I would like to point out to Deputy Corry that it is more than ten years ago since they built them. This matter is too serious for an exchange of views now between Deputy Corry and myself; we can have that going down in the train any day. I would like to draw the Minister's attention to the mentality of the Cork Corporation and the mentality of the person in charge of the Cork Corporation. The Minister was present when the Cork City manager said at a luncheon after opening the Ballyphehane scheme:—
"There are matters we should consider such as finance, and then, should we build rapidly now and maybe have idleness after, or should we have a steady programme of building?"
I was surprised that the Minister did not pass some remark on that. Probably as he was only a guest at the luncheon, he did not like to.
"Should we build rapidly now and have idleness after, or should we make steady progress in building?" If that was the mentality behind the rate of progress in Cork for years, it only shows the position we are in. That statement was published in the Press and it was made in the presence of the Minister. I know that houses will not grow and I know they take a considerable amount of trouble and organisation, but I think there should be a greater advance in Cork, at any rate— some serious effort to overcome the desperate state of affairs that exists there.
I now come to another matter, and this was mentioned by the city manager—finance. In the Dáil on 16th May, the Minister for Finance, in Volume 121, column 50, said:—
"Take a house at an average price of £1,400. The total assistance given in respect of the building of such a house is £765, excluding Dublin and Cork. In Dublin and Cork the assistance given in respect of such a house would be £667. The figures vary in relation to the cost of the house. In the county boroughs, except Dublin and Cork, the total assistance given for a £1,000-house is £712. In Dublin and Cork it is £667. I do not know how anybody can expect anything more."
I thoroughly agree with the Minister for Finance, I do not know how anybody could expect anything more. I put down a question to the Minister on 17th May asking what financial assistance did Cork get for houses built since 1945 for each financial year and what assistance was given to the four county boroughs. I was informed that up to the financial year 1948-49 Cork built 182 houses and that they did not get one brass farthing by way of assistance from the Government. There was not a farthing offered to encourage housing in Cork. I was told that Limerick built 148 houses and got £101,600 out of the Transition Development Fund.
It was only by probing and putting down questions that I could get any information. I asked more questions, and I was told that Cork could not get anything from the Transition Development Fund because they were awaiting final figures. I was told that Limerick got about £40,000 for houses completed in March, 1950, but Cork could not get anything at all for houses that were actually occupied in April, 1946, four years previously—not one brass farthing.
I was told that they could not get it because we had not the final figures. I am perfectly well aware that money was paid out of the Transition Development Fund in many cases as soon as the houses were started. I need not go outside County Cork for that. The £400 was paid when the building of the houses was started, but in Cork County Borough we must wait for the final figures four years after. I do not know whether we are going to get this or not. After putting down several questions, I was informed one day that we were getting an instalment of £25,000. We have 340 houses built that were occupied since the establishment of the Transition Development Fund. We have about 320 houses in the course of construction. As regards the houses in course of construction, we should at least be getting half the grant in respect of them. I contend that there is at least £200,000 due to the Cork Corporation at the present time, that is, if Cork is going to be treated the same as the rest of the country. I do not think the Minister or anybody else expects the taxpayers in Cork to pay taxes and to give grants of £400 to the rest of the country and not get the same grants themselves. If we assume that we are going to get these grants, I would like to know from the Minister who is going to be responsible for the payment of interest on this money that we should have got. I put down a question about the overdraft and of how the Cork houses were financed. I got a reply stating that the Cork Corporation was authorised to borrow by means of raising stock a sum of £400,000 for the financing of their housing schemes. That was in December, 1948. The reply went on to say:—
"It is understood from the local authority that at present the overdraft on the housing capital account is £125,000."
That was after the instalment of £25,000 had been paid in to reduce it. I have got figures here with regard to the amount of interest that has been paid. The figure is £14,939 4s. 2d., paid by way of interest on that loan and overdraft. I want to know, if we are going to get our grants, are we going to get a refund of the interest that we have paid since, the interest that should be due to us for these houses, 90 of which were occupied in April, 1946.
