Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 3 Mar 1960

Vol. 179 No. 8

Committee on Finance. - Vote 35—Local Government.

Minister for Local Government (Mr. Blaney)

I move:—

"That a supplementary sum not exceeding £195,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1960, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Local Government, including Grants to Local Authorities, Grants and other Expenses in connection with Housing, and Miscellaneous Grants."

The sum voted for these grants for the year 1959/60 was £1,700,000. Of this sum, £1,690,328 had been expended at the 29th February, 1960 (allowing for credits by way of refunds etc.) leaving a balance of £9,672 to meet commitments arising before the end of the financial year. When this sum is added to the amount of the Supplementary Estimate it will be seen that actual requirements for the remainder of the year are now estimated to exceed £200,000.

The deficiency arising in the year is due almost entirely to the greatly increased activities in new house building which developed within the last eleven months. On the basis of our experience of the trend of new house grant allocations in the year 1958/59, it was estimated last year that 3,000 allocations of new house grants would be made for the year 1959/60. In fact, new house grant allocations in the period from 1st April, 1959 to the 29th February, 1960, amounted to 3,472, representing an estimated figure of 3,800, approximately, for the full financial year.

Apart from the increased in allocations it also became evident that the payments for new house grants were tending to mature more quickly during recent months. In fact, the amount of payments on all grants maturing during the month of February was by far the highest February total in any year and one of the highest monthly totals ever. This is the direct result of the increased building activity in both new houses and reconstruction which was stimulated by the Act of 1958 and by a general improvement in the economic conditions encouraging that activity. The more rapid maturing of payments of grants was also stimulated by the very favourable weather conditions obtaining during the summer and autumn.

I need hardly say that I welcome this distinctly encouraging evidence of a further growth in the tempo of housing and that I have the utmost satisfaction in coming to this House to ask that the necessary additional funds be provided in advance of the provision which will be available on foot of the Vote on Account as from 1st April next.

Mr. Sweetman

The Minister to-day has again repeated in slightly more moderate language the dishonest implication to which he committed himself yesterday in extreme language. I want to characterise that implication yesterday and to-day as being a disgrace to the high office he holds. The Minister yesterday brought to this House certain selected information. He selected it quite deliberately and put it accross to attempt to show that the present housing activity, whatever it may be, was higher than the housing activity that operated during the régime of the Government that preceded his. The House will remember that yesterday, in relation to this matter, he was asked to produce certain figures for the year ending 31st March, 1957. He said he had not got them with him. I shall oblige him by giving these figures for these Estimates today. Another member of the Fianna Fáil Party—the member whose function apparently it is to throw dirt on every possible occasion, Deputy O'Malley—then proceeded to say there had been a Supplementary Estimate for £2 million in 1957, which Deputy Smith, as Minister for Local Government, brought in for the purpose of paying arrears of housing grants. That again is a complete falsehood and if any Deputy is interested there are the Appropriation Accounts, the Supplementary Estimates that were brought in, and there was no Supplementary Estimate introduced in the period from the 20th February, when Fianna Fáil came into power, and the 31st March, 1957.

What are the facts in relation to housing, the facts which the Minister is deliberately trying to conceal by taking figures for certain months, figures which have been increased because of the fact that during the earlier part of the year grants were not paid? I am sure the Minister is telling the truth when he shows favourable grant figures for one month such as these. I do not challenge that at all but the fact is that during this current financial year there are fewer houses to be built. There is less money being paid by the Minister under this sub-heading than was paid in either of the two years for which we were responsible.

Let us look at the records. First of all remember that the figures were announced in the Book of Estimates each year. In the year ending 31st March, 1955, when we were responsible, the allocation then given, as set out in the Book of Estimates for this type of housing grant, was £2,000,000. For the year ending 31st March, 1956, the amount set out in the Book of Estimates was £2,250,000 and an additional Supplementary Estimate was taken in that year for £50,000. For the year ending 31st March, 1957, the period for which I asked the Minister for figures yesterday, the amount provided in the Book of Estimates was £2,250,000. Then Fianna Fáil came in and in the year ending 31st March, 1958, the sum was £2,000,000. In the year ending 31st March, 1959, for which Fianna Fáil must take the full responsibility as the Book of Estimates was entirely prepared by them the figure was £1,300,000 compared with the previous sum of £2,250,000. In the year ending 31st March, 1960, the current year, the amount provided was £1,700,000 and the Minister is now providing a further £200,000 to make a total of £1,900,000. In the new Book of Estimates, published this morning for the next financial year, what do we find? We find the provision is less than the provision that was made in either of the years ending 31st March, 1956, and 31st March, 1957.

If we want to pass from the Estimates to the actual amounts paid, let us take the figures in the Appropriation Accounts of the moneys actually spent. In 1954/55 £1,995,000 was spent, in 1955/56 £2,247,000 and in 1956/57 £2,167,000. Then Fianna Fáil came in and in 1957/58 it was £1,526,000. That figure actually differs slightly— it is £20,000 more than the figure the Minister gave yesterday—but I am giving the larger of the two figures so that he cannot have any complaint. Apparently there may have been some adjustment at a later stage. In 1958/59 £1,329,000 was spent.

As regards the number of houses that were built the information is to be got from the Statistical Abstract for 1959, at page 190, and what do we find there? We find that in each year ending 31st March, the financial year, the figures were as follows: In 1955 10,490 new houses were built with State aid; in 1956, 9,837; in 1957, 10,969, and the Minister cannot suggest that any single one of these houses built in those years was in any way the result of anything he, or his Fianna Fáil predecessor in office, might have done. Then Fianna Fáil came back to power and in 1958, 7,480 houses were built, and in 1959, 4,893—fewer than half of those that were built in the year for which I asked him for the figures yesterday.

If the Minister wants to take the figure of new houses that were built other than by local authorities, he will find exactly the same thing. In 1955, in rural areas, the figure was 3,522; in 1956 it was 3,587; in 1957 it was 4,066 and in 1958, after Fianna Fáil came in—and I might add that these are privately built houses, not local authority houses—the figure went down to 2,473 and in 1959 it went down to 1,651, fewer than half the figure when we were in office, yet the Minister had the audacity and effrontery to come into this House and try to suggest that he has stimulated a wonderful new housing drive.

If we want to go from new houses to reconstructed houses we can look for the same figures and we shall find, on the same page of the Statistical Abstract, that the number reconstructed in 1957 was 8,147 and in the last year for which I have the figures it had dropped to 6,909. As I said already, the evidence of what he anticipates the situation is going to be is in the Book of Estimates that his colleague, the Minister for Finance, issued this morning. The amount provided in that Book of Estimates is less than the provision and the amount that was paid in either of the last two financial years for which I was responsible.

