Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 29 Feb 1944

Vol. 92 No. 14

Committee on Finance. - Vote 41—Local Government and Public Health.

Minister for Local Government and Public Health (Mr. MacEntee)

I move:

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £10 be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1944, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Local Government and Public Health, and certain services administered by that Office, including grants and other expenses in connection with housing, grants to local authorities, sundry miscellaneous grants and Grants-in-Aid, and certain charges connected with hospitals.

The purpose of the Supplementary Estimate is to enable us to give effect to the provisions of the Housing (Financial and Miscellaneous Provisions) Acts, 1932 to 1944, under which we are enabled to give grants to private persons, public utility societies, local authorities and philanthropic societies for the building, reconstruction, acquisition, alteration, etc. of dwelling houses. As will be seen from the face of the Supplementary Estimate, it is a purely nominal one and is merely intended to give us authority to proceed on the basis of the Acts as passed by the Oireachtas. The amount will not exceed £10.

Mr. M. O'Sullivan

Might I ask if the Supplementary Estimate covers the question raised on the debate on the Housing (Amendment) Act with reference to the Charlemont Public Utility Society?

Mr. MacEntee

Yes, that is one of the purposes.

Mr. A. Byrne

I should like to ask the Minister to what extent the grants are being availed of by private persons for putting houses in order and if tenement owners in Dublin have the right to make application to put some houses in good order that are unfit for habitation in the City of Dublin.

Mr. MacEntee

I am not in a position to deal with that. The Act is confined merely to houses which have been built in rural areas by private individuals or public utility societies and, in urban areas, by public utility societies. It does not deal with individuals.

Mr. Hogan

I believe the Government are anxious to build houses. I believe they are giving a very good lead in that respect and have done very good work during the years they have been in office. I want, however, to put this seriously to the Minister and to ask him to take serious notice of it. To my mind, it is a very serious matter in connection with the erection of houses. It refers to private individuals who endeavour to erect houses for themselves and who have had to collect a couple of hundred pounds and then go to the local authority and borrow money from them. There is very little use in giving grants unless the loan that is given is of some value to the person who endeavours to build a house for himself. The best way I can put this to the Minister is to give a concrete example of what happens in respect of a person who puts £300 or £400 together and then goes to the local authority to borrow the money to erect a house for himself. I will give him exact figures which I have checked up, because a statement in respect of this appeared in a local newspaper and I made it my business to go to the local authority and check up on the figures.

Here is what happens. A man gets a loan of £535 from the local authority. He pays 13 instalments of £8 7s. 10d. each. In that time he has paid a considerable amount of money. But out of that he has only paid off £49 14s. 9d. of the original loan. The local authority say that out of £33 11s. 4d. that he pays £7 16s. 0d. is all of the original loan that he has paid off—the rest is interest. He has to make annual payments for 35 years and for that loan of £535 he pays back £1,174 16s. 8d. That is the total amount that he pays for the loan of £535. In other words, he pays back the £535, plus £639 16s. 8d. interest, or £104 16s. 8d. more in interest than the amount of the loan he got

I want the Minister to consider whether, while that system of loan, that price for money, is in operation people are likely to try to build houses or to borrow £500 or £600 from a local authority and pay back at least two and a half times as much in 35 years. That is the one point I want to put to the Minister, and I think it is worthy of consideration. The grant that is available is of no value so long as that system continues. Nobody will attempt to build houses so long as that price for money is in operation. No one can change that except the Minister.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy raised very wide issues on a token Vote of £10.

Mr. Dillon

I do not propose to follow the Deputy into the broad question of the creation of credit and the cost of it to this country. But there is a matter in regard to this grant for houses which I wish to put to the Minister. I think everybody is strongly in favour of housing grants and the building of houses in any way we can. But all these excellent schemes are materially injured if something approximating to fraud begins to manifest itself in connection with the administration of them. I want to communicate to the House a case that came before the Public Accounts Committee and which, I think, was commented upon, but which no one seems to have taken any notice of, and which, in my opinion, will seriously affect the whole of this housing business if allowed to continue.

