asked the Minister for Local Government what is the average length of time it takes for a planning appeal to be determined by his Department.

On the basis of appeals decided during the year ended 31st March, 1968, the average period taken from the date of receipt of an appeal to the issue of a decision was approximately 30 weeks where no oral hearing was required. Of the cases involved, approximately 45 per cent were decided within 24 weeks and 18 per cent within 16 weeks. In the case of appeals in which an oral hearing was required the average period was 42 weeks.

(Cavan): Could the Minister give an approximate idea of the time it takes between the oral hearing and the decision?

Approximately ten weeks.

(Cavan): Six months is a bit long.

41.

asked the Minister for Local Government the number of planning appeals in his Department awaiting sanction (a) for under three months, (b) for between three and six months and (c) over six months.

As the reply is in the form of a tabular statement, I propose with your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, to have it circulated with the Official Report.

Following is the statement:—

Planning appeals awaiting decision (a) for under three months, 384; (b) for between three and six months, 283; (c) for over six months, 368.

42.

asked the Minister for Local Government if he will state (a) the number of appeals against refusal of planning permission by Dublin Corporation which have been submitted to him in the past 12 months and (b) the number of cases in which his Department reversed the decision of Dublin Corporation.

The number of valid planning appeals against refusals of planning permission or approval by Dublin Corporation received by me in the 12 months ended 31st October, 1968, was 197. To date, nine of these appeals have been allowed and 16 have been allowed subject to conditions.

43.

asked the Minister for Local Government if it was a condition attached to or prerequisite for planning permission given to build houses on an open space at Orchardstown Park, Templeogue that a contribution of £5,500 would have to be made to buy alternative open space; whether, when on appeal he reduced the amount of £5,500 to £2,400, he was satisfied that the latter sum was adequate to purchase similar space in this area; and the basis for adopting the sum of £2,400.

It was a condition attached to the permission referred to by the Deputy that a contribution of £5,500 should be lodged by the developer with the county council towards the cost of acquiring alternative open space in the neighbourhood. While I agreed with the planning authority's decision that the case was an appropriate one for requiring some contribution from the developers I considered that the amount of the contribution they stipulated would increase the cost of the six proposed houses excessively and accordingly I reduced it to £2,400.

Seeing that the Minister was satisfied that £2,400 was adequate to purchase a similar open space, does he now know whether such a similar open space has been purchased or is available for that amount? The condition attaching to this was that it was for the purchase of similar open space.

I consider that £5,500 for two-thirds of an acre was an exorbitant charge.

Is a similar open space available in this area for £2,400, the price the Minister fixed?

I do not know whether or not a similar open space has been purchased but I certainly consider that £2,400 is an adequate price for two-thirds of an acre.

Will the Minister agree that the reduction from £5,500 to £2,400 is directly related to the personnel of the appellants?

No, it is related to the fact that it was proposed to build six houses here and that an addition of approximately £1,000 to the cost of each house would be exorbitant and something for which I would not be responsible.

Particularly if the appellants were members of the Minister's own Party.

This is not so.

Is the Minister not aware that one of the appellants is a Member of this House and a member of the Minister's Party?

He is, of course.

It was based on no such consideration.

Are Members of this House not to get justice? Is that Deputy Lindsay's contention?

They will get this kind of justice only if they are members of the Fianna Fáil Party. This is a method that has been used by the Minister to give a present of £3,100 to a member of his own Party, a Member of this House, and his in-laws who were the developers in this case.

A contribution of £8,250 per acre is an exorbitant price.

Why was Deputy Lindsay not present here yesterday when the Taoiseach exposed him?

He did not mention the Kelly case nor any other case and he gave a lame explanation for the Gaeltarra Éireann one, which nobody accepts.

Deputy L'Estrange apologised, in fear of the consequences——

I certainly did not. I am raising the matter on the Estimate for the Department of Justice.

And so shall I—and I shall repeat every one of them.

Order. I am calling on the Minister to reply to Question No. 44.

Is the Minister serious when he says he does not know the name of the appellants?

Will the Minister please answer Question No. 44?