Now, I do not know who is to blame. I certainly think it is not the business of an individual member of the corporation to go probing into things like this, to find out, question by question, what the position is, and to go and interview people who have had experience of the building of these houses and of getting paid those grants. Why is there discrimination made as regards Cork? I hope the Minister will tell me that, and also who is going to be responsible for the interest that has been paid on this money. It is a terrible state of affairs that up to 17th May this year Cork had not got one brass farthing from the Department after all the talk of the Minister for Finance saying we were getting £667 a house. I had to prove by way of question that that was quite untrue as far as Cork is concerned and that we did not get one farthing. By persisting in asking questions we did get an instalment of £25,000. This is a matter that I think would cover some of the finance that was spoken about at the luncheon at which the Minister was present. I do not think it is the business of an ordinary individual to be probing into these matters. I think there are people appointed and paid for looking after them, for checking them. I hope the Minister realises the great injustice that was done to the people of Cork.
I asked this question about Limerick:—
"To ask the Minister for Local Government if he will indicate how much of the sums of £15,000 and £86,600 mentioned in his reply to a question on 17th May, 1950, as being payments from the Transition Development Fund to Limerick Corporation, were referable to the 148 houses built in the financial years 1944-45 to 1948-49, and to what houses, giving the numbers, location and date of completion, the balance was referable and the amount of grant per house."
The reply I got from the Minister was:—
"The reply to the first part of the Deputy's question is £59,200. The balance of the sums referred to by the Deputy, namely, £42,400, was distributed as follows:
(a) £40,000 towards a scheme of 128 houses at Ballinacurra, Weston, which was finally completed in March, 1950."
The Cork houses were occupied in April, 1946, and not a farthing was paid. The reply goes on:—
"The amount of the Transition Development Fund grant per house already paid is £312 10s. 0d.; and——"
that is clear proof to me that an instalment had been paid on houses in the course of construction. The reply concludes:—
"—— (b) £2,400 towards a scheme of 36 houses at Palmerstown, which was finally completed in May, 1949. The full grant of £400 per house has been paid."
I want to draw attention to another matter. I think the Minister should seriously look into it. It deals with the rents of houses. I put down this question to the Minister:—
"To ask the Minister for Local Government if he will indicate (a) the number of prosecutions during the past two financial years of corporation tenants for arrears of rent in each of the four county boroughs; (b) the minimum and maximum number of weeks' rent due in these cases in each area, and (c) the number of evictions carried out by each local authority concerned."
The reply I received was:—
(a) The number of prosecutions during the past two financial years of corporation tenants for arrears of rent in each of the four county boroughs was:
Dublin
|
12,193
|
Cork
|
183
|
Waterford
|
28
|
Limerick
|
20
|
(b) The minimum and maximum number of weeks' rent due in these cases were:
Dublin Corporation
|
2 weeks,
|
10 weeks
|
Cork ,,
|
3 weeks,
|
10 weeks
|
Waterford ,,
|
8 weeks,
|
15 weeks
|
Limerick ,,
|
8 weeks,
|
16 weeks
|
(c) The number of evictions carried out by each local authority concerned was:
Dublin Corporation
|
21
|
Cork Corporation
|
Waterford ,,
|
3
|
Limerick
|
I want to draw the Minister's attention to the fact that people are prosecuted for as little as two weeks' rent and in Cork three weeks' rent. In Waterford and Limerick they do not prosecute anybody who is in arrear for less than eight weeks. I know it is easier to get two weeks' rent than to get two months' rent when the tenants go into arrear. I know of cases, however, where people threatened with prosecution brought down the rent to the city hall and the rent was refused. The lord mayor asked me to draw attention to one case this week where a woman, the mother of nine children, had a clear book up to the month of May this year. In that month, two of her children were confirmed and she had to let the rent go for two weeks. The rent collector subsequently, I take it on instructions, refused to take the money. She went down to the county manager and he accepted it. In the past fortnight she was preparing to go into hospital to have her tenth child. While she was away making arrangements the rent collector called. On the following day she offered the rent and it was refused. The city manager was away and the lord mayor accepted the rent from her and gave her a receipt for it. He told the official in charge that he would hold him responsible if anything happened to the woman. She got notice to quit.