As I said, Deputy O'Malley apparently had been trained by his colleague, Deputy Smith, to try to put over in this House what are not the facts. I am not accusing Deputy O'Malley of doing it deliberately. No doubt he has been misled but he suggested yesterday that in 1957 Deputy Smith, as Minister for Local Government, had to introduce a Supplementary Estimate for £2,000,000 to pay housing grants that had not been paid. Here is the bound volume of the Estimates, Financial Accounts, Supplementary Estimates and Appropriation Accounts and there was no Supplementary Estimate whatever of that sort introduced by Fianna Fáil in respect of these housing grants. In fact there was no necessity for one because, as I told the House a minute ago, the provision was £2,250,000 and the payments in that year were £2,167,477.

It is not as if all these things were new and that the Minister could make the excuse that he was caught yesterday without information on something of which he had no previous knowledge. Housing questions have been put down by me to the Minister which he has answered. Let me refer to one of them. On 11th February, 1960, —col. 337, Vol. 179—I asked in relation, for example, to Dublin Corporation, what was the amount expended by means of advances under the Small Dwellings Acquisition Acts. It is the person who builds with help under the Small Dwellings Acquisition Acts who requires grants of the type we are discussing this morning.

In 1956, when certain members of Fianna Fáil, notably Deputy Briscoe, were screaming here about the allocation being made, £1,536,000 was available and spent by Dublin Corporation on small dwellings loans for this type of house; in 1957, £936,000; but, in 1958, under Fianna Fáil, that had dropped to £533,000 and again, in 1959, though it had recovered somewhat, it had not recovered to the previous level and was only £711,000. Similar questions appear in relation to Cork and to the country as a whole.

The Minister, therefore, could not possibly have been in ignorance when he was deliberately selecting his figures yesterday. He was doing it in an endeavour to put over a politically dishonest trick. What has happened not is, and thank goodness it has happened, that some of the leeway that was lost by Fianna Fáil, and deliberately lost by Fianna Fáil, in relation to housing, is now being made up and the Minister is counting that as a great advance. When he gets back to the situation that there was in those two years, when he gets back to the figures of which I have spoken, figures that are on the records, figures that tell their own story, figures that show that the number of houses built with this type of grant under Fianna Fáil dropped from 9,800 to 4,800 in three years, and when he is able to make up that backlog and is in a position to tell the House truthfully and honestly that that backlog has been caught up and that he has reached the figures that were obtained before, it will be time enough for him to boast.

Meantime, let him keep to the truth and not try to paint a picture as untruthful and as politically dishonest as he endeavoured to paint yesterday and as he tried this morning to paint slightly differently.

Mr. O'Donnell

I do not wish to repeat what Deputy Sweetman has just said but there are a few salient points which I should refer to. Estimates sometimes are misleading. There are in Estimates commitments which sometimes never materialise and I would prefer to take figures, as Deputy Sweetman has done, of the actual expenditure over the past years and the actual number of houses built or reconstructed. Deputy Sweetman quoted the figures from 1956 or 1957. I should like to go slightly further back, to the days of the first inter-Party Government, the days of the last Fianna Fáil Government, the days of the second inter-Party Government, right down to the present time and to give the figures of the actual number of new houses built in the State. In the year ended 31st March, 1952, the number was 12,644; year ended 31st March, 1953, 14,060; year ended 31st March, 1954, 11,179; 1955, 10,490; 1956, 9,837. In the last year of office of the inter-Party Government the number of new houses erected was 10,969. Then we had the first year of Fianna Fáil and the present Government, and the figure fell from 10,969 to 7,480 and in the year ended 31st March, 1959, it again fell to 4,893, to more than 50 per cent. less than the number of houses built by the inter-Party Government during their last year of office.

The Minister has boosted reconstruction. I heartily endorse everything he says about reconstruction. More attention should be paid to it. On the occasion that the Minister mentioned that matter in his Estimate, Deputy Corry informed the House that, in opening a housing scheme in Bandon in 1955, I advocated the reconstruction of houses and said that more attention should be given to it, not only by individuals but by local authorities.

I should like to quote the figures for reconstruction of houses from 1952. In the year ended 31st March, 1952, the number of houses reconstructed was 2,292; year ended March, 1953, 2,573; year ended March, 1954, 4,224; 1955, 4,889—that is the year in which I appealed to individuals to apply for reconstruction grants. As a result, in the year ended 31st March, 1956, the number was 6,494; and, in the last year in which we were in office, the year ended 31st March, 1957, the number was 8,147. In other words, the number of houses being reconstructed had gone up by approximately 75 per cent. from 1952. Then we had the first year of Fianna Fáil and in March, 1958 the number had fallen from 8,147 by 1,000, to 7,162. In the year ended 31st March, 1959 it fell to 6,909. In other words, the peak year was our last year of office and now the number has gradually tapered off again.

When considering the money spent on the building of new houses or the reconstruction of houses, ignore Estimates and commitments and consider the actual money paid out, which is much more factual than commitments. For the year ended 31st March, 1955, actual money paid out was £1,995,000; year ended 31st March, 1956, £2,247,500 and then, in our last year in office, £2,167,000. Then in the first year of Fianna Fáil it fell to £1,527,000 and last year to £1,330,000, in other words, last year there was £600,000 less spent on houses than there was in 1955. These are actual figures which may be obtained from the Appropriation Accounts and which are vouched and certified. These are the figures on which we must go.

The Minister was very wrong in his policy in abolishing what is known as appointed officers. In the country there were appointed officers, local architects or engineers, who did the preliminary examination on all projects for the building of new houses or the reconstruction of houses and a sum of two guineas was paid in respect of each applicant or each house. These men were living in the locality. They knew the type of houses the applicant was going to build, with the result that, once an application came in, sanction was forthcoming because these men would often prepare the plans themselves; they were there on the spot and were able to give sanction to applicants.

The Minister abolished these appointed officers and appointed his own inspectors to do their duty, at the same cost, but the two guineas is now collected by the Department. We now find that these officers have so much work to do that there is a delay in getting around to the various applicants and getting sanction for building. This current year these men have substantial arrears and they are anxious to sanction as many grants as possible for new houses or for reconstruction before the end of the financial year. We find this backlog to which the Minister referred, the number of housing grants being sanctioned during the month of February and an endeavour being made by these civil servants to keep up with this backlog which has accumulated over the past 12 months. They are anxious to get these grants out before the beginning of the financial year and the Minister has to come in with this estimated commitment of approximately £195,000.

The Minister informed the House on his Estimate last year that he proposed increasing grants for private water supply and sanitary services. Have Deputies had the experience of endeavouring to get this grant for their constituents? Have they found delay, first of all, in the sanction of grants and then the delay in payment? It is payments we must base our figures on, not on allocations. When the Minister is able to give us facts on payments, then and then only will his boast be accepted that he is doing more than his predecessors in the housing of this State.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

After the last general election there was a photograph of the former Taoiseach in the newspapers surrounded by British journalists. They asked him what he intended to do to relieve unemployment. The then Head of the Government replied that he would extend housing. The scathing indictment we have heard from Deputy Sweetman, with incontrovertible facts and figures he produced to prove this Government has cut down on reconstruction and the building of houses, has not been replied to by any Fianna Fáil Deputies, although there are quite a few of them in the House at the moment. The reason it has not been replied to is that the facts Deputy Sweetman has produced are true as every Deputy knows.

