We will have to deal with the amendment as it stands, and to deal with it in connection with the clause to which it has reference. At present we are dealing with arrears and payments in lieu of rent, and we will come to the question of prices afterwards. The Deputy's intention is to ensure that where-ever there was a genuine agreement for an abated rent, that that shall be the rent, but his intention is defeated by his own amendment. His amendment reads: "For the purposes of this Part of the Act and of the Schedules attached to the Act, rent, whether on a judicial holding or otherwise, shall be understood to mean any abated rent accepted by a landlord for a period of at least 5 years previous to the first gale day of the year 1921, provided that such abatement was not given by way of payment for services."
Now, apart from the question of payment for services, I suppose any number of specific reasons could be given as to why a landlord reduced a rent and gave an abatement. The landlord gave an abatement, as the Deputy pointed out, for services rendered. A tenant's holding perhaps may have adjoined a piece of untenanted land, and a landlord may have come to the owner and said, "If you drive in my cows every morning, I will allow you a shilling in the £ off your rent." That, I hold, is not a genuine abatement of rent. Then, there might be a case where you had a reasonable landlord who had been on good terms with a tenant. Let us suppose that the tenant died, and that the landlord went to his widow and said, "I will allow you a 50 per cent. reduction on your arrears if you try and pull up a bit." That, I hold, would not be a genuine abatement either.
In any case it would be quite impossible to cover, by any general rule, the reasons or circumstances under which abatement of rents are given, and it will be quite impossible to provide directions for the Land Commission which would enable them, without having recourse to a judge, to say, in every case, whether abated rent was the real rent or not. Deputy Gorey's amendment states that an abated rent "shall be understood to mean an abated rent accepted by the landlord for a period of at least five years previous to the first gale day of the year 1921, provided that such abatement was not given by way of payment for services." The five years to the first gale day referred to in the amendment would cover the years 1916 to 1921. There were very few abatements in these years; in fact I think abatements were taken off during that period. On the other hand, a man might have got an abatement for 10 years, and yet his rent would not be a real rent; there might be a case of a man who only got an abatement for one year, and in that case the abated rent might be a real rent. It all depends, I say, on circumstances, and whether there was an agreement between the landlord and the tenant for a new rent, an agreement based on the value of his holding for rent purposes. Deputy Gorey's amendment would rule out hundreds of genuine cases, and would let in hundreds of bogus cases. Amendment No. 18 on the Order Paper, in the name of Deputy Hennessy, covers the point much better than Deputy Gorey's amendment, and covers it in the only way in which it can be covered. I am accepting Deputy Hennessy's amendment. Before I read the amendment, perhaps I ought to read the Section. The matter is dealt with in Section 20, Sub-section (3): "Any question arising between a tenant and a landlord regarding the accuracy of any particulars furnished pursuant to this Section shall be determined by the Land Commission in accordance with rules made by them, save that in the case of a holding subject to a judicial rent the record filed in the Land Commission shall be final and conclusive in all matters appearing thereon, except that where the judicial rent was fixed before the 1st day of April, 1899, the adjustment provided for by Section 54 of the Local Government Act, 1898, shall be taken into account in determining the amount of rent."
Deputy Hennessy's amendment, dealing with the matter, reads:—"In Section 20 (3), page 8, line 58, after the word `rent' to insert the words `and save that any question as to whether an agreement for an abated rent was in fact an agreement for a new rent or any question as to the amount from which the deduction of 25 per cent. is to be made in ascertaining compounded arrears of rent and payment in lieu of rent shall be determined by the Judicial Commissioner, whose decision shall be final.' "
That enables the High Court Judge to take the circumstances into account, and to see whether in any particular case the abatement was given by reason of services rendered, or was given gratuitously by the landlord, or as an admission of the fact that the old rent was too high, and that the new rent should be fixed. This is the only possible amendment that would cover all the cases, and that would do justice in all the cases. It would be quite impossible to provide a form of words in an Act of Parliament that would cover all cases, some of which may be extremely complicated and varied. There is no way of doing it except to leave it to a judge to say whether the rent is an abated rent or a real rent. I am accepting Deputy Hennessy's amendment. I could not accept Deputy Gorey's amendment, because it does not carry out the intentions which both of us have in mind, that where there is a genuine agreement for a new rent, that that shall be the new rent.