I hope I have outlined the need for the additional expenditure sought.

I commend the Supplementary Estimate to the committee.

I am impressed at the way the table could be reconstituted overnight. I accept there is more accurate information in terms of the underspend on day one in relation to Ballymun. However, the point arises that if the Minister can recoup £23 million of the £50 million, he could have recouped £50 million of the £50 million and put it into additional social housing. When I was Minister, we had an early warning system in relation to under expenditure and we made sure that Merrion Street did not grab money back in relation to anything. It was always the case that every Estimates round on an annual basis was very hard fought, and one tends to hold on to anything one gets. Again this morning I heard really dire reports of the social circumstances of people without shelter, without proper access to hostels, and so on. I cannot understand why, in a very basic and superficial response - because the housing issue goes much deeper than that - some money could not have been made available to organisations such as Focus Point, given that there was under expenditure within the budget.

In line with the Chairman's request to confine our remarks to the matters before us, I would like to take this opportunity, because it is not possible on the floor of the Dáil to go into the road programme in detail, to deal with one aspect in some detail, the £1 billion provided for in the PPF in the context of hard tolling. I am deeply concerned that the Minister will get all the credit for starting all these projects while the Minister who comes after him will have the odium of dealing with the hard tolls when the booths are put up on the completion of these projects in two or three years' time, and we will be told that it was agreed at the time. My questions are specifically in relation to the roads programme. What will be the nature of the contracts for these 11 projects? What will be the buy-back period? If the traffic exceeds what is forecast, if 4% gross per annum is forecast and it reaches 9% and the contractor gets more money, will the buy-back period be shortened? Will there be an option for the Minister to buy the road? For example, if the Fermoy by-pass costs £42 million, will it be possible for the Minister to buy it at that price in the event he has excess revenue available to him? Is there a calculated APR? When one buys an item using a credit card or on hire purchase, one is told what the APR is? What is the APR on these? I appreciate they must be financed. There are two alternative ways of doing that, one of which is by way of a green tax on fuel, which would affect everybody and would be fairer. If, for example, the Minister taxes the Fermoy by-pass, it penalises the people of Fermoy more.

That brings me to the next question. There are new roads all over the country, a new motorway in each region. Some have been selected for hard tolling and others have not. How have these been selected? I can see this becoming a very serious localised political issue, and I can see independent Deputies being elected to the Dáil on foot of it, because it seems to be very arbitrary. Has the Minister given any consideration to shadow tolling, as in the UK, whereby the amount of traffic is monitored and the Exchequer makes good the money to the road owner rather than the motorist being charged? I would like answers to those questions.

I note in the Public Gallery a delegation from west Kerry - of which the Minister may not be aware as he came here in hurried circumstances - who have come all this way to highlight their plight in the context of their roads. I am sure the Minister and my colleague, Deputy Deenihan, will not miss the opportunity to deal with that. The members of the delegation are welcome, and I hope they get what they are looking for.

Throughout the country, compulsory purchase orders are in operation. I have tabled a number of Dáil questions on this issue, but they have fallen on deaf ears. Let me give an example of the problem. In my constituency there are three roads projects, one of which is the Gorey by-pass. Gorey is like Arklow, Wicklow and Bray. It is part of suburban Dublin in terms of the development of satellite towns. Farmers in the area accept that the route has been selected. However, they are refusing to let NRA staff onto their lands because the most they can get for it is £5,000 an acre. There is no land in Gorey that either the Minister or I could buy for £5,000 an acre. That price is based on a national notional figure for agricultural land. Those farmers are not looking for £50,000 an acre. Land in the vicinity has made £400,000. However, if they got a fair price, such as £15,000 an acre, they would accept that. I am told that this would be the outcome of arbitration. To say that a piece of land outside Bray is the same as a piece of land in the remotest part of Leitrim because they are both agricultural seems like theft of land. I have been through this with the IFA. I am not saying people are not generous in the context of a farm being divided. The basis of compensation is not the problem. The problem is the basic value of an acre of land. They have been told this by a firm of consultants who do most of this work, to which they have access. This is a serious growing problem.

The next area I want to deal with is D1, the water and services programme. The Department of the Environment and Local Government is a very fine Department and is doing its best. However, the relationship between the Department and local authorities is not clear. The role of the Department is one of policy and finance provision, of supervision and auditing. However, if one examines the logjam in the delay of sanitary services and the NESF report on housing, the level of expertise and the relationship in imparting best practice between the Department and local authorities is totally ad hoc. The NESF recommended a national housing authority to give the most professional advice to local authority housing units. There is a suggestion that a national water authority is needed. According to Peter Bacon's last report the SLI initiative failed to deliver houses and the north interceptor sewer and so on. The National Roads Authority was established to address strategic aims. A national housing authority and a national water authority have been proposed and there should also be a national waste management authority.

There is something wrong in the delivery relationship between the Department and local authorities. It preaches to local authorities about waste management and so on, yet there is no imparting of professional assistance, best practice and the technical assistance they need. Nothing compels local authorities to co-ordinate the recycling of waste in regional waste management plans. There are structural problems.

What can be done to improve the delivery of critical, strategic plans? The reason development land is sold for £1 million per acre is that there is not enough land with planning permission and water services. Builders tell me the provision of water services is the biggest problem. Supply is the key issue in housing. The only way to stabilise house prices in the long-term is supply. We need to construct 500,000 houses. Does the Minister have new proposals to ensure the SLI delivers services on the ground?

I refer to local authority staffing which is provided for under the local government fund. I am a member of two local authorities and my experience is that more and more directives are sent to local authorities dealing with everything from meat inspection to new planning Acts to tourism infrastructure and so on. They are not given extra administrative resources to deal with them. The acute shortage of planning staff is a critical problem both in An Bord Pleanála and in local government. This is the result of market forces. People are leaving to go into the private sector. Will the Minister consider issuing a circular to allow greater flexibility in the pay and conditions of town planning staff and other staff so that local authorities can retain and recruit staff in a competitive environment?