I personally have had nothing but the greatest courtesy from the officials in the Custom House in relation to housing. However, every time I come to Dublin I have to go to the Custom House looking for three or four grants which are unpaid. That is not only my experience but that of every other Deputy. It is a known fact that there is a go-slow on the housing programme and on the payment of grants and that no one has any chance of getting a grant unless he goes to his elected representative and asks him to go to the Custom House to look the matter up. I am not making any charge against the officials in this respect. It is a deliberate act on the part of this Government or the Minister for Local Government. I presume it is a Government decision.

This morning I was in touch with the Department of Local Government with reference to a grant for a constituent of mine. The work was completed six weeks ago. It was inspected months ago and he did not receive the preliminary grant, the first half, to which he was entitled. I was told by the official that he was telling me only what he was directed to tell me, that he could not say when the first half would be paid. We were told yesterday in the House that when the Supplementary Estimate was passed all the grants were to be paid. That may be so and it may not, but I want to support what Deputy Sweetman and Deputy O'Donnell have said, that there is a definite whittling down of housing grants and the money generally supplied for them. The fact that no Deputy has risen from the other side to try to controvert these incontestable facts makes it more conclusive that what the two members of the Front Bench Opposition have said is true, and there is no argument the Minister can produce that can satisfy us that such is not the case.

Mr. N. Lemass

I have been rather amused this morning at the wonderful change of tune, particularly on the part of the former Minister for Local Government. I can speak principally as far as the Dublin Corporation is concerned. I have a very vivid recollection of special meetings, deputations, and so forth, to the former Minister to enable the Corporation to meet its commitments. I can remember the banks dishonouring the then Taoiseach's guarantee for money.

Mr. O'Donnell

On a point of order, would the Deputy state when the Taoiseach's guarantee was dishonoured by the banks?

Mr. N. Lemass

I recollect quite well that the former Minister was compelled to make available to the local authority in Dublin city the Local Loans Fund because it was impossible to raise money elsewhere. There was a sum of——

Mr. O'Donnell

Would the Deputy withdraw the allegation if he is unable to substantiate it?

Acting Chairman (Mr. Sheldon)

That is a question of fact, not of order.

Mr. O'Sullivan

Seemingly, because he has veered away from it.

Mr. O'Donnell

Will he substantiate it?

Mr. N. Lemass

Will the Deputy deny it?

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

Surely the Chair knows what are the facts?

Mr. O'Sullivan

I wish to protest against the Clerk of the House telling the Chair what his duty is.

Acting Chairman (Mr. Sheldon)

The Chair had already expressed an opinion on the point of order.

Mr. O'Sullivan

The Clerk was audibly informing the Chair of his functions in this matter.

Acting Chairman (Mr. Sheldon)

It is most disorderly to make reference to officials of the House. The Chair has already ruled on the Deputy's interjection.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

Surely the Chair cannot allow Deputy Lemass to continue on the lines on which he has been proceeding, saying the guarantee of the farmer Taoiseach——

Mr. O'Sullivan

Let him continue. He is up to his neck in trouble.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

Surely the Chair will not allow him to continue.

(Interruptions).

Acting Chairman (Mr. Sheldon)

Deputy Lemass.

Mr. N. Lemass

The position is, as the Deputies opposite know quite well, that only for a bye-election in Dublin city, we would never have got money from the Local Loans Fund. Builders would have been thrown out in the streets with no work to do and the building of houses would have been left uncompleted.

Mr. O'Donnell

Produce the figures.

Mr. N. Lemass

I am saying that the decrease in building as far as Dublin Corporation was concerned, was due, first, to lack of money, in previous years. The Corporation could not go ahead with its schemes and every building programme was held up for minor objections.

Mr. O'Donnell

Name one.

Mr. N. Lemass

The cost of construction was cut down irrespective of the standards we aimed at for the people living in the houses. Only for the brilliance of Mr. Hanly, who, we are glad to say, is safe after the terrible earthquake the other day, we would never have been able to carry on in the Dublin Corporation.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

A very decent man and a first-class architect.

Mr. O'Donnell

Give us one scheme.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy O'Donnell has already spoken on this Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. N. Lemass

There was another matter which affected Dublin Corporation building. When the former Government left office there were no people looking for houses. There were houses being handed back to the Dublin Corporation at the rate of 2,000 a year where whole families were packing up and going to England. In that year——

Mr. O'Donnell

And you want to build more.

Mr. N. Lemass

——national progress went backwards for the first time since the establishment of the State. The Corporation have their sites; they have developed sites outside the city. Houses can be built and workers can be put back immediately but we have to build up our population again. The Corporation is now concentrating on the clearance of slums in the centre of the city. The cost of construction is a little more expensive and unfortunately the labour content is less. Many Deputies, and some former Ministers, have a cheek to come in here and say "It is your responsibility because you took office when this was taking place." If it had not been taking place, we might not have got into office.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

It is very diffcult to know whether the Minister for Local Government or Deputy Lemass would get first prize in this House as the greatest bluffer. Any Deputy who has the courage to get up to make a speech such as Deputy Lemass has made should be entitled to a prize of some kind or other. It takes an extraordinary hard neck to be sufficiently brazen to make the type of speech that we have heard from Deputy Lemass.

Everybody realises, particularly those having close contact with the people, that today there is less being spent on housing than there was when the inter-Party Government were in office and Deputy O'Donnell was the Minister for Local Government. There is no use trying to paint a rosy picture if you have not got a good sound canvas on which to paint it.

The Minister for Local Government, or any of the Deputies behind him, may quote figures until the cows come home but figures are no consolation to the unfortunate person in the country who cannot be paid for work done. The fact of saying that we are participating in a great housing drive and that you have the money to pay out is no consolation to the unfortunate people who have carried out reconstruction work which was approved and passed and the work completed satisfactorily. They cannot get one penny piece from the Department of Local Government.

Those are the people in whom we are interested, the people who, we want to make sure, are not misled by an Act which the Minister for Local Government is putting into effect, and that is to turn housing grants completely and entirely into a political matter. I want to put it to Deputies that the aim behind the hold-up of reconstruction grants and grants for new houses is to try to build up a political movement in each area. A state of affairs is being created that an applicant who cannot be paid his grant will be forced to go and see the local Fianna Fáil Deputy and, when he does that, the claim will be paid forthwith.

I feel this is a matter in which the Minister for Local Government himself must take the responsibility for trying to make politics and trying to boost the low standing of Fianna Fáil Deputies, the very low standing which they have in every constituency throughout the country. The only way he can do that is to try deliberately to create difficulties in various constituencies so that it will be a means of bringing the local Deputy to him with representations about which he may be able to do something to remedy the position in particular cases.

I wonder if the present Government have any housing policy at all or what is their policy on housing? It is amusing to hear Deputy Lemass state, as he did a few minutes ago, that a few years ago there was such an extraordinary flight from the land and from our large towns and cities that there were not sufficient tenants to occupy the houses. The position now is that many a man then engaged in the construction business is at present out of business. There were many contractors, particularly in rural Ireland, who were engaged in the reconstruction and erection of houses who have gone out of business completely. There are contractors who have erected houses this year and are forced to the pin of their collar to stay in business because of the failure of the Department of Local Government to pay the grant to the architects.

