In a question which I had down yesterday, I asked the Minister for Local Government whether he is aware that, as a result of the restoration of his former lands to Colonel R.B. Charteris by the annulment of the Tipperary South Riding Compulsory Purchase (Labourers Acts) Town of Cahir, Order, 1954, labourers' cottages will have to be built on a most unsuitable site, which is three-quarters of a mile from the town, which will entail greatly increased cost for site development and sewage and water amenities; and, if so, if he will state (a) the reasons why he annulled the Order, (b) who will be responsible for the extra cost involved, and (c) if suitable transport will be provided for the workers in the alternative site suggested, which is both backward and unsuitable.
The Minister in his reply stated:—
"Under the Order in question the Tipperary (South Riding) County Council sought to acquire a site in Cahir Park Estate which is used as a town park and recreation grounds and by the local G.A.A. Club, the District Nursing Association and the Irish Countrywomen's Association. All of these bodies, together with the owners of the adjoining Cahir House Hotel, objected to the Order.
The evidence given at the inquiry showed that the compulsory alienation of this property would disrupt important recreational and social facilities at present enjoyed by the inhabitants of the town, that the provision of houses on the site would be contrary to town planning principles and that an equally suitable alternative site is available about half a mile from the centre of the town and can be got by agreement. I am not aware that the cost of development of the alternative site would be greatly in excess of that of the proposed site. The foregoing are the considerations which led the Minister to annul the Order and, in view of the facts stated, (b) and (c) of the Deputy's question do not call for a reply."
I consider that this is a matter of very fundamental importance. We have, first of all, a land owner with 2,000 acres, surrounded as he is by what is now apparently an impregnable famine wall. On many occasions I was curious to know why cottages could not be built on this particular estate and on estates of its kind elsewhere. I remember asking the late Minister, Deputy Murphy, at a meeting in Clonmel, was it true to say that we could not enter inside those demesne walls. His answer was that we could. Now I am satisfied that we can if the will to do so is there.
The excuses given by the Minister for not doing so now are flimsy. Number 1—we find that the Cahir House Hotel objects. From personal knowledge may I say—and I know the place very well—that the proposed site is 400 or 500 yards from the hotel and if we are going to agree now that workers' houses should not be built within 400 yards of a hotel I say we can very well do without the hotel?
Objection No. 2 is in respect of a little garden path which leads to this site and which becomes a cul de sac, but I see no reason why this objection should be entertained at all. The Cahir branch of the Irish Countrywomen's Association also objected, and their objection was also entertained. There is an old hut which the Irish Countrywomen's Association occupy, but it is of a movable nature and there is no reason why it could not be removed to many other sites which are available in Cahir so that this site could be left for the workers.
The Cahir and District Nursing Association put up what I consider the flimsiest excuse of all, and it has been represented to the Minister as something he should appreciate. The objection is in connection with a car shed which the district nurse uses to house her car. This shed, as well as the hut and the garden path, is the property of Colonel Charteris.
Another obstacle put forward was in regard to the G.A.A. playing pitch, and I notice it has been represented to the Minister that the G.A.A. are there for a considerable number of years. May I say to the Minister that that is not so? They are there for a few years; they have no lease and have no right to remain there other than the goodwill of the colonel in question, and I believe myself they will get a very short shrift when this site is finished one way or the other. Anyhow knowing the G.A.A. as I do, and being a member since I was a foot high, I would naturally be the last to object to a playing pitch for them, but I have examined this very closely and I am satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt that the proposal in question would not interfere in any way with the G.A.A. playing pitch.
Now we come to the alternative site. The Minister possibly is quite right in saying that it is half a mile from the centre of the town, but the site in question is about 400 or 500 yards away, which bears out my statement that it would be three-quarters of a mile at least from one site to the other. The proposed site was adjacent to the Catholic church, where old people could go and say their prayers without having the hardship of coming down from this bare, barren hill almost, I might say, on the slopes of the Galtee Mountains.
As I said at the commencement, there is a fundamental principle involved and in this respect the Minister or any other Minister must take courage in his hands in knocking down those walls. It would not cost very much to knock them down; it certainly cost very little to put them up and I think it is about time there was an end to this impregnability of the famine wall. If farmers of 30 or 40 acres are going to have cottages erected on their land—and I am in agreement where a deserving person looks for it—is it not a great enticement to them to seek a sworn inquiry in the matter seeing how easily Colonel Charteris and the others have got away with this? I am afraid it will mean innumerable objections on the part of land occupiers in the future in South Tipperary.
We have not solved the housing problem in Tipperary, far from it, but this year we were quite confident we would be able to do a great deal in this connection. We have built many houses both in the urban and rural towns, as I would call them, because they are not urbanised, but if we are going to allow this to go unchallenged I fear we are going to have a grave increase in the number of land owners who are going to fight every inch of the way to deprive our workers of decent homes. If we want to keep people on the land from emigrating we must continue the housing drive and ensure that our people are properly housed. When they are, I believe the wave of emigration will cease to an appreciable extent. The Minister has glossed over the fact that the development of this alternative site may not cost anything. It is naturally the duty of the Minister to ensure that houses are built as cheaply as possible, and naturally where you have increased cost the ultimate analysis will be that the unfortunate tenant will have to pay his own just share of that, too.
I ask the Minister now, in view of what I have told him, to ask one of his senior inspectors, a senior engineer, to go down and inspect it. If he is right, I will apologise not only to himself and his Department but to the House. We certainly believe that where you have a democratic council, as we have, they ought to be given their head at some time or other, especially when we are facing a man with 2,000 acres of land on which not one cottage has been erected yet. That is the very strange thing. I have been asked by the people of Chair, by many people there of different political persuasions, to bring this matter before the Minister and the House. I make my appeal now to him to send down one of the senior inspectors to investigate if the facts are not as I have stated to him. If I am proved wrong, I certainly will have the moral and physical courage to apologise to him and to this House.