A gentleman in County Leitrim applied for two housing grants in respect of two houses. The grants were authorised, and he was told to proceed with the building. The gentleman built two houses in one block. One of the houses had three bedrooms and a drawing-room, and nothing else. The other house had only a kitchen, a scullery, one bedroom, and out-house, a lavatory and, I think, a bathroom. There was no kitchen in the other house, only three bedrooms and a drawing-room. The second house had, I think, a lavatory and a bathroom, but certainly a kitchen and a scullery, and, I think, one bedroom. The inspector, when he came to inspect this pair of houses, said: "These are not two houses at all; there is only one house." The gentleman said: "No, there are two houses, and I want two grants." He got two grants. The inspector went back after the fellow had got the grants and found that he had broken in a door between the two houses, and, so far as my recollection serves me, he had converted the hall-door in one of the houses into a window.

Mr. MacEntee

When did this happen?

An Ceann Comhairle

Administration generally does not arises on this, and, if it did, it would be administration for one year. If my recollection serves me aright, that exact case was raised a year ago. Perhaps I am wrong.

Mr. Dillon

Are steps going to be taken in this administrative year to see that a gentleman is not going to be able to build a drawing-room, a dining-room and three bedrooms in one house, and a bathroom, a lavatory and a kitchen in an adjacent house, and get two grants for the two houses; and then break a door between the two and close up one of the hall doors? If that is allowed, the whole housing scheme will become a notorious swindle. I understand the Minister to say that he has taken precautions to ensure——

An Ceann Comhairle

The administration of this year does not arise. It would be relevant on the main Estimate.

Mr. Dillon

As regards this £10, will any of it be given to any gentleman——

Mr. MacEntee

I can give the Deputy an assurance that it will not.

Mr. Dillon

But I want an assurance that that practice is not going to continue. This Supplementary Vote is—is it not—for housing?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair wants to see that this debate will not develop on too wide lines.

Mr. Dillon

Is it not for housing?

Mr. MacEntee

No.

An Ceann Comhairle

Not generally.

Mr. MacEntee

It is, in the general sense of the term, but its particular purpose is to enable us to implement the amendment of the law made in the Housing (Amendment) Act this year, whereby we are empowered to recoup public utility societies which had built houses in urban areas for slum clearance the expenditure they had undertaken.

Mr. Dillon

If the Minister wishes to restrict the matter so rigidly——

An Ceann Comhairle

Not the Minister; the Chair.

Mr. Dillon

I want now to say a word about public utility societies. That certainly comes within the scope of this Estimate.

An Ceann Comhairle

To a limited extent.

Mr. MacEntee

In urban areas.

Mr. Dillon

Surely we are not going to let public utility societies——

Mr. MacEntee

The Bill deals with private persons who erect houses in rural areas and public utility societies in urban areas.

Mr. Dillon

Then, in regard to public utility societies in urban areas—

Mr. MacEntee

To be precise, the money is to assist public utility societies which have undertaken schemes for the purpose of housing persons who have been dispossessed by slum clearance schemes.

Mr. Dillon

I am going to talk about public utility societies until I am stopped. There are certain public utility societies in this country and they get the person building the houses to make the application for a grant through the society. This House knows how they arise, as regards 95 per cent. of the new public utility societies: they were Fianna Fáil clubs. That is a notorious fact. There were four or five respectable old public utility societies before 1933, and they were functioning and working in the interests of the public. Then an attempt was made by the Government to turn all the Fianna Fáil clubs into public utility societies in order to provide a £10 bribe in the erection of houses.

An Ceann Comhairle

In urban areas?

Mr. Dillon

Urban and rural.

An Ceann Comhairle

Rural societies do not arise.

Mr. Dillon

For the purpose of this £10 Estimate.