Such flexibility was introduced for IT staff by the Department of Finance when there was a shortage of IT personnel because it was considered a national problem. A total of 100 out of 300 posts remain unfilled. Officials are writing to applicants seeking further particulars instead of making decisions. Planners work at night and at the weekend but do not get an extra penny in overtime. Many of them are young and they cannot cope with the volume of work. My local authority has the fourth largest number of applications to process. Four years ago it received 1,100 applications while this year it has received more than 4,000 and it has fewer staff now. The problems are evident.

With regard to subhead F.15 there are more and more Leader companies, area partnerships, county enterprise boards, SPCs and county development boards and some people's time is taken up entirely with meetings. No rationalisation is proposed. Everything that is supposed to co-ordinate this adds another layer. Does the Minister have any proposals to streamline this?

The major area of difference between the national development plan and Fine Gael's plan for the nation is the question of a spatial strategy. If £40 billion is to be spent on changing the face of Ireland and addressing the infrastructure deficit, it would be a good idea to decide what goes where first or in tandem with the strategy. It will not be available until the end of next year. Almost all the major investment projects and operational programmes under the NDP will have been launched by then.

If all the houses that are needed are built, it will be no wonder if there are traffic jams if the designation of transport corridors, higher areas of urban density for housing and the shape of Ireland in 2020 is not co-ordinated. This is fundamental to organised delivery of services and quality of life. Very often deadlines lapse. Can the Minister bring forward the national spatial strategy to ensure it is more synchronised with the roll-out of the NDP?

I join you, Chairman, and Deputy Yates in welcoming the Minister and his officials. The Supplementary Estimate covers four or five main headings. The roads and sanitary services subhead contains the largest increase, £80 million under C1 for roads improvement and maintenance and £45 million of water and sewerage services. Having listened to the Minister's statement in the House yesterday and his opening contribution earlier and while I acknowledge the general point made both in respect of the roads programme and the water and sewerage programme that projects have moved at an accelerated pace, which I welcome, I do not understand where the proposed increased allocation comes into the equation.

Is the Minister saying in respect of these projects that money has already been expended in excess of what was originally estimated? If so, the committee should be given that information. Is he proposing in the remaining three working weeks of 2000 to spend an extra £80 million on roads and an extra £45 million on water and sewerage schemes?

I do not understand why we are dealing with a Supplementary Estimate for increased allocations under these two headings in 2000 and why it is necessary to do so by way of Supplementary Estimate in 2000 as opposed to providing for these allocations in the 2001 Estimates. Perhaps, the Minister will clarify that.

Why are payments being brought forward to 2000 that might otherwise be made in 2001 or have they already been made? Is this genuine increased acceleration of the programmes or is this an accounting exercise? I would like clarification.

The increased allocation is for the national roads programme and I welcome the acceleration in this regard. I join Deputy Yates in welcoming the delegation from west Kerry in the public gallery. However, as he said, one of the problems we have is that while many millions are spent on the improvement of national roads the state of country and urban roads in various parts of the country is not following suit. We are in danger of becoming a country with expensive and high standard national highways and a network of county and urban roads which do not match them and which in many cases are becoming derelict.

Part of the Supplementary Estimate covers the local government fund. When the Minister appeared before the committee last to discuss an Estimate I made a suggestion, which I will reiterate and which I would like to have taken up early in the new year. The committee should at an early date hear a presentation from the Department on the local government fund. What money has gone in and out of the fund? How is it allocated? The fund remains a mystery to me.

During the past year a needs and resources study was carried out in the Department and there is now a new basis for the allocation of funding under the local government fund. I am also aware that there is disquiet among some local authorities that the basis on which the fund is allocated does not reflect their needs, particularly in regard to community development, estate management and, for example, problems which are particular to urban areas.

I would welcome an opportunity for the committee to hear a presentation by the Department on the fund. The fund is based on motor taxation revenues, which have been a buoyant source of taxation in recent years with the increased number of vehicle registrations. However, the increase is not reflected to the same degree in local government funding.

I also refer, as did Deputy Yates, to the £2.8 million allocated to partnership in local government which is relatively small in the context of the Department's overall budget. I support partnership, including partnership in local government, but according to the Minister the bedding down of change in local authorities will be assisted by facilitators and partnership committees and so on and I am a little sceptical about the expenditure of this money. I do not agree with the Minister's assertion that partnership has delivered results in a number of areas such as service delivery, public image, health and safety and training and development.

I cannot comment at great length on health and safety and training and development within the local authority system but in regard to service delivery and public image the graph is going in the opposite direction to the Minister's claim. On service delivery, whatever the facilitators are doing, they are not causing the telephone to be answered any more quickly in any local authority. The scenario now is that when a member of the public rings a local authority, he or she speaks to a machine.

And that machine talks to another machine.

The public image of local authorities has not been enhanced in recent times. Public money is involved. Perhaps the Minister will outline how this spending is audited. Where and how is the money allocated? What evaluation is there of value for money?

The saving on housing expenditure, which was referred to yesterday during the debate in the House, relates to the Ballymun project and I regret that it was delayed for the reasons the Minister outlined and I wish it had progressed more rapidly. I am bothered that the money saved is going back into the maw of the Exchequer rather than into other social housing projects. If a project is proceeding at a slower pace, ideally other local authorities should be able to pick up the unspent money quickly.

The Minister referred to his expectation that 3,800 local authority units will be built this year. That is a major improvement as the figure was less than 1,000 in June according to the Department's statistics. However, it is still significantly lower that the number for which the allocation was made. There is a difference of almost 2,000 units when one accounts for the extra 3,000 over four years announced in June as part of the action on housing programme. Local authority housing output has consistently fallen behind its allocation for the past five years.

Exhortations, letters, the summoning of county managers to ascertain what they are doing and so on by the Minister and the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, has not produced the results. The penny must drop that local authorities, particularly as we face an unprecedented high level of local authority housing construction in a highly competitive environment, will require support to deliver on those targets. I have argued, on behalf of the Labour Party, for the establishment of a national housing authority to provide that support to local authorities in the same way the National Roads Authority provides support and leadership in the construction of our roads programme. I invite the Minister to take up that suggestion.

