asked the Minister for Local Government if, in relation to the guarantee scheme provided in the Housing (Amendment) Act, 1956, he will state (a) the number of local authorities who have (i) adopted such a scheme, (ii) rejected it, and (iii) taken no action; and (b) the number of applications for loans under the scheme approved by building societies at the latest available date, the local authority concerned in each case, and the total amount of such loans.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Housing (Amendment) Act, 1956.
asked the Minister for Local Government if he will state, in respect of each housing authority, the number and value of guaranteed loans (a) sanctioned, and (b) paid under the provisions of Section 10 of the Housing (Amendment) Act, 1956.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to answer Questions Nos. 64 and 65 together.
Twenty-two housing authorities have so far made or intimated that they will make guarantee schemes under Section 10 of the Housing (Amendment) Act, 1956. Two authorities informed my Department that they had decided not to make schemes pending consideration of certain information. The particulars requested at parts (a) (iii) and (b) of Question No. 64 and in Question No. 65 are not available in my Department.
asked the Minister for Local Government whether he is aware that for the purposes of Section 19 (b) of the Housing (Amendment) Act, 1956, some local authorities are calculating the market value of a house in a harsh manner, as a result of which applicants are in effect required to find deposits of as much as 15 per cent. of the cost, and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I am not aware that there has been any alteration by local authorities in recent times in the method of assessing market value for the purposes of the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Acts.
Is the Minister aware that in certain cases where the deposit previously was £80 on a house under the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Acts, it is now approximately £230?
That is not the question asked by the Deputy, but I can assure the Deputy that these market valuers for the various local authorities are the same persons as they have been down through the years and that no new instruction was issued by me to them on the question of valuation; and further all local authorities appear to have accepted these market values as assessed by these valuers up to the present and, as I say, no instruction to the contrary has been issued by me.
Is the Minister further aware that representations have been made to the Taoiseach by interested parties that the Minister for Local Government should consider issuing instructions to the local authorities who are interpreting this Section 19 (b) in such a harsh manner that they should review their attitude in such cases?
I appreciate the point made by the Deputy but that is not the question which he has asked me. It is laid down by statute what each valuer shall take into account in assessing the market value of a particular dwelling, and so far as I know all valuers are complying with the law in assessing market values. Very often it has been the case down through the years that the market value does not agree with the selling price but that is not the fault of the valuer. The market value as assessed by the valuers has been accepted by builders, local authorities and applicants down through the years. Until it is proved to me that a particular market valuer is not doing his duty in assessing the value as he is bound to do by statute, I think he should not be removed from office. If any local authority is not satisfied with the manner in which a particular valuer is carrying out his functions, they are at liberty to dispense with him and appoint somebody else in his place.