asked the Minister for Local Government and Public Health if he will state whether he is aware that in the District Court, Dublin, on the 27th June, a large number of decrees for substantial arrears of rates was given without any stay of execution against occupiers of the Irish Sailors' and Soldiers' Land Trust, in Dublin, and that on the 2nd July a large number of similar cases was brought before the District Court at Kilmainham, and there adjourned; and whether in view of the fact that the report of the committee of inquiry set up to investigate the position of the occupiers of the trust has not yet been published, and the Government intention with regard to that report not yet been announced, he will take steps to see that the position of these occupiers will be clarified at once, and the intention of the Government made known; and that in the meantime no seizures will take place arising out of any of the cases dealt with in the District Courts.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Sailors' and Soldiers' Land Trust.
I am aware that the Dublin Corporation took legal proceedings to recover rates due by occupiers of these houses in certain cases. I understand the valuation of the houses occupied by the persons against whom court decrees were obtained takes those houses out of the category of small dwellings and that being so the occupiers are legally liable for rates. No further clarification of the position is required. I have no power to interfere with the execution of decrees of the courts in regard to arrears of rates. The matter rests entirely with the Corporation.
Is it not a fact that, as the Minister informed the House in reply to a Parliamentary question, a commission was set up in April last year to inquire into this whole business, which reported in May, yet no publication of that report has taken place, and no statement has been made of the Government's intention? Further, is the Minister aware that, as pointed out, the corporation have not proceeded for rates for a number of years up to the present; and does he not consider it wrong, inequitable and contrary to public interest, that these proceedings should be taken now, when there is a report dealing with the whole matter lying with the Government for the last 12 months? Will the Minister take steps to see that these actions and seizures are stayed until the Government publishes the report and makes some kind of a public declaration as to what it intends to do arising out of the report?
The matter of publishing the report is under consideration. I cannot say when it will be published, or when a decision will be come to. I do not think the publication of the report would help this matter, or in any way help in regard to the particular proceedings which have been taken. I have stated in my answer to the question put down here that the corporation is legally entitled to collect the rates on these dwellings. They have got decrees, and I have no right to interfere. It is a matter for the corporation.
Will the Minister not admit that the corporation had the same legal title last year, the year before, and the year before that, and that they did not act on it?
Possibly.
Does it not seem quite unreasonable that a corporation such as the Dublin Corporation would now act "out of the blue" as it were and at a time when the tenants, the corporation and everybody else are waiting for a disclosure of the contents of that report—whatever it may be—so that whatever action might be taken would be taken in the light of a disclosed Government policy following a complete inquiry? Does the Minister realise that there are households where they have allowed arrears of rent to mount up to £30, £40 or £50 and, as a result of a threat that seizures will be made, the people concerned are disposing of their property, some of which was taken on the hire purchase system? To avoid losing more even than the corporation would be entitled to get by reason of the hire purchase furniture being seized, they are getting rid of their furniture. I ask the Minister to realise that a grave injustice is being done to unfortunate people who have no way of assisting themselves and into whose case the Government caused an inquiry to be made more than a year ago, and that more than a year ago they have got that report. I submit to the Minister that, in any circumstances, action like this should not be allowed to progress without the Government's policy being stated; and, in the stress and circumstances of to-day, it is madness.
It is a matter entirely for the corporation. Apart from any report—although it has been stated, and I accept it as true, that the corporation have not proceeded this year—I cannot imagine any people thinking they can escape rates. That is something entirely new.
Can the Minister imagine how any Parliament or any people can accept it that the Minister would have a report of the whole circumstances of the case lying in his office for more than 12 months and would not disclose that and, on the basis of that report, state the Government policy? Does the Minister not realise that, if the Government were to state that it was Government policy that these people should be made pay rent and rates on their dwellings, there is a problem of arrears due to be met and there should be some kind of public discussion and understanding that arrears accumulating over a lengthy period cannot be collected now unless the sheriff is sent in where they are not paying.
I would like to know if it is now a generally established legal principle that local authorities are entitled to recover rates from the occupiers of these houses.
That is a matter for the corporation to deal with.