I am sorry that one of the Deputies, who appears to know more about the subject than anybody I have heard of for a long time, has not said something on it—Deputy Myles Keogh. That Deputy addressed a meeting in Dublin last week on the subject, and appeared to have a very much bigger conception of the whole matter than any Deputy I have heard speak in the Dáil since we first started discussing the housing question. This Bill has received a very half-hearted kind of support. It does not appear to me that we are likely to come to a point where we can say that the housing question is going to be solved, unless very much more generous support comes from the various sections. Take the statement of one Deputy. It was to the effect that certain restrictions provided for in the last Act should be removed and that other restrictions should be imposed in order to make the Bill a success. In order to allow one section of the community a sufficient amount of profit another section must have its profits diminished. To my mind, that is a selfish way of dealing with the matter.
This is a problem that does not admit of any profit being made by anybody. It is too big a problem. It will entail too much of a drain on the resources of the country. Although it would be well worth the money, I do not know that it is possible for us at this stage to foresee any immediate likelihood of such a scheme being adopted as would eventually solve the housing problem. If it be true that there is something like 70,000 houses required, and that no further municipal or national help can be given than is proposed in this Bill, you can see at once that the amount of money required is something like £14,000,000. That £14,000,000 is only a subsidy. When it is provided, and when the money is spent, we are then in the position described by two or three Deputies, that the amount still to be paid in rent is more than the people can afford. Examining the question analytically, one is inclined to ask what is the cause. Obviously, the provision of houses is too expensive. It cannot be maintained. I do not know that there is going to be any solution of the housing problem unless the cost be reduced.
When we are told that there is nothing in this Bill to provide any relief for the denizens of the slums, the question immediately arises: how does anybody else propose to relieve them? What is the suggestion that is in the mind of the Deputy who says that no relief is given in this Bill? How is he going to do it? There is no use in talking about the matter unless we can do something to afford the relief which we all desire to afford, and which, I believe, we all intend to work towards. The position, as we see it at present, is this: there are three sections of the community—those who can afford to pay for houses, those who are on the border line and scarcely able to afford to pay for them, and those who must be assisted. The needs are so great that it is obviously desirable that the first class must be dealt with first— those who can afford to pay. Even those who can afford to pay are reluctant to indulge in any building activity. One does not see much of it in Dublin where there is a very considerable demand for houses. One observes, when houses are sold, even though of recent construction, that nothing like the money which it would take to build a similar house, would be got when the house is sold. There seems to be something wrong.
The whole housing problem needs consideration by a very much bigger mind than those that have been brought to bear upon it. I read a lecture that was given by a clergyman on this subject at the Catholic Truth Society last week, and I was rather pained at it. It seemed to me as if the clergyman was dealing with conditions six or eight years ago, had no knowledge whatever of the gigantic proportions of this problem, and certainly had not laboured very hard at finding a solution of it. It is more than a question for the central authority and for the local authorities—very much more. If one examines what has been done by either of these authorities during the last ten, twenty, thirty, or fifty years, it falls immeasurably short of what has been provided by private enterprise. The Bill introduced last spring certainly emphasised the fact that you had got to bring private enterprise again into operation.
It will not be possible at present prices for the State and the local authorities to provide for the persons mentioned by Deputy A. Byrne. It would be a good thing if they could afford it—an excellent thing—because the advantages to be derived are incalculable. The evils of the slums do not require any particular picturing here—they are well known. Any resident of Dublin knows the evils of the slums, knows of the drain they are on human life. There is no use in saying that and leaving the matter there. We must make some effort, at any rate, to relieve the congestion there, if nothing else can be done.
There are cases at present where the local authority has provided houses in Dublin, and where these houses are sub-let. Where there is a big demand, that is inevitable. I have heard of cases in which the persons to whom some of the houses are sub-let are paying practically as much as the person who holds the house from the local authority. I have heard of other cases in which small houses are sub-let at a rent far exceeding the actual rent. There must be a field there for private enterprise. Despite the restrictions in the Act that was introduced last March or April, it does afford a measure of profit to the builder. I believe it is not what it was up to that, but the problem does not admit of big profits. I believe that one Deputy in this House has put up £2,000 as an experiment, to provide houses under the Act.