An Ceann Comhairle

I should like the Deputy to understand the procedure. On a token Vote or small Supplementary Estimate, administration is not discussed.

Mr. Dillon

What is supposed to be discussed?

An Ceann Comhairle

Very little on a token Vote. Long discussion is most unusual. Administration is not discussed. If I mistake not—indeed, I would lay a wager on it—the exact words about Fianna Fáil clubs have been used by the Deputy on two other occasions on the main Vote for Local Government. Surely it does not arise now.

Mr. Dillon

I refuse to believe that you have brought before this House a token Vote on which there can be no discussion at all.

Mr. H.M. Dockrell

On a point of order, I would like to ask you if this Vote is not for £5,000, which is the additional sum required, less savings of £4,990? Now, the difference between these two sums is £10, but, with great respect to you, I submit that it is an Estimate for £5,000 additional money.

An Ceann Comhairle

It is not a main Estimate.

Mr. Dillon

It is a Supplementary Estimate for £5,000. Here is the note. I am not influenced by what the Minister chooses to say ex parte. We are bound, I understand, by the note on the Estimate and it says: “Grants to private persons, public utility societies, local authorities and philanthropic societies for the building, reconstruction, acquisition, alteration, etc., of dwelling-houses.” That is what we are bound by, Sir. The Minister has no right, in my submission, further to restrict the debate by a personal assurance to you that he is going to forbear from doing certain things under this Estimate which the Estimate authorises him to do.

An Ceann Comhairle

The facts are under S (2).

Mr. Dillon

The note is quite clear.

An Ceann Comhairle

This is for "Grants under the Housing (Financial and Miscellaneous Provisions) Acts, 1932 to 1944."

Mr. Dillon

Yes, to provide "Grants to private persons, public utility societies, local authorities and philanthropic societies for the building, reconstruction, acquisition, alteration, etc., of dwelling-houses." There is nothing about urban areas there.

An Ceann Comhairle

Granting that the amount is £5,000, the original Estimate for Local Government was £1,500,000.

Mr. Dillon

The original Estimate was £50,000 for this purpose. This represents an increase of 10 per cent. —a 10 per cent. increase for distribution, in my submission, amongst the Fianna Fáil clubs which are masquerading as public utility societies. I do not mind that so much— that scandal has gone on for ten years —but where the Fianna Fáil clubs are being allowed to function as soi-disant public utility societies and to operate to deprive the beneficiaries of the grants of their money, I object strenuously. My attention has been drawn on more than one occasion to grants being made under this subhead to public utility societies, for conveyance by them to the grantee, and I have known grantees to stand out of their money for 12 months.

Mr. MacEntee

I challenge the Deputy to mention a case.

Mr. Dillon

I mentioned one and drew the Minister's attention to it.

Mr. MacEntee

I challenge the Deputy now in the House to mention a single case.

Mr. Dillon

I wrote about a case to the Minister personally. It was investigated by the Minister.

Mr. MacEntee

When?

Mr. Dillon

Within the last three months. I am not free to mention the person's name.

Mr. MacEntee

Can the Deputy mention the society in question?

Mr. Dillon

I do not propose to mention the subject of our correspondence across the floor of the House. I challenge the Minister to deny that I was in correspondence with him in the last three months, in regard to a case where a public utility society withheld the money from the grantee. The Minister wrote, over his own hand, to me, that the public utility society had not carried out the completion of documents, and he would allow the grant to be paid out to them only when they had completed the documents he wanted.

Mr. MacEntee

Would the Deputy give me leave to answer that question now?

Mr. Dillon

Fire away!

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy did write to me some time ago—I do not know exactly whether three, or four, months ago-in respect of one case, the case of the South Roscommon Public Utility Society, regarding the erection of a house for occupation by a certain person in Frenchpark, Roscommon. I dealt with the case, but I also dealt. with it on this Bill and this Estimate last year, as it had been, in fact, raised then by Deputy Dillon. This is the case of one particular society. There is no use in talking about public utility societies in general. The matter of this society was raised so far back as 1936.

