Joe O'Toole (Independent)

What I like about it is that all businesses will have an equal vote in that first decision whereas businesses might have a different contribution to make when it comes to paying for it. We should look at it in a positive way, which is the way I want to look at it.

I see dangers, however, in that some people might get involved in trying to make improvements to their streets but cannot get the support of their colleagues or the other businesses in the area. I could foresee streets becoming very run down while others forge ahead. Perhaps that is the nature of competition and there is nothing we can do about it but I have to say, because I know no one else will have said it, that the fundamental question being begged is the funding and the authority of local authorities. My view on that has been consistently clear.

Local authorities are underfunded and are still suffering from the abolition of rates in 1977. We must examine issues like water rates, and I want to be clear about the way I see that working. People should not be charged for water for everyday use but if I have a fleet of cars and two swimming pools, the local authority should not have to provide the water to wash those cars and fill the swimming pools. There is something obscene about the fact that if I have a fleet of six cars and two swimming pools, the local authority provides the water to fill those pools and wash the cars and everybody is paying part of it.

I make that point deliberately, before people argue on the grounds of equity that everyone is entitled to water. Everybody is entitled to water, but the reality is that it is very costly on local authorities to provide it. The intention always was to provide water for all the valid reasons going back to the yellow plague in terms of dealing with issues such as dysentery, cleanliness, etc. However, that is now being interpreted by people to mean they are entitled to all the water they want. That was never the intention and I wish to emphasise that.

There is no other country in Europe in which water is used in the way our citizens use it. That is not something of which I am particularly proud. One sees notices on the sides of buses to the effect that water is precious and should be conserved. We need to do more than that. People should be given all the water they need for living, washing and the basic requirements of running a house. Once it goes beyond that some form of charging should be looked at. I do not want to be quoted as saying, "He is in favour of water charges". I am in favour of them in those circumstances, where a limit is put, and once that is reached then the situation must be examined.

What the Minister of State is proposing here is another form of rates. Effectively, the local council is saying that it would be great if it could introduce improvements in a particular street and do all the positive things outlined in the Minister of State's speech, with which I agree. This is what may be described as a "needs must" type of legislation. The local authorities do not have the money to do these things. Is it not the case that there has been a good deal of talk about development costs and the local development charges that have to be paid? There has to be significant understanding that they are necessary, but they are far too high.

In a recent debate Senator Bannon raised the matter of high development costs. They have increased well beyond the rate of inflation because they are trying to meet another need. If 24 houses are built in an area, the local authority gets paid a development fee from the developer. From the day the developer walks away the houses are a charge on the local authority, without any income being paid to it. Nowhere else in Europe, or perhaps the world, does this happen. It does not make any sense, regardless from what viewpoint one looks at it.

I do not suggest we start charging people for something they have always had. We need to have at least an understanding, however, as to how all these matters should be approached. It is creating an increasing drain on those councils in whose areas large numbers of houses are being built and no income is accruing from this to the local authority. I do not believe that can continue forever.

This raises the question of how we get the business community to do something. How do we get something positive done in this area? What is good about this legislation is that it will give people a sense of pride in their space, their sense of place and their area. I recently met a group of business people in Limerick who spoke about one of the weekly markets which is owned by the local authority. They want to put a roof on it because it is popular with local people. When it is raining it is not that pleasant. This an ideal example of what the Minister of State is talking about, where people come together for this type of enterprise and put all that is needed into it

I wonder, however, about the level of consultation the Minister of State might have had with local businesses about this. Those involved in the Dublin City Business Association were mentioned. However, they are not very good in terms of reflecting that view. I look at Senators Bannon and O'Rourke, for instance, and think of the town of Athlone. One might want to improve the streets in the centre of the town, given that all of the businesses have transferred to Golden Island or the new place on the other side. There are many empty shop units in Athlone that cry out for development. There are beautiful streets and lanes there. However, one wonders whether the money will be available to develop the area because in this case it is a question of whether the initiative is demand-led or supply-led.

Everything the Minister of State refers to is concerned with streets where there are active and successful businesses trying to improve their space. If one wants to breathe new life into a street, however, and create a nice shopping area, shopfront or streetscape and there is nobody there before one starts, one is on a loser. The difficulty in those cases is that streets which were not being patronised will relapse. Is there an answer or is this just pie in the sky?

One can see this happening in almost in every town in the country and it is something the Joint Committee on Enterprise and Small Business considered at length when the groceries order was under review. The joint committee considered situations where businesses move to the edge of town with the centre dying on its feet. I do not have the same concerns in this regard as other people. I have seen this happen in other countries. Over a period of years the inner part of the town tends to become a place where bijoux and specialist shops are located. It is a different type of shopping in which the big businesses are no longer involved. It is boutique-type shopping, even involving boutique hotels and various similar developments. However, this is a slow process. What the Minister of State talks about would not help to increase the pace of change because the people and the successful businesses are not there.

I wonder whether this can be extended towards improving streets and areas where there is nothing to make them more attractive. The answer, when the Minister of State comes to answer that question, is to ask from where will the money come. The money is not there. I recently met with members of local authorities just after the Minister had made the comment that they were flooded with money——