The objection that was urged by Deputy A. Byrne in connection with the enhanced price of building sites is an objection that can be got over. It is possible for the Corporation to acquire the sites and let them or hand them over to individuals who will build. It is possible for the Corporation to serve notice and go in within a fortnight and take possession under the Act of 1919, so that that is not a real objection. It seems to me the problem is one that ought to bring about a conference between employers and employees. Offhand I would say that very much more must be done than has been done. Even if all the operatives engaged in the building trade were to work their best for the next twenty years I doubt if they would be able to provide 70,000 houses and do the ordinary work that has to be done. That is a matter that might reasonably engage the attention of persons engaged in the building trade, tradesmen and others. I believe building must be made cheaper. You have the inevitable question raised by one to the other that the builders have too much profit and that the tradesmen and others engaged do not turn out enough work. I think there is a field there for exploration between the two, and the sooner they would get to business about it the better. The actual cost, I think, must be minimised in every way possible. We endeavoured to do it in the Act that was introduced. I think the very fact that 1,300 houses have been started under the Act shows that it has been something of a success.
In 1922, after the Provisional Government was set up, we got £1,000,000 for housing. I think out of 94 local authorities only 74 took up the scheme. Twenty of them did not consider two-thirds of the cost sufficient. One sees that in these towns no possible chance exists that I know of to solve the housing question. If they would not agree to put up one-third of the money I am afraid the State cannot hope to introduce any legislation to help them. It took two years to put up 2,000 odd houses. At least that length of time passed before the money was spent. It is not all spent yet. Deputies know that through some dispute considerable interruption took place in the City of Dublin, where four or five hundred houses are under construction. The people responsible for that, if they had any real appreciation of the difficulties of the people, or any natural feelings, would have hesitated, I think, before bringing about that dispute. In this matter I think we must have an understanding that there ought to be a round table conference between the people concerned.
With regard to the amount in the Bill, only £300,000 is provided. It is not spent yet, and it is time enough to complain of the lack of money when there is a sufficient number of applications to absorb the whole of it. I believe that the Minister for Finance will provide more money when he is asked. From the point of view of the provision of houses, I say that this Act has been even a greater success than the other proposal we put up that cost one million, and at much less cost to the State. I think Deputies will agree that the problem must be solved on an economic basis. With regard to the other matter mentioned by Deputies Wilson and Heffernan, I put it to them that apart from the very high administrative costs that would result, another point has to be considered. This Act was never intended to give help to those who are able to put up their own houses. I can understand and admit that many cases exist where small farmers are as much entitled to help under a measure like this as any other section in the community. But they will realise that a difficulty does arise there. There are some who have means other than the small farm. We never intended that the Act should assist people able to do their own building. Deputies can see that a very considerable amount of money would be spent in administration in order to make certain that the State would not contribute what it ought not to be called upon to contribute.
The really big question was the provision of a very large number of houses in the urban areas. I do not know whether the Minister has had his staff working at the highest possible pressure during that time, but I understand that the staff has been kept going on this Act since its introduction. The very fact that something like 1,300 sites have had to be inspected is evidence that a considerable amount of work has been done—very much more than under the old scheme, where only the schemes of seventy local authorities had to be inspected. In the case of Dublin, for instance, three or four hundred houses were inspected at a time. Deputies can see that where a number of houses are dotted over particular parts of the country inspection entails very much more time and costs a good deal more money in travelling. That is the objection we have to that. The objection is not to prevent small farmers making necessary improvements in their houses.
With regard to the question raised about the banks providing money, banks are conducted on such lines that the directors are the trustees for those who deposit their money. They always assert that being in the position of trustees they are not entitled to lend money for a longer period than the one I have mentioned, fifteen years. We found some difficulty even in getting them to go that far. Proposals that were made by the municipal authorities to me are not, in my opinion, any contribution towards easing that particular question. The State cannot do everything. You cannot expect to get money on long loan from the State. You cannot expect to get subsidies from the State and at the same time dry up the source of supply. It was mentioned at that time that Savings Bank deposits should be lent to local authorities for the purpose of providing long-term loans. In connection with these savings in the Post Office, the State is in much the same position as a bank. At short notice the money ought to be available, and in any case if there were money there the State has as good a right to it as the local authorities, and certainly has got as many needs, if not more.
If the Deputy has any doubt as to that, I just mention that you can take Dublin as a fair criterion of the whole country. Dublin represents about one-tenth of the valuation, and the Dublin Corporation collects in rates about £1,000,000 a year. One-tenth of the revenue is £2,500,000. Consequently, the calls on us must be two and a half times what they are on the City of Dublin.