Surely some consideration must be given to the traders who supply timber, paints, glass and cement and who have all the materials ready? Those traders are not in the position they were in years ago when they could get substantial credit. In most cases now, it is cash down for what you want; the time when substantial discount was allowed is also gone. To my own knowledge traders in the midlands are putting pressure on people who obtained materials from them for the erection of new houses and for the important work of reconstructing houses. Everybody in this House knows quite well from his own experience that the whole position of housing has not alone been slowed up but has been brought virtually to a standstill by the present Government.

We know that this Estimate deals entirely with grants for new houses and with reconstruction grants but on the main Estimate this House will be in a position to give the Minister for Local Government information to prove that proposals from local authorities for housing schemes have been deliberately held up and faults found in the plans so that sanction will not be given to proceed with the houses.

I respectfully say that it is the deliberate policy of the Minister for Local Government to slow up housing and to stop housing. The importance of reconstruction was stressed by Deputy O'Donnell when he was Minister for Local Government and every Deputy must place the greatest importance on the reconstruction of old houses. Very many old houses throughout the country are occupied by people not in a position to erect new houses. In view of the large number of requests from people who have applied for reconstruction grants and whose applications are now under consideration, I feel it should be the duty of the Government to reconsider their entire housing policy in so far as reconstruction grants are concerned. In respect of grants for new houses, I think it was most unfortunate and unreasonable of the Minister for Local Government to dispense with the services of the appointed officers because, as has been clearly pointed out, the appointed officer in a particular area knew the conditions and the circumstances of the countryside, and was in a position to give his approval there and then. He had all the facts concerning the applicant before him. When the appointed officers were there, approval could be given with the least possible delay. Now the position is that since the Minister's Department has undertaken this work —the cost is the same; it is still £2 2s. —there is unreasonable delay and there is such a volume of work to be done by these men that it is impossible for them to cope with it.

Like Deputy Esmonde, I have had occasion, not to call at the Custom House, but to make very frequent representations to the Department of Local Government and I was always treated with the greatest possible courtesy, but no matter what courtesy is extended by the Minister or his Department, if he has given instructions for the non-payment of the grants, they cannot be paid. I am not prepared, for one moment, to say that the Minister has not given these instructions. The payment of grants has been held up; grants have not been forthcoming and considerable anxiety overshadows most of those people who have been expecting their money for months past. The only conclusion we can come to is the conclusion that has been stressed. I am sure, by Deputies here this morning. There is a slowing down in the payment of these grants and the Minister and the Government would prefer that people did not avail of these schemes.

I should not be surprised if within the next year or two or three, if the Government should remain in office so long, steps will be taken drastically to curtail reconstruction grants. I am quite satisfied that it is being made more difficult every day to qualify for those grants. The only hope people who are anxious to avail of the reconstruction grant scheme have is to assist in bringing about a change of Government in order that the Government may be replaced by a Government with a more active and efficient housing policy. The time has come when the present housing policy has proved to be unsuccessful and unsatisfactory, and most unsatisfactory so far as the reconstruction of houses throughout the State is concerned.

I am not prepared for one moment to accept the statement of the Minister because the figures given this morning by Deputy Sweetman, and echoed by Deputy O'Donnell, speak for themselves. No matter what figures the Minister presents to the House, or what kind of case he may try to make to bolster up his argument, the facts are that the people have not been getting the grants. If the Minister carries on as he has carried on for the past 12 months in regard to housing grants, it will be most unfortunate for the people who have been expecting payments and grants and for those who have been expecting State assistance for the construction of new houses and the reconstruction of old houses.

Mr. MacCarthy

One thing which is evident from the Supplementary Estimate before us is that there must have been an impetus in building of all kinds during the past year by reason of the fact that the Estimate has been exceeded and a substantial Supplementary Estimate has been found necessary to complete the work now in hand. I have had experience of building in the municipalities and the rural areas and I can say that members of all Parties have always co-operated in what was called the housing drive. I am glad to say that the contention which has arisen here today on the Supplementary Estimate and which would be more appropriate to the main Estimate, has never arisen locally.

I was Lord Mayor of Cork and in that city various surveys were made. The medical officer was asked to present figures as to his conception of the needs for houses in that area. That programme has been going on for years under the various Governments and the need for houses is now tapering off. We all know that the needs of various urban areas have been satisfied in recent years. That is generally admitted. The time has now arrived for a new survey of some of the districts owing to the fact that new industries have come our way and have been established in various places. In consequence, the need for more houses is now an urgent matter. Surveys are being carried out and I believe the figures will be a tribute to the success of various Governments in their housing drive over past years by reason of work well done.

No doubt, there are problems to be met. I agree with some of the criticism. As a matter of fact, on the question of the appointed officers, it has come to my knowledge that at times the officer was sent down to compute figures in areas where trade union conditions prevailed. People have come to me, and, I feel sure, to other Deputies, saying they cannot possibly reconstruct houses on the approved estimates presented to them, whereas the local officer knew the local conditions and consequently when figures were being made out, they were made out on such a scale as to be in conformity with experience and working conditions.

Mr. O'Donnell

That is quite true.

Mr. MacCarthy

I hope that anything I say in a public assembly is true, but I would not have said that if the matter had not come to my personal knowledge. There have been delays in schemes because these figures have to be sent back for review and in some cases, the people concerned do not go ahead with the building by reason of those circumstances.

We have, at the present time, fewer people building houses for themselves. We had sites in Cork city and, as the Minister knows, he had to give permission to the Corporation to build on those sites under the ordinary municipal schemes. Special permission was given. The causes of these trends are various. In some cases, it is a change in the value of money. In certain years, money could be got perhaps at 4 or 4½ per cent. interest. Now the rate is higher and the policy of the various Governments was directed, to the best of their ability, sometimes to what the people were able to pay but also to the rising value of loans and the costs of building deterred people from taking these responsibilities and obligations on themselves. The thing for us to do is to appoint assessors so that money outstanding or for works on hand may be promptly paid.

The programme of the Government and of the local authorities could be discussed more appropriately on the main Estimate. It is no argument for any Government to show figures about housing because they fluctuate for various reasons, irrespective of the goodwill and the policy of the Government.

Mr. T. Lynch

I think this Estimate would have gone through very quickly if the Minister had been—I shall not say "more careful"— a little more courteous in his answers about housing to various Deputies from this side of the House for some time past. Shortly after Deputy Blaney became Minister for Local Government, he sent a circular to local authorities and to the members of local authorities. I am on record in the Waterford papers as welcoming the Minister's circular and calling on the people of Waterford to avail of it. We do not try to blow down the Custom House or to blow down the Minister for Local Government, no matter who he is. I am very grateful to a former Lord Mayor of Cork, Deputy MacCarthy, for giving the reflection of the manner in which local authorities go about their business, as far as housing schemes are concerned. I respectfully suggest that if the Minister were to follow that line in dealing with the members of this House, we might make more progress.

