asked the Minister for Local Government if it is correct that persons employed whole-time in a rural district are no longer considered eligible for a house the property of the local authority if their employment is pensionable.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Local Authority Housing.
The possession of pensionable status does not in itself constitute a disqualification for tenancy of a local authority house. Under Section 24 of the Housing (Amendment) Act, 1950, a county council may provide a cottage for letting to a person living in a county health district, who is a member of the working classes within the meaning of the Housing of the Working Classes Acts. It is a matter for the local authority to determine whether a person is or is not a member of the working classes.
Will the Minister say why the Department wrote a letter of a blank date last month in which the following phrase occurs:—
"I am directed by the Minister for Local Government to state that persons employed in a permanent, whole-time and pensionable capacity are not regarded as persons working for hire, and do not, therefore, come within the terms of the definition of agricultural labourer for housing purposes."
The Deputy will appreciate that the method of question and answer across the floor of the House does not provide a suitable opportunity for clarifying a very involved question. I can read for him a circular which was issued to all local bodies dealing with this matter. It was as follows:—
"In the Housing of the Working Classes Act, 1908, as amended by theHousing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1931, it is provided that the expression "working classes" shall "include" mechanics, artisans, labourers and others working for wages, hawkers, costermongers, persons not working for wages but working at some trade or handicraft without employing others save members of their families, and persons, other than domestic servants, whose income does not in any case exceed £3 a week and the families of any such person who may be residing with them. For the successful administration of the Housing Acts, there must be some line of demarcation and every person who does work of some kind cannot reasonably be considered as belonging to the working classes. Strict interpretation of the expression in any particular case would be a matter for court decision, and the meaning of the term in its popular sense as at present applied by housing authorities derives from their long experience in the administration of the Housing of the Working Classes Acts."
In other words, it is mainly, in fact, entirely the responsibility of the local authority concerned to place their own definition on what I have read out, and to take the responsibility of any decision they arrive at.
Will the Minister say who fixes the ceiling of £3 per week as the ceiling for determining whether a person should be called a member of the working classes or not and when was that fixed?
This dates back from 1931 when the Deputy himself was Minister for Local Government.
Has the regulation not been changed in any way since then?
The regulation is, as I have said, that the local authority have the complete right and freedom to determine this question as to who does or who does not come within the definition of agricultural labourer.
What was the purpose of the circular then?
The purpose of the circular was to give a general idea of the type of classes that were intended to be covered by the definition of agricultural labourer, but even after that, the responsibility rested with the local authority concerned and has since rested with them to determine the question and to take the consequences of such determination.
Twenty-two years ago.
After ten years of Fine Gael.
The Minister's reply dealt with the Housing of the Working Classes Acts. My question covers not merely people under the Working Classes Acts, but people under the Labourers Acts, and it is under these latter Acts that the term "working for hire" occurs. Is the Minister also aware that there is a proviso in the Act of 1919 that any question that may arise as to whether a person is a person to whom this section applies shall be determined by the Local Government Board and their decision shall be final and conclusive? Is the Minister not aware that he is the successor of the Local Government Board and therefore his decision is final and conclusive?
My information is that the law is there and the responsibility rests with the local authority to make its decision. It can from time to time seek advice and when it does the advice is tendered as to the meaning of the law. Even then, it does not follow that after they have made their own determination their decision need not be questioned.
If the Minister looks again at the measure——
Would the Minister give us a definition of agricultural labourer as defined in the Act?
The Deputy may not be aware of it, but we have been discussing that for the last couple of minutes.
We have been discussing the housing of the workingclasses, which comes under a different Act. The Minister does not know his own Acts.