Mr. Dillon

And this interesting fact emerges now, when it is raised for the fifth time in the House. The matter was raised in 1936 first and it was discussed until November, 1943. For seven weary years the same disgusting scandal, first raised in this House in 1936, has continued to go on, until I, personally, intervened with the Minister, under threat of further exposure in Dáil Eireann, and brought it to an end. It started in 1936 and it reached maturity in 1943 and is, no doubt, continuing still. It so happens that one grantee comes to me in 1943 and says: "The scandal you first revealed in 1936 is still going on. We are still being held out of our money, because this public utility society said to itself that it will not complete its forms for years after failure to do so was first brought under the attention of the Minister for Local Government and Public Health."

An Ceann Comhairle

In fact, the Deputy did raise that on the main Estimate.

Mr. Dillon

I did. I am sick raising it and will raise it again and again: and every time there is a Supplementary Estimate brought before this House for Fianna Fáil clubs converted into public utility societies I will raise it.

Mr. Carter

Nonsense, and the Deputy knows it.

Mr. Dillon

What is nonsense?

Mr. Carter

There is no such thing as Fianna Fáil clubs being public utility societies.

Mr. Dillon

I know it to be perfectly true and I now state that the primary object in providing £10 additional for persons in rural Ireland applying through public utility societies was a corrupt effort to force people to join Fianna Fáil clubs and apply through that agency for their housing grant. The Government provided that additional £10 bribe in order to enable local Fianna Fáil clubs to bring pressure to bear on local persons to apply for grants in that way. I do not want to reopen that now.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy has dwelt on it for a quarter of an hour.

Mr. Dillon

I want to secure that public utility societies so constituted will be required to conform to the terms of the law, and see that the person who applies for grants through that medium will get them within a reasonable time. As the Minister points out, I raised this matter in 1936, and on every main Estimate down to this. Here, in 1943, the Minister is obliged to confess that, in respect of a society first brought to his attention in 1936, he has to take executive action from his own office before he can secure for the grantee payment of a grant to which the Minister knows that grantee was entitled. Surely, if we are to vote, time and again, money to public utility societies for the purpose of the Housing Acts, we should distinguish between the honest public utility societies, which are old-established and respected institutions in the State, and the new breed of public utility societies, constructed for the purpose of recruiting members of the Fianna Fáil Party, which societies have now drifted into a condition in which they are an inefficient and incompetent blister on the body politic and on the housing schemes at present in operation. I ask the Minister, before he comes to the House again for money to be distributed through public utility societies, to give this House guarantees that the public utility societies through which he proposes to operate will have completed their statutory duties and conformed to the requirements which he prescribes in order to ensure that they are bona fide bodies, and that any public utility society which has repeatedly failed promptly to discharge its statutory obligations will be dissolved, so that the grantees will not be left out of their money in the future, as they have been in the past.

I should expect from the Minister an eager willingness to collaborate with me in putting an end to these abuses rather than his attitude of apparent, indignant repudiation of the case I am making. He knows that the case, I am making to him is true and just. He knows that a great many people in the country have been cruelly ill-treated by these societies and he ought to put an end to it. I warn him that, unless he does, every time Estimates of this kind come before the House I shall remind it of the true state of affairs in relation to these public utility societies and press in every way I can for their prompt reform.

Mr. Bartley

I should like to avail of this opportunity to pay my meed of praise to the work the public utility societies have done for the very poor applicants. The societies have had to conform to the statutory requirements and have their accounts audited. If they did not do that, they were struck off the list. Apart altogether from the £10 grant, the main service which the public utility societies rendered to the applicants for houses was, in my opinion, in the matter of obtaining credit for the supplies of materials. My experience has been that, in the very backward districts, particularly, these people were refused credit for supplies of building materials and, if it were not for the co-operative efforts of the public utility societies, they would not have been able to build their houses. A great many people who are now enjoying the blessing of dry and sanitary houses would not have that blessing if it were not for these co-operative methods. I do not know of any other method better calculated to serve the people in this respect than that of the public utility society. I think that it is quite unfair that the vast number of these societies should now be pilloried in this way—

Mr. Dillon

The Fianna Fáil clubs.