We have been told that the differential rent system will cure a lot of this. The Minister can take it from me that most of these things happen in cases where there are differential rents. The county manager recently boasted to us of the prosperity of the people in the differential rent houses because the income from rents had increased so much. I can assure the Minister that there are people paying rents who need the money very badly for the ordinary necessaries. They know that if they do not pay the rent they will get short shrift. I do not think that is the kind of attitude that should be adopted in these cases.
During my inquiries in relation to Limerick, I asked for a few particulars there about houses. I was told of six houses in Clancy Strand with an area of some 730 square feet, four rooms, a bathroom and scullery, the rent of which is 7/6 a week; £400 was paid from the Transition Development Fund in respect of these houses. I was told of six houses at Crosby Row, 780 square feet, the same number of rooms, bathroom and scullery, 17/- a week, exclusive of rates; 30 houses at Palmerstown, 633 square feet—observe the reduction in the floor area—four rooms, bathroom to be provided later, at differential rents ranging from 11/- to 30/- a week; 106 houses at Pennywell, 720 square feet, four rooms and a bathroom, differential rents ranging from 11/- to 30/- per week, inclusive of rates. I do not know what the feelings of an industrious, hard-working man will be when he discovers that a tenant in Clancy Strand with an area of 730 square feet, ten square feet more than him, and, in the case of Palmerstown, 100 square feet more, when he is called upon to pay 30/- a week, while the other man pays a fixed rent of 7/6 a week and the man in Crosby Row 17/-. Surely the Minister does not think that position can make for contentment amongst the tenants. Surely 30/- a week under a differential rent is out of all proportion. We had such a scheme in Cork, and I heard Deputy Hickey say that the people were paying more than an economic rent for the houses. I might point out that in that case the maximum rent was 18/6 a week. I do not know what the differential rents are in other areas. My object in these questions was to find out principally why Cork was neglected so far as the Transition Development Fund is concerned or any other financial assistance given for the building of houses. That situation cannot make for contentment. All these houses were built recently.
As far as my experience of the Department goes, I have nothing but praise for the officials. I have always received the greatest courtesy from the Minister. We have known one another for a long time. I might mention, however, that recently Cork Corporation applied to have a deputation meet the Minister in relation to the Transition Development Fund. We were told that the Minister was not available. So far no arrangements have been made for that deputation. We were also told that the officials of the Department would have to meet the officials of the Cork Corporation first and go into the figures with them. There could have been no need to go into figures. There was no need to go into figures in other places. The Transition Development Fund moneys were paid in other areas just as soon as the scheme started. I believe there is a necessity to go into figures in relation to the payment of contributions towards loan charges, but the £400 grant, as far as my information goes, was acknowledged as due to any local authority which had built houses for the working classes. The Minister may not have been able to meet us. The lord mayor and I went over and met the officials, together with the city manager and city accountant. We were not able to make any headway, and I was told by the secretary of the Department that we could not expect any finality in an interview like that. I agreed with him that there could be no finality when the Minister was not present. It was a very short interview and we got no satisfaction. We were asked to wait until the officials went into the figures. We agreed to that, but I did ask how much of the £101,600 was given towards the 148 houses; £400 multiplied by 148 only amounts to £59,200. I wanted to know what the balance was given for, and I was told that it was probably given for houses in course of construction. I had to put a parliamentary question in order to get the information, which was that the Limerick houses were completed in March and were paid for in the month of May. I omitted to ask how many months previous to that they were paid for, but they had been paid for when I put the question down. The Cork Corporation did not get a penny for houses that had been completed in April, 1946. The answer I got was that no claim for contribution was made from the loans fund and that payment from the Transition Development Fund could not be made until the final figures were given. I think I can prove conclusively that other people did get the grants before the final figures were given.