I refer to the extra £23 million allocated for housing in current expenditure. This is provided for the recouping of expenditure incurred by local authorities in regard to accommodation for homeless persons. I am not surprised that the £23 million represents a doubling of last year's allocation for such accommodation because as a result of the increased numbers on local authority housing lists, increased rents in the private sector, the increased number of evictions and the housing problem generally, there has been an enormous increase in the number of homeless persons. It is becoming a major problem which needs to be addressed urgently.

Many of the provisions in the Supplementary Estimate, including those relating to social housing will be dealt with in six or 12 months time but the issue of homelessness needs to be addressed this week. There is a problem with the non-availability of bed and breakfast accommodation because the number of homeless people, particularly in Dublin, has increased. Up to now, hostels were used and when they filled up, the health boards accommodated people on a temporary basis in bed and breakfasts. That worked fine up to a point. There was a degree of turnover in the bed and breakfast accommodation. People were eventually housed by their local authority and they made way for the next wave of homeless people.

However, because of the slow output in local authority housing there is no turnover and some people have been in bed and breakfast accommodation for up to a year. Health boards cannot find accommodation. Bed and breakfast accommodation is manifestly unsuitable where children are involved. Children leave bed and breakfasts at 9.30 a.m. and are hawked around the streets by their parents in and out of coffee shops, public parks and so on until 6 p.m.

I do not want to make a song and dance about this but some emergency measure should be taken immediately to acquire overnight accommodation and day accommodation to cater for families with children. I support the strategy on homelessness announced by the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, earlier this year. It will take time for that and the provision of local authority housing to kick in. I ask the Minister to address this issue before Christmas. Measures need to be taken immediately.

I agree with Deputy Yates's comments on local authority staffing. While there has been a great deal of focus on staffing in planning sections, the problem is more extensive. My local authority had three housing inspectors who deal with estate management, anti-social problems and so on, but it now has only one inspector. There is a staffing problem in every local authority section but the most pressing problem relates to planning. The vacancies, to which Deputy Yates referred, need to be filled. Not enough planners are passing through of the education system.

There are people who have a knowledge and experience of the planning system generally and it should be possible to provide a short-term course in one of our third level institutions to attract some of them into the professional planning service. I made this suggestion to the Minister previously. A typical example is a retired architect or an architect who is winding down his practice and who might be interested in working in the planning area.

I refer to the industrial dispute involving IMPACT and SIPTU at a number of local authorities in regard to the suppression of the county planning officer's post. I understand the rationale behind this in the document on better local government, but it is a bad move because when an effort is being made to recruit additional people into the local authority planning service it makes no sense to suppress the highest post. It would be similar to recruiting teachers and abolishing the post of principal. We are trying to attract people into the local authority planning service while at the same time telling them that while they can be promoted to senior planner posts, the county planner post no longer exists. That makes no sense. The Minister should intervene directly and reinstate the county planning officer post which would help to give a career structure in the planning system.

I refer to the National Roads Authority and its effect on rural areas. While roads are not the direct responsibility of the Minister, the N86 to Dingle, which was highlighted earlier and which is the busiest tourist route in Ireland and one of the busiest in Europe, has been neglected and is dangerous. I received a presentation from a group from west Kerry who were protesting outside Leinster House earlier about the state of roads in that area, and I will pass it on to the Minister. An accident occurs on the N86 every day. Tour operators are threatening not to run buses on the road, which will affect the economic life of west Kerry and Dingle, in particular, where people have made major investments. They are very concerned but the NRA for whatever reason has decided to ignore the road.

The authority's allocation for national secondary roads was small under the previous national development plan but under the new plan it is £400 million. However, if the Minister has a surplus he should direct it towards national secondary routes. Kerry is more affected than other counties because 13% of Ireland's national secondary roads run through the county. The N69 from Tralee to Tarbert carries the traffic for the Tarbert-Killimer car ferry. The ferry transports more than 250,000 cars annually but the N69 is the worst road in Ireland after the N86.

The Minister must examine the legislation which established the NRA and underpinned its independence. At the time we all thought it was a good idea to prevent politicians and the Minister of the day from influencing decisions relating to roads, but I question the legislation. The Minister must have power to direct in certain instances. If that means amending the legislation, the matter should be seriously examined because the NRA is a law unto itself.

Kerry County Council spent a year requesting a simple meeting with the authority. Eventually officials decided to travel to Kerry and they were totally dismissive of what the 27 councillors, the county engineer and the county manager had to say. Every councillor said the council was allocated money by the Minister but it could not spread it all over the county. It is not just loaves and fishes. I would like the Minister to respond to that and I will forward the presentation I received to him. One representative of the group is still in the Gallery.

The Minister and I agree that one of the greatest instruments of rural development and regeneration is the provision of sewerage services in villages throughout Ireland. If the Minister receives extra money, I ask him to divert it to this area. There are 13 villages in Kerry, including my own, which do not have a sewage treatment facility. Tomorrow my village could treble in population if it had a sewage treatment system because it would permit back land development. People are not inclined to sell road frontage because they know that will destroy any future opportunity for back land development. The funding for the Minister's three year programme in Kerry will cover only one or two villages. At the rate at which funding is provided there will not be a sewage treatment facility in a village such as Finuge for another ten years, which is entirely unacceptable.

With regard to staffing, there is increased pressure on planners, for example, and they cannot meet deadlines. Planners make most decisions at the last minute when the eight weeks is up because they must contact the applicant and inform him or her of the position. Normally they delay the process by seeking additional information. Where there is pressure on the planning sections of local authorities, would it be possible to call on a private contractor or a reputable firm to process surplus applications in a particular month? That would relieve the pressure on planners to some extent. The health of some planners whom I know has been affected; they have suffered because of the pressure. In a very scenic and tourist driven county such as Kerry, which has a precious environment, there is always tension for a planner in terms of striking a balance between granting planning permission and trying to protect the environment. That is a major difficulty.