Deputy Lemass shattered me. I expected more from an intelligent young man than the statement that they wanted more houses, that the inter-Party Government were holding them up in their schemes for building more houses. At the same time, he announces that 2,000 people a year were running out of the houses.

Mr. N. Lemass

1956.

Mr. T. Lynch

That must show that you did not want the houses at all but were just putting on——

Mr. N. Lemass

You never got over 1956.

Mr. T. Lynch

We never saw Deputy Briscoe since.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

He deliberately created that position in order to embarrass the Government.

Mr. T. Lynch

I find it hard to know where I am as to the numbers of the houses. I can quote the figures that are here. On the 11th February, 1960, in a reply by the Minister to Deputy Sweetman, as reported at Column 337 of the Official Report, the number of houses completed in 1956 was 4,218. In 1957, the number was 4,123; in 1958, the number was 2,033; and in 1959 the number was 2,399. I should like to know if they are all new houses. I want the Minister to make a note of that and to let me know if they are all new houses, because, on 10th February, in reply to a question by Deputy O'Malley, the Minister provided a tabular statement. Deputy O'Malley asked the Minister if he will state (a) the estimated housing requirements of each housing authority at the latest available date, (b) the number of houses under construction by each local authority, and (c) the number for which tenders are being sought. In reply, the Minister gave figures for each county and each county borough in respect of the number of houses under construction. It showed that on 31st December, 1959, the number of houses under construction in the borough of Waterford was 25.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Perhaps the Deputy would give the column and Volume references?

Mr. T. Lynch

Columns 69 to 72, Volume 179 of the Official Report of 10th February, 1960. That reply was intriguing to me because I am a member of Waterford Corporation and as far as I knew, we were not building any houses in Waterford. I put down a question to the Minister for answer on 24th February. It is recorded at Column 720 of Volume 179. I asked the Minister for Local Government if he will state the number of houses (1) at present being constructed by the Waterford Corporation, and (2) under construction on 31st December, 1959. The Minister replied; "Twenty-five unfit houses which were acquired by Waterford Corporation are being reconditioned at present, and work on these houses was in progress on 31st December, 1959. As the effect of this work is to provide fit units of housing accommodation, the dwellings are recorded for statistical purposes as houses under construction."

I should like to know if the tabular statement as supplied and put on the records of this House in answer to Deputy O'Malley's question is to be taken as meaning that the number of houses under construction includes the number of houses under construction and the number of houses under reconstruction in each county and county borough. If that is so, I would say that the reply is misleading.

I asked the Minister on that date, as reported at column 721, Volume 179: "Is the Minister aware that there are people living in these houses? If there are people living in these houses, how can they be available for applicants when they apply for houses?" The Minister said: "The only answer I can find to this riddle is that they are occupied at the moment and they are occupied as unfit houses; the result of reconstruction will be that they will then be occupied as fit dwellings." The people never left these houses at all. By putting these two classes of figures together, the figure given by the Minister for Waterford county borough is misleading.

The Minister was annoyed yesterday when a Deputy stated there was delay in paying housing grants. He pointed out what happened in 1956. That is no good to us. We are here in 1960. There are many builders' suppliers in the country. We are indebted to them. They have practically been financing the schemes, as far as I know. They give the materials to the builders in these cases. There is small builders in these cases. There is great delay in the issue of grants. I would say that the great majority of people doing this work would not have the money themselves and they are dependent on the grant to pay the contractor.

I hope this Estimate will go through today and that the matter of the payments will be speeded up. It will be welcome news to contractors and to people who own these houses. It is not right to come into this House and to say that the business is going well under this Government. It is not. As far as my constituency is concerned, I could say that 65 per cent. of the tradesmen have emigrated.

I had hoped that Deputy Lemass would withdraw his statement which was untrue and without foundation. It is the kind of statement that undermines the credit of the country, the kind of statement that will not come from this side of the House. When we are in Opposition, we shall not make statements that will cry down the credit of the Department of Finance or the Department of Local Government.

I would ask the Minister if he could send me the figures I request. Would it be necessary for me actually to put down a Parliamentary Question? It would save trouble if he would send me the figures in regard to Mr. O'Malley's questions of February 10th and if he would show in the answers he gave how many of these houses were new houses in the course of reconstruction.

Mr. O'Malley

It comes very strangely to hear members of the Fine Gael Party criticising the Government for delay in paying housing grants. I think one of the main factors in defeating the previous Government was the appalling plight in which the building industry found itself as a result of that Government's mismanagement. In December, 1956, as we know, a motion was put down by Deputy Smith, who moved it on behalf of the Fianna Fáil Party, criticising the Government's action. That carried very great weight with other members supporting the Coalition at that time.

The criticism made now evidently is that there are delays in the payment of grants. Some of the Opposition speakers are evidently not very conversant with the position, at least not sufficiently to differentiate between new houses and old houses. In regard to the payment of new housing grants, there is not, nor could there be, any unreasonable delay. I have not come across any delay in the Department of Local Government in the issue of a grant for a completed new house. There may be cases where, due to defective workmanship, the amount of the Government grant might be cut by £2 or £3. That might entail a certain amount of correspondence between the Department and the applicant, but if the applicant replies promptly to the queries, I cannot see where the undue delay would arise.

In regard to reconstruction grants, I can see delays arising. In the first place, possibly the applicant, perhaps through no fault of his own, is mainly to blame. If I might make a criticism of the Department of Local Government, the forms issued for reconstruction grants are not sufficiently comprehensive. There are only 7 or 8 different headings to be completed, so many square yards of plaster and so many linear feet of timber and so on. I think there should be space on that form for a more detailed résumû of the work to be done. The applicant, unless he employs an architect or an engineer or building contractor is not competent to price the work and it is there, initially, that these delays arise.

I have not come across any cases of undue hardship due to a hold-up in the payment of grants. If that happens in certain constituencies, it certainly does not apply in the Limerick area. I understand also in regard to the questions that were asked here yesterday that criticism was made by Deputy Sweetman of my intervention in the heat of the moment. There were, of course, very substantial commitments left to the Government when the Coalition departed in March, 1957——

Mr. Sweetman

Would the Deputy like the transcript of what he said yesterday? I have it here.

Mr. O'Malley

I recollect exactly what I said.

Mr. Sweetman

The Deputy was not here when I was speaking. Would he like the Appropriation Accounts to show that he was telling an untruth when he said——

Mr. O'Malley

The Appropriation Accounts?

Mr. Sweetman

Yes, the Supplementary Estimates are included.

Mr. O'Malley

If the Deputy wishes to take me up on a technicality that it was a Supplementary Estimate that the Minister for Local Government had to introduce to make good the debts of Deputy Sweetman's Government, or whatever it was, the point is that the Minister had to pay them, anyway. Deputy Sweetman will admit that very substantial debts had to be made good by Deputy Smith as Minister.

Mr. Sweetman

Nonsense. If the Deputy were a member of the Government, he would know that is untrue. I know he himself is not telling an untruth; he is merely repeating what others tell him.