Mr. Bartley

There may be exceptions, as there always are where large numbers are operating but, taken generally, I think that these societies have rendered very good service. That service has now been interrupted because they are not operating to any large extent at present. My intention in rising was primarily to agree with Deputy Hogan. I am very much concerned with the question as to the large element of interest contained in the rents of these houses in urban areas. But I do not think that making representations to the Minister or to the Government will bring about any alteration——

Mr. Hogan

What will?

Mr. Bartley

I have a suggestion to make to which Deputy Hogan's organisations could probably give effect better than any other bodies I know: I refer to the trade unions. I mentioned this at the last general election in Galway. It is a matter of very considerable importance in Galway City, where rents are high. The trade union movement has the necessary organisation. Some of these trade unions are very wealthy—perhaps the wealthiest bodies in the country. With their membership, they could procure good, safe tenants. What I think they should do is demonstrate to the Government how this element of interest could be cut out.

Mr. Hogan

Somebody would want to give a lead to the Government.

Mr. Bartley

I understand that what I suggest was done somewhere in Europe after the last war; I think it was in Vienna. I am not sufficiently acquainted with the details——

An Ceann Comhairle

Following another Deputy, Deputy Bartley is now very wide of the Estimate.

Mr. D. Morrissey

The Transport Union gave the Government £50,000 free of interest.

Mr. Pattison

And nobody seemed to have followed the good example.

Mr. Bartley

The question is of vital interest in urban areas. If a demonstration were given, such as I suggest, it would be up to the Government to adopt the scheme, if it were successful.

An Ceann Comhairle

That is outside this Estimate.

Mr. Hogan

It is a good job that the Deputy has more faith in the trade union movement than he has in the Government.

Mr. Moran

Will the Minister give an undertaking that the "respectable societies", consisting of the unrepentant Unionist element, will comply with the law?

Mr. Corish

I should like to know from the Minister to what extent local authorities have availed of the grants open to them and if he will give any indication of the policy of his Department at the moment so far as the housing of the working classes is concerned. Anybody who has anything to do with a local authority which has been endeavouring to build houses in recent years knows that it is confronted with an impossible task. Repeated representations have been made to the Minister and his Department by the Council of Municipal Authorities, which represents all the urban authorities, but without avail. One wonders what policy the Minister has in mind so far as the post-war period is concerned——

An Ceann Comhairle

That is also extraneous.

Mr. Corish

The Minister has a housing board at his disposal, and we should like to know if that board is considering the future of housing. They should not have much to do at the moment, and they would be well employed in applying themselves to that task.

An Ceann Comhairle

That does not arise on this Estimate.

Mr. MacEntee

In replying to the debate on the Estimate for my Department, I dealt at some length with all the questions Deputy Corish has raised, and I explained what our attitude was. I do not think it is necessary for me to add to what I said on that occasion. I do not propose to follow Deputy Hogan into the very interesting field which he has opened because, as you have indicated, Sir, the subject would not be in order.

Mr. Hogan

The Ceann Comhairle has not ruled the Minister out at all. Perhaps the Minister is afraid to tackle the subject?

Mr. MacEntee

As Deputy Pattison has reminded the House, one union set a very good example in lending money free of interest. If the railway unions and the other unions followed that example in regard to the housing question, the difficulties of that problem would be greatly decreased.

Mr. Hogan

Would the Minister not impress upon the banks that they should follow the lead of this trade union?

Mr. Murphy

What about the Central Bank?

Mr. MacEntee

I have no doubt that the banks noted what the unions did——

Mr. Hogan

Has the Central Bank any scheme?