I agree with the assertion by other Members that, given the number of committees that have been established by local authorities, being a county councillor is a full-time job. In addition to normal county council meetings, councillors now are obliged to attend SPC and sub-committee meetings. The council of which I am a member takes two days instead of one to deal with all of the items on its agenda. County councillors are extremely busy individuals. I agree with the Minister that Deputies have enough work to do without also working as county councillors. The Chairman probably disagrees with that assertion. It is very difficult for Deputies to be members of county councils if they are also obliged to carry out their various Dáil duties.

The Minister stated that because of the limited time available he could not deal with all aspects of the different programmes. His speech is a masterpiece in terms of what it does not say as opposed to what it says and I have a number of questions to put to him.

Will the Minister indicate the number of centimetres, metres or kilometres of additional roads the National Roads Authority will provide with the extra £80 million it is being allocated? Is that money merely a top-up to cater for overruns on costs or delays in the completion of contracts? The Minister stated that the National Roads Authority has "geared itself up to meet" the massive task it faces and has "made significant progress". He should make that information known to people whose areas have been adversely affected by the disruption caused by certain road projects. How many centimetres, metres or kilometres of additional roads will the NRA provide with the £80 million to which he referred?

Will a proportion of that £80 million be spent on repairing roads damaged by recent flooding? Roads that are less than five years old were damaged by flooding caused by recent heavy rain. Given the millions of pounds spent on pre-planning, the preparation of documentation and the employment of a phalanx of engineers, quantity surveyors and other experts, it seems extraordinary that a new road or a relatively new road was not sufficiently well built to allow it to cope with a heavy downfall of rain. I accept that smaller roads can be flooded when the ditches that run alongside them become overgrown and are easily inundated by rainfall. However, I do not accept, particularly in light of the amount of money spent on developing the national roads network, that any national main road should be closed during a period of excessive rainfall.

We do not experience the kind of weather which affects the United States, the Arctic or elsewhere. One does not see six or seven foot snow drifts in this country, but I accept that we experience occasional bouts of heavy rain. Can the NRA be held responsible or is it liable for mistakes made vis-à-vis the drainage of relatively new roads?

In view of the level of expertise used in planning the national roads network, why, before a road is in place for ten years, are we adding extra lanes? Why is it not possible to include the provision for additional lanes in the original plans and thereby avoid the type of disruption caused on the M50 during the construction of new junctions with the N4 and N7? I am not surprised that signs have been put up on the northside approach to the toll bridge on the M50 because this stops people leaving their vehicles and becoming involved in incidents of road rage. It is a welcome development that people seeing these signs know that they have only four kilometres to travel before passing the toll bridge. I have sat in my car on the motorway for long periods before moving from the four kilometre to go sign to the two kilometres to go sign.

There is something wrong with the fact that these roads are being upgraded and additional lanes provided only ten years after their original construction. The Minister stated it takes five or six years to proceed with a major road development. Is there no one who could identify the proper number of lanes to be provided? Is the Minister sure that an extra lane will not be needed on the M1 before it is officially opened?

We must stand indicted for the fact that, given the billions of pounds spent in the past 20 years, we do not have continuous national primary roads running from Dublin to Cork, Limerick, Galway and Waterford. When one is driving through rural areas, one moves off a good stretch of road on to what is usually described, in order to gloss over the mistakes that have been made, as "a picturesque" stretch of road. There should be single continuous primary roads running from all of our major cities to the capital. It is disgraceful that we do not have such roads, particularly in view of the amount of money that has been spent on road development.

If we had a decent primary road network connecting our major cities, the pressure being placed on roads such as the N86 and other roads in rural areas would not be as great as it is at present. In addition, roads along which major flows of traffic move would not become little more than pot-holed laneways when bad weather occurs.

What is the meaning of the Minister's euphemistic statement that "The level of activity represented by the national development plan will also require considerable acceleration of the road planning and design process"? The level of activity in respect of the national development plan is almost nil, given that the Minister is only now making an investment in respect of his spatial plan. It seems extraordinary that, after the major announcement made by the Minister, the speed of delivery vis-à-vis the national development has ground down to a snail’s pace. The level of work carried out in the first year of this four or five year plan is already well below that originally envisaged.

By the time we reach 2006 I hope the Minister will no longer be in office and that someone from this side of the House will have succeeded him. Whoever that person is, they will have to explain why in 2006 we will only have reached the level we should have reached in 2001 or 2002. The Minister is aware that in the system there are too many logjams which have not been tackled.

Under the scenario outlined by the Deputy, that will occur after a Government led by Fine Gael has held power for three years.

We will have to explain to people at that stage that we inherited a travesty of a national development plan. The Government has not made proper provision to ensure that it can deliver on that plan.

Will the Minister indicate the number of additional water and sewerage schemes that will be put in train as a result of the allocation of the extra £45 million? Has that money already been spent or have the various consultants and contractors increased their fees and costs? It has been stated the cost of various housing programmes has risen because bricklayers who began work on £600 per week sought to have their pay increased to £1,000 per week. Does a similar position obtain in this instance or will additional water and sewerage schemes be put in place as a result of the allocation of the additional £45 million?

How far behind has Ireland fallen in terms of delivery of its responsibilities under the EU Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive? If my recollection is correct, we were to ensure, by 2002, that no untreated sewage would enter the waters surrounding this country. We are a long way from achieving that goal. Are we two, four or six years behind schedule in complying with that directive and will there be a need to seek a further derogation in respect of it?

Earlier, as if he was referring to a fine cheese, the Minister stated "It would be remiss of me not to mention to the committee that certain non Exchequer funding for the programme has matured more slowly than anticipated". What is the meaning of that statement? It means the companies the Minister envisaged would come to Ireland to develop these programmes have not done so. I blame him and his Department for failing to ensure that these non-Exchequer funds did not mature sooner. Why must the State invest money to assist this maturation process to reach its conclusion? It is difficult to understand why the Minister feels obliged to make a top-up payment in this regard. He must have known whether the provision he made in the original Estimate would mature. I do not know why he feels the need to upgrade the funding on offer.