Mr. O'Malley

They did not tell me anything about the Department of Local Government.

Mr. Sweetman

Are you not persona grata there?

Mr. O'Malley

I shall quote from Volume 161, column 896, of the Official Report. Deputy Smith, then Minister for Local Government, speaking on 7th May, 1957, said — perhaps Deputy Sweetman will listen carefully to what the Minister had to say when speaking on his Estimate:

Since assuming office I have recommended the issue of £1,340,000 to liquidate the obligations of local authorities outside the cities of Dublin and Cork, to banks, to contractors and to persons awaiting payment of approved grants and advances for private housing.

Mr. O'Donnell

Which then became due.

Mr. Sweetman

But I kept to the Estimate. This is not the heading for which this Estimate is introduced. I could deal with this also. This is "Grants for private houses" and I could not go outside that.

Mr. O'Malley

Most of the debate this morning has been a castigation of the Government in regard to delays in the issue of payments——

Mr. Sweetman

Of grants for private houses. This Estimate is only for private housing.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I think Deputy O'Malley is replying to statements that were allowed this morning.

Mr. O'Malley

If Deputy Sweetman wishes to object to my quoting an extract from the Minister's statement on 7th May, 1957, I am simply replying to a point made by the Deputy himself this morning.

Mr. Sweetman

Deputy Sweetman did not refer to local authorities; he referred to grants for private persons' building. That is the heading under which the Minister is asking for £200,000. I kept to it. I should have loved a wider debate and I shall refer to it later on the Vote on Account.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Perhaps Deputy O'Malley would give the reference?

Mr. O'Malley

I have already given it but I shall give it again. It is Vol. 161, column 896. I should like to remind Deputy Sweetman when he spoke of issues from the Local Loans Fund to local authorities that he was quite wrong in suggesting it has nothing to do with private housing.

He must be aware that quite a substantial sum of money is paid from the Local Loans Fund to enable the local authorities to issue loans under the Small Dwellings Acquisition Acts. He must also be aware that a substantial amount is issued from the Local Loans Fund to enable the local authorities to pay supplementary grants. The amount that Deputy Smith, the then Minister, had to pay to meet the Coalition's liabilities was £1,340,000. He went on to say:

The position in this regard is that the local authorities may now apply in the normal course for installments of approved loans to meet the firm commitments already entered into by them, according as these commitments become due to be discharged.

As regards new works it will be necessary to control the time of their commencement so that approvals to essential proposals now in hands and others accruing in the course of the year can be undertaken in progressive stages. I have already approved the undertaking of new works to the value of £300,000.

The date of that was the 7th May, 1957, a few months after the Coalition went out of office.

Mr. O'Donnell

What happened since?

Mr. Sweetman

Would the Deputy mind going lower down in that column?

Mr. O'Malley

I shall go to the bottom of the Column at 898, and I cannot go any lower than that, where the Minister for Local Government said:

The outstanding liabilities of the Road Fund at 31st March, 1957, in respect of road maintenance and improved grants and other liabilities amounted to £4,212,000. These liabilities were left at that unduly high figure on the date in question owing to the abnormally low proportion of the grants which had been paid in respect of the allocations for the preceding financial years.

Mr. Sweetman

Is this matter in order? Are we now allowed to say anything on anything?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy O'Malley is relating his remarks to the Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. Sweetman

Then we can deal with the Road Fund also.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

As long as it is relevant to the matter before the House.

Mr. O'Malley

In Volume 160, columns 2509 and 2510 of the 13th December, 1956, I was speaking on the adjournment debate on the economic position and I referred to the critical position in Limerick Corporation. I cited one example where we had a scheme in Limerick costing £330,000 and stated that we could not get the sanction of the Minister. The only satisfaction I could get was that on the 29th November, the Minister for Finance, then Deputy Sweetman, said:—

"Proposals in relation to Limerick Corporation for loans from the Local Loans Fund amounting to £410,200 under the housing of the Working Classes Act and £26,500 under the Sanitary Services Acts are at present before me and are being examined Departmentally. I cannot say to what extent these proposals will be accepted."

Mr. Sweetman

A good standard answer.

Mr. O'Malley

I got that answer, notwithstanding the fact that some of these houses were actually built and occupied and the payments could not be got from the Local Loans Fund. The answer to my question was on the 29th November, 1956, but I was speaking on December 13, 1956. I should like to recall what Deputy O'Donnell said at the time.

Mr. M.J. O'Higgins

That was the year in which 5,000 more houses were built than were built last year.

Mr. O'Malley

The bone of contention was that local authorities could not get the money for their commitments.

Mr. Sweetman

Your propaganda to that effect was very good and highly effective.

Mr. O'Malley

There is one point to which I should like to draw the attention of the House. Deputy Lynch has stated that there is not a lot of house building taking place in Waterford. There is no Deputy in this House who can suggest that for reasons of lack of finance a housing scheme is being held up. That cannot be suggested.

Mr. Sweetman

They have been held up deliberately up to this. Deputy MacCarthy has said so.

Mr. O'Malley

I did not hear the former Lord Mayor of Cork say that housing in Cork was held up because of lack of finance but I now challenge anyone to say that a housing scheme is being held up anywhere in this country today for lack of finance. I defy anyone to say that supplementary grants or Government housing grants are being held up for lack of finance; I defy anyone to give me an instance of a person being refused a loan under the Small Dwellings Acquisition Acts due to lack of finance. The position is that money is available today.

In the time of the Coalition our objection was that local authorities and private individuals were being misled and that the money was not there. The suggestion was that people should go to the insurance companies and to the bank but there was a limitation on the amount that could be obtained according to the income of the buyer. The first preference was to be given to the lower income groups. But when that group went to the local authorities the loans were denied on the grounds that they would be unable to meet them.

Mr. O'Donnell

Where is the change in the situation now?

Mr. Sweetman

There is no change.

Mr. O'Malley

There is at the present time the statutory limitation under the Small Dwellings Acts of £832. It was increased to that figure from the £12 a week maximum, by Deputy Smith. If the local authority borrows its money from the Local Loans Fund that is the maximum limit. If the local authority goes to the bank or the insurance company there is no statutory income limit.

Mr. Sweetman

Exactly. That has always been the case.

Mr. O'Donnell

There is no change there.

Mr. O'Malley

Deputy O'Donnell set up certain specified areas in the country; one might call them attested areas.

Mr. O'Donnell

Did it not work?

Mr. O'Malley

It did not work in a satisfactory manner. There were certain very large areas in the country where a private house could not be built. I cited that when I replied to a letter sent by the then Deputy Donegan, now Senator Donegan, to the Irish Independent in which he complained of the attitude of the Fianna Fáil Party in Drogheda. The guarantee scheme was not operative in Drogheda at all. I showed that at the time. Before concluding there are one or two other small points——

Mr. Sweetman

Before the Deputy concludes, being a man of honour he will either withdraw the charge he made falsely yesterday or else prove it with the book there?

Mr. O'Malley

There is the book.

