There has been very little criticism levelled against the Minister or his Department. I am not going to offer any criticism, because the Minister, since he came into office, has done a good deal by way of helping with housing, and he has been ably assisted by his very efficient staff. There is, however, a matter to which I should like to refer, which has been already dealt with by Deputy Davin, and that is in connection with bricks. We, in Dundalk, are very near the Border. Unfortunately, at the moment there are no bricks manufactured locally, although some years ago bricks of a very fine quality were manufactured there and at an economic price, which is the main factor with regard to bricks. At the same time, in Northern Ireland there are many brickyards at present manufacturing large quantities of bricks of good quality—ordinary stock bricks—which could be delivered in Dundalk and towns immediately adjoining the Border at a price varying from 63/- to 70/- per thousand. The price asked for ordinary stock bricks manufactured in the Free State, as far as my information goes, is in the neighbourhood of £5 per thousand. Even allowing that the average price of Northern Ireland bricks is 70/- per thousand, there is a difference of 30/- per thousand between that and the price of bricks manufactured in the Free State. That difference of from 30/- to £2 in the price would mean for an ordinary house, which would take 15,000 to 20,000 bricks to erect, that there would be an increased charge for rent, if such a house were rented by a public authority, of anything from 1/6 to 2/- per week, which is a very important factor when one considers the capacity of people to pay high rents at present.
There is also the other point of view which I should like to put before the Minister, and that is the very large number of craftsmen who have followed the trades of bricklayers and stone masons. It is a very ancient craft. The craftsmen engaged in this trade have been responsible all down through the ages for erecting great buildings in different countries, buildings which have excited the admiration not only of the people who lived in these particular countries but also of the people who happened to visit them. If this system of forcing people to use cement as the chief commodity in the erection of the houses as against brick or stone is persisted in, there is a great danger that in a few years we shall have no bricklayers or stone masons in the country at all. Again, as Deputy Davin pointed out, there is a very serious difference of opinion not alone amongst architects and engineers, but also amongst medical men, as to the relative value of cement houses and brick houses. The general opinion amongst the ordinary public is that a brick house is much drier than a concrete house. Anyone who has any experience of building knows that it is very difficult to make a flat roof of cement waterproof. If you walk along the streets on an ordinary damp day, even when it is not raining, you will notice a sort of sweat appearing on footpaths made of cement. That also occurs in kitchen floors made of cement. You can visualise what it means to little children coming down on a cold winter's morning to a kitchen with a cement floor. According to medical testimony, it has been the cause perhaps of a great increase in that terrible disease, tuberculosis. I would impress upon the Minister the advisability, if it is at all possible, of allowing public authorities to erect brick houses when they are willing to do so. The difference in the cost of erection of a brick house and a house built of solid concrete or concrete blocks, say, 4½ by 4½, with a cavity between, is very slight. The difference in the cost would be from £10 to £15, and I know from experience that, as far as the people of Dundalk are concerned, they are prepared to pay 6d. a week extra for brick houses as against concrete ones. I know that the Minister's policy, representing that of the Government, is "all out" for increasing industries in the Free State, a policy with which, to a certain extent, I agree, still, in connection with house building the Minister might, without militating against the manufacture of bricks in other parts of the Saorstát, allow a certain quantity to be imported from Northern Ireland.
The same argument holds regarding the prices of other commodities used in the erection of houses. I am bringing these facts before the Minister, because I know that he is doing all he possibly can to have houses provided as cheaply as possible, in order that the rents may be low. Sometimes, I think, he does not get that co-operation that he should get from all concerned in the building of houses. It is with a view to assisting him that I suggest it would be no harm if he, or some of his officials, gave some attention to the great difference that exists between the cost of timber in Northern Ireland and in the Free State. As regards mouldings, floorings, scantlings, and timber used in the manufacture of windows and doors, the difference in cost is enormous. It is possible to import timber for these articles from Northern Ireland, and to pay the duty, and to have it cheaper than it can be got in the City of Dublin, or in any other city in the Free State. The same may be said about slates. It is well known to everyone who reads the newspapers, and who takes an interest in local affairs, that as regards the supply of Irish slates, the thing is a joke. Where orders were given to Irish quarries six or eight months ago, there is no hope, even to-day, that they will be fulfilled. I am not decrying the work of the Irish quarries. I know that they have been inundated with orders from all parts of the country, and that it is impossible for them to meet the demand. That being so, the Minister there, as in the case of bricks, should consider the question of allowing a certain quantity of slates to be imported, so as to enable builders, or private individuals, whose operations are being kept back on that account, to proceed with their work.