With regard to partnerships, I am not a member of a council but I do not know how councillors survive without employing a full-time diary clerk to inform them which meetings they are supposed to attend each day. The concepts of partnership and that of establishing local representative groups are wonderful but I find it difficult to know where to send people seeking help to develop a project, obtain a grant or gain access to someone with relevant expertise. Even in giving them information about five places where they might seek assistance, one will invariably forget to inform them about a sixth place where they might find what they are looking for. It is very difficult to keep up to date on these matters.

In relation to the £800,000 for the national spatial strategy, have the relevant experts been hired, are they in place, is the national spatial strategy plan in train or is this money being put in place now so it will not have to be accounted for in next year's Estimates? The Minister indicated that the £800,000 "relates to the cost of expertise engaged by my Department in support of the second stage of the four stage process". Does that mean that the money has already been spent or does the allocation refer to experts who are to be employed in the near future?

I agree with other Members that it is an indictment of our society that local authorities must recoup £23 million to help them provide emergency accommodation for the homeless. One could argue that it would be much better if we could spent that £23 million and the other £27 million that has been saved on providing long-term housing for these people. There would then be no need to spend money in an unnecessary manner to help those who are homeless. If one could put the programmes in train more quickly, one could remove people from the situations in which they find themselves.

This is similar to the position vis-à-vis hospitals where there is always a hidden list of people waiting to gain entry to the existing hospital waiting list. We are faced with a situation where councils have waiting lists of homeless people. In the past there were always two or three emergency cases where councils would find housing for families in dire need. Now, however, when one contacts the council about a person or persons who are homeless, one is informed that they are fifteenth, eighteenth or twentieth on the homeless list, not on the ordinary council housing list. This has become a major problem.

I support Deputy Gilmore's suggestion that there is a need for accommodation to be made available immediately, both in the evening and during the day, for homeless people. A number of people with whom I am acquainted are on the homeless waiting list. These individuals are living in guest houses and hostels in Dublin city, in the main, because there are no such facilities available in the Fingal area. They usually contact me from telephone boxes and one can hear their children crying in the background. At times I would swear these people make calls from telephone boxes in order to avoid being out in the cold. They try to spend the hours from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. or 7 p.m. in places where they will not be told they have no right to be. It is awful that, in the year 2000, children and young mothers are forced to spend their days wandering around the city.

At present an enormous accommodation facility at Clonliffe College, Ballybough, on the northside of the city is lying empty because the Catholic Church has no young priests to train. Discussions should be entered into with the Archbishop of Dublin to allow parts of the college to be opened to the homeless during the day. This would put a stop to the vandalism that is already occurring there. Clonliffe College is enormous and is surrounded by huge grounds. I do not know why it is not being used to provide accommodation either for asylum seekers or the homeless. I suggest that the Minister should appoint an official to investigate, before Christmas, the possibility of whether homeless people could be provided with shelter at the college.

With regard to the ability of local authorities to deliver on their housing programmes, there is a shortage of planning staff and road inspectors. Let us consider the position of Chorus which, at present, is laying new cable in every housing estate to which it will provide television signals. Roads are being left in a terrible state of disrepair as a result. I have contacted the roads department of Fingal County Council but I was informed that it cannot spare a member of staff to monitor the project and ensure that roads, grass verges and open spaces are properly resurfaced or restored. This type of behaviour by contractors will create further problems for local authorities which, in the next year, will be obliged to repair those roads.

Major delays are occurring in the planning process because of the shortage of planners and planning inspectors. Like the Chairman, who commented on this problem when representatives of An Bord Pleanála came before us, I am concerned about the employment of consultants. As a result of the current level of activity in the planning area, it is difficult to find a firm of architects or planners which is not compromised in some way. In other words, because these companies have a vested interest in the planning process it is difficult to find one that is so independent that a planning report prepared by it would not be open to question. Perhaps the Minister should consider Deputy Deenihan's suggestion that people contracted to carry out work in this area should be obliged to work solely for a local authority and sever links with the firm that employs them.

Using consultants to draft plans for county councils and private sector companies at the same time might lead to people assume that those consultants have a vested interest in granting a permission or, in certain circumstances, providing a bad report in order to protect the interests of the firm for which they work. Will the Minister indicate how additional planning staff can be employed without their being accused of having a vested interest in making decisions of a certain nature?

Despite what other Members stated, if the Minister has a Supplementary Estimate of more than £120 million to spend there is obviously an enormous amount of work being done and projects being approved by the Department in liaison with local authorities. We will not ever reach the stage where every project will be in train, but it is obvious that the Minister is making great inroads into carrying out the work outlined in the national development plan.

Deputy Owen was full of bright ideas in terms of housing people in other Members constituencies. I am not that familiar with the constituency of Dublin North, but I am sure there are locations there where people could be housed. I went for a walk around Donabate and Portrane recently——

Did the Deputy identify any likely locations?

Yes, St. Ita's Hospital.

St. Ita's is filled with patients.

It did not seem that way to me. I walked around the hospital and it appeared to be derelict. There might be a number of small units that have been newly built——

The Deputy's remarks are disgraceful. Unfortunately, there are patients housed in the part of the hospital to which he referred as "derelict".

It did not look that way to me. I accept that there are many homeless people in Dublin. One of the main reasons for this is that Dún Laoghaire, South County Dublin and Fingal County Councils export their homeless people to the city centre. If the various local authorities shared the burden and cared for the homeless people in their areas, those people would not end up living rough on our city centre streets.