Mr. Sweetman

Quotations from the Deputy are not as good as from the Comptroller and Auditor-General. The Deputy has not reached that stage yet.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Perhaps Deputy O'Malley will be allowed to make his speech?

Mr. O'Malley

I am quoting the Minister for Local Government.

Mr. Sweetman

I prefer the Comptroller and Auditor-General to any Minister, even one of my own Ministers.

Mr. O'Malley

Does Deputy Sweetman deny this statement of Deputy Smith?

Since assuming office I have recommended the issue of £1,340,000 to liquidate the obligation on local authorities outside the cities of Dublin and Cork.

I do not think I was very far out in my contribution yesterday when I mentioned the £2,000,000 mark.

Mr. Sweetman

The Deputy was a long way out.

Mr. O'Malley

I was not. I have come to the conclusion by doing a little bit of addition that I was, in fact, short of the mark. There was £1,340,000 for the rest of the country and, if the figures for Cork and Dublin were combined, it would be the best part of another £1,000,000.

I come now to the other matters to which I wish to refer. Does Deputy O'Donnell remember the occasion he made this remarkable statement?

There will be no recession in house building, absolutely none. I am making available for house building a source of funds never before available.

They never became available.

Mr. O'Donnell

You are still using them.

Mr. O'Malley

What?

Mr. O'Donnell

The insurance companies' contribution.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Would the Deputy give the column number for his last reference?

Mr. O'Malley

Volume 160, column 2017, of the 6th December, 1956— as I said, the last days of Pompeii. Deputy O'Donnell went further and said:

I have given an undertaking to this House, and I now repeat it, that any applicant of modest means who requires a loan under the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Acts will get it from the Local Loans Fund.

Then we had a dissertation as to what was meant by "a man of modest means". Previously we had Deputy Everett at a meeting of the Congress of Irish Unions making a speech in which he stated there was no scarcity of money for housing but that money would not be given to the wealthy civil servants and the teachers, who, I suppose, are civil servants too.

Mr. Sweetman

They are not. They are the servants of the managers.

Mr. O'Malley

The criticism of the Opposition this morning hinged around a period of anything from five to seven weeks. The approval in the case of the specific applicant referred to by Deputy Sweetman in his question yesterday was given by the Department in December.

Mr. Sweetman

Which question now?

Mr. O'Malley

The payment of a grant to an individual.

Mr. Sweetman

Does the Deputy mean the case in which the Minister slandered his officials?

Mr. O'Malley

The Deputy means no such thing. He was listening to the Minister and could not take that implication from it.

Mr. Sweetman

It is in the Official Report:

what the Department tell the Deputy and what they tell me is another matter.

Mr. O'Malley

Deputy Sweetman put down a question asking for certain information about the payment of a grant to an applicant whose name was supplied. To his horror he discovered that the grant had been paid.

Mr. Sweetman

Since the question was put down. That is why it was paid.

Mr. O'Malley

Put down a few more d questions and more grants will be paid. That is a very good idea. However, I put down a lot of questions on behalf of Limerick Corporation for payment of £403,000 and, unfortunately, when the question was answered the £403,000 was not paid. In fact, it was not paid until Deputy Smith became Minister for Local Government and had to put another £1,000,000 to the £6,000,000 deficit Deputy Sweetman left us. I think they have a hell of a cheek to criticise the Department of Local Government for delay in the payment of grants. As I say, it now hinges around a few weeks. It is a great compliment to the Government to think that there should not even be a delay of a few weeks, that when an approval certificate is obtained from the local officers payment should issue forthwith or at least within a week.

Mr. Sweetman

Come along and tell us something about the number of houses built under this subhead.

Mr. O'Malley

I shall tell the Deputy this, that there were never more houses reconstructed in the history of the State than at present. I have the figures.

Mr. O'Donnell

Last year there were 6,909——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy O'Donnell has already made his contribution. He should allow Deputy O'Malley to speak.

Mr. Sweetman

We are in Committee; we are allowed to speak again.

Mr. O'Malley

I think I have done remarkably well up to now.

Mr. Sweetman

The Deputy has given us a lot of help.

Mr. O'Malley

I forgot to mention the criticism by Deputy O.J. Flanagan of Deputy Briscoe and the sabotage he was supposed to have carried on when the Coalition were in power. That is not true. I should like to recall to the House that Deputy Denis Larkin got up immediately after Deputy Briscoe had spoken on the housing debate and as Chairman of the Housing Committee, endorsed everything Deputy Briscoe had said.

Mr. Sweetman

And Deputy Denis Larkin now realises he was codded.

Mr. O'Donnell

And we never heard from either of the two of them since.

Mr. O'Malley

I know perfectly well that the Labour Party and the Fine Gael Party have fallen out. I know perfectly well that Fine Gael hope some day to be the Government of this country and to drop all their friends.

Mr. O'Donnell

The Deputy can say that again.

Mr. O'Malley

There is one little thing——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

This does not arise on the Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. O'Malley

I am relating to this the politics of Supplementary Estimates. I am pointing out that there is one last little external link, so to speak, between Fine Gael and Labour. Even though Labour have avowed they will never again enter into a coalition, they have not yet said—perhaps the new leader will—if they will vote for a Fine Gael Party to form a Government.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy must link his remarks to the Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

The Deputy is very worried about the subject he is trying to speak on now.

Mr. O'Malley

I have dealt with the criticism of Deputy Briscoe and shown where Deputy Denis Larkin agreed thoroughly with what he said.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

No matter what kind the next Government will be, it will not be Fianna Fáil.

Mr. O'Malley

It will be a most interesting conglomeration if it is not. Another observation I should like to relate to the Supplementary Estimate is this. When Fine Gael go down-hill they always seem to descend to most unsavoury tactics and criticisms of a most doubtful nature. They produced Deputy O.J. Flanagan to-day on housing, if you please, talking about delays in paying supplementary grants, to criticise the Department of Local Government, and to criticise the Minister for Local Government—the same Deputy O.J. Flanagan as made a "bags" of Fisheries. It stinks.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is again getting away from the Supplementary Estimate and I shall not allow him to continue on those lines. He must get back to the Estimate.

Mr. Sweetman

The Deputy, you know, Sir, is an expert on stinks. That is why he used the world.

Mr. O'Malley

Deputy Sweetman knows that when I give a quotation and make an observation, I have the facts to back them up.

Mr. Sweetman

I have not seen that this morning.

Mr. O'Malley

I shall not repeat this for the third time because I would be pulled up for repetition. I think I have shown beyond yea or nay——

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

The Deputy has shown nothing.

Mr. O'Malley

——that there is no undue delay in the payment of grants, but above all at the present time, since this Government got the financial position on an even keel, there is nowhere in Ireland today where a local authority scheme or a private housing scheme need be held up for lack of finance. When people like Deputy T. Lynch from Waterford, and other Deputies, say this is not being done, or that is not being done, in Waterford or elsewhere, then that is the fault of the local authority.

Mr. Sweetman

That is why there are half the number of houses being built?

Mr. O'Malley

Certainly. It is one of the reasons.

Mr. Sweetman

Now we know.