Anyone who has experience of the building trade knows that any little delay means more cost in the erection of houses. Once a builder starts with his work he likes to have the stuff coming along in rotation, because delay means that the work is going to cost him more, and incidentally the person for whom the house is being provided. I hope the Minister will give these matters serious consideration, especially in the case of bricks and slates.
A good deal has been said regarding the erection of cottages. I am not going to dwell on that now, except to say, in answer to Deputy Corry, that I would like to see the rate of interest as low as possible. It is not easy sometimes to secure that. The Minister has to borrow the money, and sometimes he has to pay a rate of interest much higher than he would like to pay. I cannot see much hope of a reduction in interest charges at present unless, in the near future, it is possible to float a loan, which would enable local bodies to reduce interest charges by one per cent. or two per cent.
In reply to Deputies who made a comparison between the number of cottages built by the late Government and by the present Government, I would remind them that some years ago, when the late Government was in office, it was much more difficult to build houses than it is now, even though it is difficult now. The rate of interest some years ago was much higher, and the cost of building was higher than it is now. I would go as far as to say that if houses had been erected on a large scale some years ago an intolerable burden would have been placed on the finances of the State, as well as on the people for whom the houses were built, in the form of higher rents. When making a comparison of the houses built by the present Government and by the late Government many circumstances have to be taken into consideration. I take the view that all Governments would like to build as many houses as possible, because they know very well that good houses are essential for the welfare of the people.
The Minister is aware that numbers of tenants of houses built by public bodies would like to purchase their houses. It seems that under the last Housing Act passed by the Government urban councils are precluded from selling the houses to the tenants. As these bodies were empowered to do so in previous Housing Acts, a certain amount of dissatisfaction exists. I know that to be the case in Dundalk. The Minister was in that town lately opening new houses—I am sure he was pleased with his visit, as we all were— and I think one of the matters referred to was the question of the purchase of the houses by tenants. As far as I know the tenants are anxious to purchase in the same way as the tenants who occupy houses erected under previous Acts. As ownership creates a spirit of civic responsibility, it would be appreciated if it was at all possible for the Minister by order to allow urban authorities to sell these houses. It would relieve local bodies, such as urban councils, from a heavy item of annual expenditure on repairs. If a person knows that his house will be his own he will take greater interest in it, and will carry out certain repairs at much less cost than they could be carried out by local authorities.
Some confusion exists as to whether persons who are not drawing home assistance at present will be entitled to a supply of free milk under the milk scheme. I do not know if the Minister for Finance has decided that question. I do not think the Minister has made any regulation as to whether persons who are not receiving home assistance are entitled to free milk. I know that next September the carrying out of the scheme will be entrusted to the authorities in the urban areas, and that other changes will be made. Pending that, I would like the Minister to let the House know what is the exact procedure regarding the distribution of milk.
I have not very much more to say except to mention, in reply to Deputy Davin, that I do not think that a housing board would be of much assistance to public bodies. I think that public bodies will be able to carry on very well. The only thing that I can see that militates against housing at the moment is the cost, and there, again, I would like to see a little more co-operation in endeavouring to reduce the cost of building. That seems to be a point that is not adverted to by very many people. It might be a rather unpopular point, but it does seem strange that the cost of house building to-day should be three times what it was in pre-war days. What the cause is I do not know. I know that the State is doing all it possibly can, and I think that there should be some reduction in the cost of building. It would be to the interest of all concerned and might make for more continuity. It would also, amongst other things, mean more constant employment and more houses. The Government has done its part and I think the general public should do a little as well in order to help this very worthy object of the provision of houses for the people. I hope the Minister will do all he can to meet the points I have raised, especially in regard to the imports of bricks and slates. They are two very important things in connection with the erection of houses. Bricks and slates are two building commodities, at the moment, which are agitating the minds of those engaged in house building in the towns situated along the border, and I hope the Minister will give that matter favourable consideration.