I agree with Deputy Gilmore's comments on the local government fund. I am of the view that if the committee discussed that matter in the new year, it would make for an interesting meeting. More than 100,000 cars with 00-D registrations have already been sold this year. I do not know where the money obtained from vehicle registrations is going, but the local authority of which I am a member does not believe it is receiving its fair share. At a time when some Ministers have stated that the State's coffers are awash with money, certain local authorities are facing major financial crises. There is an opinion abroad among local authority members in Dublin that there has been an anti-Dublin bias in the Minister's Department for many years. Perhaps we are paranoid, but that is what people believe.

I do not know what the Minister said about Ballymun, but I heard another Member refer to the redevelopment project being carried out there. I am involved with that project and I believe the work being carried out will proceed more quickly in the future. I accept there have been many delays, which were caused by politically active people who have complained about the housing crisis and the need to upgrade accommodation. There has been a series of appeals to An Bord Pleanála, judicial reviews, etc., and the most recent information I have to hand indicates that these people have targeted the work of a housing co-operative involved in a project in Ballymun. Some people are adamant in their efforts to stop the development and, despite our best efforts, we find it difficult to communicate with them.

I was horrified by Deputy Gilmore's suggestion that a national housing authority should be established. As I recall, the Deputy also recently called for the setting up of a national waste management authority. I hope that is not on the Minister's agenda because I believe in what local government has to offer. In my opinion local government received a terrible setback in the past week as a result of the taxi dispute. I would be extremely concerned if further powers were removed from local authorities and that is what would happen if we established the national agencies to which Deputy Gilmore referred. There is no point in introducing legislation to develop, expand and upgrade the status of local government unless such legislation is supported by affirmative action. One cannot state that one supports local government and then establish rival agencies and remove powers from local authorities. If we take such a route, we should abandon the local government altogether.

Members referred to a debate that took place yesterday, but I must admit that I was not present for it. Is this the only Supplementary Estimate relating to the Department of the Environment and Local Government or will the Minister be introducing further Supplementary Estimates? As a result of a direction from the Department, Dublin Corporation is faced with paying refunds to taximen to the tune of £14 million in respect of more than 700 wheelchair accessible taxis. Would it not be proper to include that amount in the Supplementary Estimate at this stage?

Like Deputy Noel Ahern, I welcome the introduction of the Supplementary Estimate and I applaud the fact that there is a range of capital projects under way. In my county work on a large number of water and sewerage schemes has commenced. For a long period, during most of which I was a local authority member, virtually no progress was made in terms of the provision or improvement of water and sewerage schemes or in the commencement of road projects.

One of the councillors in County Clare brought to my attention the fact that consultants seem to obtain a large amount of the money on offer for large water and sewerage schemes. I accept that the NRA addressed this problem by appointing regional design teams to carry out most of its work. I do not know if figures are available which show a comparison between the costs involved in employing consultants or regional design teams, but the sum of money paid to consultants by Clare County Council was huge. It would be useful to consider the position in this regard.

On the last occasion we dealt with an Estimate or Supplementary Estimate I raised the question of the quality of environmental impact schemes. There has been no progress in this area, which is of particular concern to me. I also referred to the use of a selective tendering system by the NRA but everyone seemed to be of the opinion that there was nothing wrong with this. However, I understand that one or two court cases are pending as a result of difficulties that have arisen in that area. It should have been clear at least 12 months if not two years ago that the system used by the NRA was going to cause problems.

It would be extremely desirable if the NRA was made more accountable to Parliament because it is not particularly accountable to elected local authority members. If it was made answerable to the Dáil, Members could submit parliamentary questions on NRA projects that would have to be answered. I accept the committee is empowered to call representatives of the NRA to come before it once or twice a year. That is helpful, in certain respects, but there are ongoing matters which need to be addressed and with which it ought to be possible to deal in Parliament. The fact that the NRA is, effectively, not accountable to Parliament will lead to many difficulties in the future.

I am concerned that the huge level of work it is envisaged to carry out under the national development plan will encourage people in the construction industry to become involved in civil engineering works. This could be a factor in reducing the number of firms engaged in building new houses. As I said to the Minister on a previous occasion, the effects of the third Bacon report are being felt and the situation needs to be carefully monitored. As Deputy Yates said, we must ensure the rate of housing construction continues at the current level or, preferably, at an accelerated level. Ultimately, that is what will bring down the price of houses in the future. I accept that artificial interference with the market was required in the short-term. However, it is now necessary to monitor developments closely.

The rural water programme has been a major success and tremendous work has been done in upgrading some schemes. There is a realisation among those who operate group schemes that the issue of water quality must be addressed. These people are in a position to address it under this programme and they enjoy a high level of co-operation from local authorities. That is a welcome development.

I wish to refer to the employment of consultants to carry out other work for local authorities. For example, in the case of Clare County Council, consultants do virtually all the preparatory work in respect of local house improvement works, which costs a huge amount of money. The council is now faced with resolving a staffing issue vis-à-vis its technical personnel whose position has been affected in terms of their level of remuneration and the lack of promotional opportunities. This matter must be addressed in the immediate future. If one considers the money local authorities are spending in buying in outside expertise, one will find that many of their permanent staff could do the work for the same amount.

A number of Members referred to the fact that the job of local authority members is becoming more onerous and it is becoming very difficult for people to serve as both county councillors and Members of the Oireachtas. As far as I am aware, I am the only Member who decided it was too onerous and gave up my county council seat. I believe the Minister is correct in that regard, despite the fact that the Chairman and a number of others disagree with him. If local authorities are to become the kind of organisations they need to become, councillors must be in a position to devote more time to their work than a Member of Parliament could reasonably be expected to do.

Difficulties are also looming for virtually every county council in relation to the disposal of industrial and domestic waste. The landfill issue has already been the cause of tremendous problems. It appears that individual councils are not able to cope and there will have to be greater co-operation among councils. This is happening on an informal basis but more must be done because this matter needs to be addressed urgently.

My final point, which I have made at every meeting to discuss Estimates or Supplementary Estimates, is that social housing organisations have a positive role to play. However, in my opinion these organisations do not always receive fair treatment from local authorities. They are made jump through hoops, particularly in relation to planning matters, in a way private developers are not made to do. That is most unhelpful and I would like the Minister to make it clear to local authorities that the work done by these organisations offers one of the best ways to make progress in terms of the provision of housing. A little more co-operation would not go astray.