Mr. MacEntee

——and if they were reluctant to follow the example of one trade union, it is, perhaps, because people more closely associated with the trade union movement did not follow it themselves.

Mr. Hogan

This is only toying with a serious matter.

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy has raised a big issue on this Estimate for £10. With regard to the points raised by Deputy Dillon, it is a great pity that he did not find other subjects for the exercise of his eloquence on a debate on a Supplementary Estimate. For it is not the first time that the Deputy has raised these matters. One criticism related to certain things which occurred in Cavan. The Deputy has indicated that it came under the review of the Public Accounts Committee. The report of the Committee which investigated that occurrence was laid before the House. The observations of the Committee have been dealt with by my Department and I stand or fall by what has already been done in regard to them. Deputy Dillon, occupying a responsible position as Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, surely knows that if he wishes to debate in the House any matter reviewed by the committee, the proper way to do it is to put down a motion.

Mr. Dillon

Nonsense—utter rubbish !

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy is not as long in the House as most of us are——

Mr. Dillon

Utter rubbish!

Mr. MacEntee

——and if he will consult the record, of the House, or be advised by those in charge of procedure, he will find that the proper way to bring before the House a matter which has been the subject of a report of the Public Accounts Committee, and to have it ventilated, is to put down a motion to discuss the report.

Mr. Dillon

Utter rubbish!

Mr. MacEntee

I would advise the Deputy to ask advice about it.

Mr. Dillon

Well, if you hope that way, you will never hope again.

Mr. MacEntee

With regard to the South Roscommon public utility society, I would like to point out to the House that utility societies have been responsible for the provision of over 13,000 new houses in rural areas. Those houses have been built for agricultural labourers, people with small farms and occupiers of land with valuations of £5, £10 and £15. The building of over 13,000 houses is a very creditable achievement. I cannot say what is the number of public utility societies responsible for the building of these houses, but it is certainly very large. Out of that large number Deputy Dillon has been able to single out only one society for criticism. There has not been another case requiring review in this House except this one, which came under Deputy Dillon's notice as far back as 1936.

Mr. D. Morrissey

Would the Minster not add "came under the notice of the Department"?

Mr. MacEntee

"Came under review," anyhow. It is quite true that the history of this society has been unsatisfactory, but we have not any responsibility for the conduct of public utility societies, and no responsibility for the relations which exist between members of these societies and their society. That is a matter entirely for the members themselves. All we are concerned with is this: if the society can establish a claim to a grant, it gets the grant. What it does with the grant we do not know. If the general arrangement is that the grant is passed on to some member who has built a house, and it is not so passed on, we have no responsibility, for we do not deal with the individual but with the society.

The real point is that Deputy Dillon has got up here and made a very serious charge against public utility societies in general and has been able to substantiate that charge only by referring to one society which, admittedly, was unsatisfactory, and which was struck off the register because it had been unsatisfactory so far back as the year 1942.

Mr. Dillon

When was it struck off the register?

Mr. MacEntee

In 1942 it had not furnished the necessary returns and it was informed that it would be removed from the register.

Mr. Dillon

It must have got on again.

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy knew that the particular item which he referred to arose in the course of the year 1942 when a certificate of approval had been issued by the appointed officer, in favour of the society, in connection with the erection of a house in Frenchpark. It was found that we could not pay the society as the necessary returns had not been furnished. However, they were furnished to the Registrar of Friendly Societies in November, 1943, before my Estimate was discussed—

Mr. Dillon

Your Estimate was discussed in November, 1943?

Mr. MacEntee

In November, 1943.

Mr. Dillon

How did the Minister expect me to learn of the fact that the society had filed its documents in time to raise the matter? His main Estimate was not taken in November, 1943. The information that the documents were filed could not reach me before the following January and the Minister knows that.

An Ceann Comhairle

On account of the general election, the Estimates were taken at a late period last year.

Mr. Dillon

I got my grant out of it, anyhow.

Vote put and agreed to.