I thank Members for their contributions, questions and positive suggestions. I will try to cover the major themes and questions as quickly as possible. However, if I fail to deal with any of the points raised, perhaps Members could bring them to my attention later in the meeting or afterwards in order that I might provide a response.

I will begin by replying to a number of the questions Deputy Yates raised in respect of roads. He referred to the proposed tolls, the contract that would be available and the details of that contract. The contracts have not yet been finalised and the PPP process is ongoing. This process is relevant not merely to road projects but to water and sewerage, education, health and other projects. There is, therefore, a certain degree of centralisation involved. As the Deputy is aware, we have some previous experience in respect of toll contracts and, in general terms, we believe the buy-back period will be 20 to 30 years. I am sure there will also be an option to buy-back earlier than that.

With regard to the Deputy's question on traffic, under the current toll scheme operated on the West Link once the traffic reaches a particular threshold there is a payback to the National Roads Authority. There has been a pay back in each year since 1997 and it is now running at approximately £6.5 million. It is our intention to pursue that type of contract in respect of other roads. The Deputy stated that perhaps a green tax on fuel would be a better way to proceed. I am not so sure about that. He made the point that people living near Fermoy, Drogheda or wherever would be obliged to pay more tolls. They will only pay a toll if they use this road. In every instance where a tolled road will be put in place, there will still be alternative routes available. That is the difference vis-à-vis what was proposed previously. People will not be forced to use a particular road but they may choose to pay the toll if using it reduces their travelling time. That is the attraction.

The imposition of a green tax on fuel would mean that people who do not ever use motorways on which there is a toll - such as, for example, poor people in certain parts of County Kerry who do not get the opportunity to drive on a national secondary road not to mention a national primary road - would be obliged to pay for those who travel on these roads. A green tax on fuel is not the way to proceed.

With regard to Deputy Deenihan's points about funding for national secondary routes, because the EU had such a major say in previous national development plan, national secondary routes were not given as high a priority as they should have been. We are trying to rectify that in the current national development plan. The amount allocated for national secondary roads this year will be £42 million and I intend to increase that substantially as the national development plan progresses.

It is fair to state that areas on the western seaboard suffered somewhat because of the emphasis placed on improving national primary routes in the previous national development plan. I accept that there is a degree of catching up to do. I cannot instruct the NRA to invest in improving the roads to which Deputy Deenihan and others referred. However, I am in a position to make additional funding available. I will convey the views of Members on this matter to the NRA. I accept that argument the Deputy made with regard to the economic necessity of improving these roads. This applies not only to Kerry but to other counties on the western seaboard.

Deputies Owen and Gilmore inquired if the top-up payment in the Supplementary Estimate is merely money brought forward or "funny money". It is certainly not funny money. This is a matured liability; it is money that has been spent on the various works. Earlier I referred to the number of projects that had been brought forward and that had been completed six or 12 months ahead of schedule. When roads are completed quicker than expected, one must pay for as soon as possible. As already stated, this is a matured liability and it is not a question of money being brought forward.

I must inform Deputy Owen that I have not measured the number of extra centimetres of road surface provided but I assure her that these roads have been completed. However, I accept the Deputy's assertion that there is a degree of inflation involved.

Is the Minister in a position to provide a figure?

I am not in possession of a figure at present. The last official figure in respect of construction for August of last year was 12.5% inflation or thereabouts and it will probably be slightly more in the coming year.

There is a simple answer to queries about the need to add lanes to roads that were only completed five or six years ago, namely, that we did not have the money at the time. I am sure the NRA would have been delighted to have built the M50 as a six-lane motorway if it had been given the money to do so. The best it could do was build a four-lane motorway and make provision for additional lanes to be provided in the future. In the past I commented on the number of massive roundabouts on our roads - these now have traffic lights on them - and I inquired why it was not possible to build flyovers when the motorway was being built. I was informed that it was simply a case that there was a lack of money to do so. I would not like to state that we have money to burn but, thankfully, we are not under the same financial pressure now. Deputy Owen suggested that we should have motorway standard inter-urban roads and we are trying to put such roads in place now that we have the necessary funding. That is why the national development plan is geared to operate in a certain way.

One point about roads and the national development plan is that the plan is not being delivered at a snail's pace. I have outlined the projects that have been brought forward. As Minister for the Environment and Local Government and as a member of the Cabinet committee on infrastructure, I receive monthly reports on the progress being made on all roads covered under the national roads programme. I also receive reports about water, waste water, etc. Time scales are set down for the completion of road projects and all of them are ahead of or are on schedule. There is quite an amount of invisible work going on in terms of the consultation process, environmental impact schemes, etc., but such work is also on or ahead of schedule. Of the four original motorway schemes, the Dublin-Waterford project is behind the others only because the decision to proceed was taken last. However, this project is proceeding in accordance with the timetable set down.

With regard to the other issue Deputy Yates raised in relation to CPOs and the price of land, I have no role or function in deciding the price of land. Offers of £5,000 an acre may be made in Arklow, Gorey, Ashbourne, Tara or elsewhere but these do not have to be accepted. In many instances these offers are not accepted and the matter goes to arbitration. The arbitrator is completely independent. He is allowed to take into account not only the section of land that is the subject of a CPO but whether a farm will be severed or made not viable by the sale of that section of land. Accordingly, he will then arrive at a suitable figure. That is not to say that the CPO process is perfect and there are issues which must be addressed. Some of the matters to which Deputy Yates referred have also been raised by the IFA. Those matters have also arisen in the UK.

I am giving ongoing consideration to this matter. However, there will not be a bonanza for anyone in terms of the sale of land because the process must be seen to be fair. There are issues which must be addressed in terms of payment, the time at which the price is fixed and how soon the money must be paid.

In relation to the water programme and water and waste water services, Deputy Yates stated that the SLI was a failure. We have put in place the largest water and waste water services programme in the history of the State. In addition, there is the serviced land initiative which is not a failure and which will deliver approximately 80,000 extra housing sites this year. By the end of next year we will have secured in the region of 129,000 building sites. This shows that the initiative, which is partially responsible for the stabilisation of house prices, has been extremely successful during the two to three years it has been in existence.

I suppose people have unreasonable expectations that one can change what was a poor situation overnight. In fairness to local authorities, in recent years they have delivered quite well in this regard, particularly in the greater Dublin area. Fingal County Council, which is responsible for Deputy Owen's constituency, has been very active and quite successful in terms of its rate of delivery.

Deputy Owen asserted that I used flowery language when explaining why something had not matured. On "the polluter pays" principle, we initiated consultations with local authorities and the private sector several years ago as part of our preparation for the commencement of the water and waste water programme. Significant progress has been made and a circular was issued to local authorities some time ago. In addition, a new circular clarifying some of the issues that have arisen is being prepared and will be issued in the near future. We had expected that the process would be completed during the current year and that some of its positive effects would already have become apparent. However, we have not completed the process or made as much progress as originally envisaged. The polluter pays principle has been clearly outlined to local authorities which must ensure that the system they use to charge for water and waste water services is easily understandable to ordinary citizens.

Almost every Member raised the question of the shortage of planning staff, which is an issue for local authorities. The local government system cannot operate outside the general public service system; they are part of the programme for partnership and, as such, I cannot make unilateral decisions in relation to staffing levels. However, a number of local authorities are currently in negotiations to increase staffing levels and introduce new grades such as the director of services grade.

We have tried, in so far as is possible, to delegate power to local authorities to allow them to recruit their own staff. We took the unprecedented step in 1998 of asking local authorities to indicate the number of additional staff required in their planning departments. In almost all cases, my Department met every reasonable demand. There has been a net improvement in this area with an extra 54 or 55 planning staff having been taken on by local authorities since last March. However, there remains a shortage of approximately 100 planners. We are actively involved with FÁS and other organisations in promoting the concept of encouraging people to return to Ireland to work. I am due to travel to London on 9 December with representatives of FÁS to make planners, engineers, etc., aware of the opportunities that are available here.

We are involved in discussions with the Department of Finance about exercising greater flexibility - it was either Deputy Gilmore or Deputy Yates who referred to this matter - in respect of in-house staff and allowing them to take up certain employment opportunities. There was also a reference to the employment of outside or foreign firms, on a contract basis for a certain period, by local authorities. The response of the Department of Finance was very positive in terms of seeking innovative ways of using our own staff. In addition, we have secured the services of additional planners from the courses run by Dublin Institute of Technology and UCD.

I take Deputy Gilmore's point that if we could encourage retired architects and planners to return to work, they probably would not require a great deal of training. I do not know of any local authority that has refused to employ qualified planners or architects, but people who are past retirement age would probably have to be employed on a contract basis. I take the Deputy's point that it might be useful to establish a refresher course of some kind and I will contact the educational institutions about that matter.

With regard to housing and homelessness, we have given local authorities, particularly those in Dublin, carte blanche to use their initiative, in various ways, to try to ensure that the problem of homelessness is tackled in a serious manner. The Government’s strategy, which was published last May, sets out a coherent approach to be taken by the various agencies in delivering services in this area. Deputy Gilmore and a range of organisations involved in working with the homeless welcomed that strategy. We will provide capital and current funding for projects relating to this area. The figures show that local authorities, in consultation with the health boards and voluntary bodies, are preparing action plans. As far as I am aware, the plan for the Dublin area has, more or less, been finalised. That plan will set out the actions that must be taken. I understand that the director of homelessness will be appointed in the next two weeks. That is an important development.

We have given local authorities power to purchase accommodation and do whatever they deem necessary. The use of bed and breakfast establishments as a solution to the problem of homelessness is not regarded as being satisfactory. We would not desire to see children being raised in bed and breakfast accommodation. This problem must be dealt with in a concerted way with co-operation between the various bodies involved. I am glad that such co-operation is becoming widespread.

A number of Members commented on the local government fund. Despite the fact that there has been a 30% increase in sales of new cars this year, there has been only a 5% increase in motor tax payments. This is partially due to the fact that many older cars due to undergo the NCT are being scrapped and, therefore, do not need to be taxed. In addition, a huge number of second-hand cars are lying idle and unsold on garage forecourts because there is no market for them at present. I am investigating this matter to see if there are other, more sinister reasons, for the difference between the number of new cars sold as against the percentage rise in motor tax payments.

Deputy Gilmore inquired about the possibility of the committee discussing the local government fund and the needs and resources model. Such a discussion would be very useful because the system is complicated but fair. Briefly, the local government fund was made up this year of £374 million net from motor tax and the Exchequer contributed a further £285 million. Because of the arrangements we have in place, we secured £1.4 million in interest on the fund which gives a total figure of £660.4 million.

The expenditure commitments under the revised general-purpose heading amounted to £369.484 million. We allocated £260 million to non-national roads, £6.25 million to group water schemes and £6.2 million to vehicle registration at Shannon. There was a carry-forward into 2000 of £18 million and we have this Supplementary Estimate of £30 million. There is a balance of a further £18 million which is made up of a £5 million settlement in respect of fire-fighters, £4 million for one stop shops, £4 million for the PPP fund, £4 million for the community warden service and £2 million for local authorities' financial management system.

I welcome the Supplementary Estimate, which provides a clear indication that action is being taken. I apologise that the meeting was cut short as a result of the time constraints that apply. I thank the Minister and his officials.

In my opinion, the Minister must have been confident coming before us in light of the massive sums of money he has made available to local authorities and the number of projects he has put in train throughout the country. There is no doubt he will be remembered as one of the greatest ever Ministers for the Environment and Local Government. I am sure that by the time his term of office is complete the N86 to Dingle will have been completely resurfaced.

Barr
Roinn