Mr. O'Malley

I am very hopeful that in the coming 12 months, the number of houses under construction will substantially increase. There is one point which Deputy Sweetman has not given attention to, that is, that the days of building houses on the outskirts of cities such as Dublin, Cork, and Limerick are over.

Mr. O'Donnell

I said that three years ago.

Mr. O'Malley

The Deputy said that but he had no money to back up his opinion.

Mr. O'Donnell

I did not want money to do that.

Mr. O'Malley

The Deputy is perfectly correct in his observation about the number of houses at present. Any fool can see that, and I am trying to point out that the days of building houses on the outskirts of cities are over. No member of a local authority wishes to build on virgin land in the future because the cost of bus transport is too high.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

You put them up yourselves.

Mr. Sweetman

That is a bad point for Deputy O'Malley to make.

Mr. O'Malley

Sir, I am being continually harangued without the protection of the Chair.

Acting Chairman (Mr. Sheldon)

The Deputy should not pass observations on the Chair.

Mr. O'Malley

I should just like to correct an observation made by Deputy O.J. Flanagan. It was the inter-Party Government who transferred the power, in toto, to C.I.E. to do what they like with fares and we have no function in that whatever. Of course, I am worse to listen to the Deputy.

Acting Chairman (Mr. Sheldon)

The Deputy has been already told that he must not pursue that argument.

Mr. O'Malley

Pursue what, Sir?

Acting Chairman (Mr. Sheldon)

Something that is not in the Estimate.

Mr. O'Malley

The question of bus fares in regard to the building of houses on the outskirts of cities and towns, in my humble opinion, is relevant to the Estimate.

Mr. Sweetman

Not to the subhead we have before us. Before you came in, Sir, we had a discussion on fisheries, above all things.

Mr. O'Malley

I agree that the number of houses is not half as large as I would wish it to be and I am trying to point out that the concentration of local authorities is now on derelict sites in the centre of cities. Certain city managers and county managers were the cause of hold-ups.

Mr. O'Donnell

And certain Fianna Fáil members of local authorities.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

And of corporations.

Mr. O'Malley

I shall give one instance where Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael members of local authorities were misled by these so-called city and county managers, but under the City and County Managers Act, Section 4, which Deputy O'Donnell introduced, these members of local authorities are now coming to realise the powers that are vested in them.

Mr. O'Donnell

They shut their eyes to them when I gave them those powers.

Acting Chairman (Mr. Sheldon)

Deputy O'Donnell should not persist in interrupting.

Mr. O'Malley

I had occasion in Limerick Corporation to invoke the Section under which Deputy O'Donnell gave this power, but the Fine Gael members vetoed it. I think I have made this matter clear now. I have covered all the points raised, relevant and otherwise. There is a fall-off in the number of houses being built but I think I have explained that that is due to the policy of now building on derelict sites.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

When will the people get their money? When will the grants be paid?

Mr. Sherwin

I have been present for the past two hours and the debate has been very amusing, but I wonder what the public would think if they were here listening. Unlike the public, I have experience of all this sort of business and I can see through it. I am concerned with Dublin. I am a member of the Housing Committee and I know what our problem is. I admit that we have no difficulty about getting money for new dwellings, but there have been complaints from people of delay in receiving money for the reconstruction of old houses and repair grants. Our big problem in the future in Dublin will be the repair and reconstruction of old houses and I believe that increased grants for this work would help to solve it.

There was a time when we built as many as 2,000 houses a year but now we are not building any houses at all. We are building only flats and we are limited to about 300 a year and it is not likely that we shall build any more than 300 a year for the next 10 or 12 years. We have not got sufficient sites and, therefore, are compelled to work on whatever sites are available. It is because of that that no building is going on in the outskirts of the city and that is one of the reasons, the main reason, why employment in building has been reduced to as low as 300 persons. Last year, there were 600 employed in Dublin on the building of houses but now there are only 300 so employed and, in that regard, I should like to comment on remarks made by Deputy Briscoe and Deputy N. Lemass.

About a year ago, a by-election was pending in the South City constituency. There was a housing Estimate before this House and Deputy Briscoe stated that they hoped to build 6,000 flats in a few years. That was given headlines in the Irish Press and there were even pictures of workers at work. I stood up and said that was not correct and that 6,000 flats could not be built inside 10 or 12 years. My statement was correct. It was also stated that because of the flat building scheme, it was hoped to employ more people but I was satisfied that fewer people would be put to work. Last year, 600 men were employed when that statement was made by Deputy Briscoe. Now there are only 300 and the official view is that there are not likely to be more than 300 employed inside the next 12 years, and there may even be less.

As far as employment is concerned, we cannot expect a lot from the building of new dwellings. As I said already, only a limited number of flats can be built and as there is no building taking place on the outskirts of the city, we are confined to the work given in flat building. However, there is another solution, and it is the main point I want to get across to the Minister, that there should be no delay in the sanctioning of repair grants and grants for the reconstruction of old houses because that kind of work can provide employment for unemployed building workers. Apart from that, there is the problem that we have at least 5,000 persons on our waiting list looking for dwellings. At the rate of 300 flats a year it will be a long time before they are all housed. However, 2,000 of these 5,000 are not eligible, under present conditions, for houses. They are single people and couples living in one or two rooms. Some of the rooms are in a bad condition but not sufficiently bad to be condemned. Therefore, there are at least 2,000 persons on our list who are not likely to be housed by Dublin Corporation but who require houses. We cannot help them and, therefore, repair grants and reconstruction grants come into the picture. The Minister should ensure that there will be no delay in sanctioning and paying such grants.

There is another point that I should like to mention. I do not know that it is relevant to the Estimate but it has been referred to. Deputy Lemass, in trying to score over the Opposition, stated that during the period when the Opposition were in power, 2,000 persons had to leave their homes annually. That is not true. The highest number of persons who had to leave their homes was the number who left their homes last year. The number for the previous year was the highest on record. As a member of the Housing Committee of Dublin Corporation, I never miss a meeting and, therefore, I have my finger on the problem. We had a deputation from the Chairman of C.I.E. last week. One of the points raised was that many houses were vacated because of the increase in bus fares. It was up to me to get all the facts as to the numbers leaving their houses and the year in which they left. We got a factual statement from the Housing Section from which it appeared that the highest number vacated their homes last year and the previous year and not during the term of office of the inter-Party Government.

There were difficulties about obtaining money for housing purposes during the period of office of the inter-Party Government but I do not agree that the then Taoiseach's guarantee was refused by the banks. I am not aware of that.

I must emphasise that there should be no delay in the payment of grants for the repair or reconstruction of old houses because there are 2,000 persons requiring houses, whose dwellings are not sufficiently bad to be condemned and who are not likely to be housed by Dublin Corporation within the next seven or eight years. Unless grants are forthcoming quickly for the repair and reconstruction of old houses, the occupants will continue to suffer because in many cases the landlords refuse to spend money on them. Speed in the sanction and payment of the money may solve the problem. It may also solve the housing problem of Dublin. If all the houses requiring reconstruction or repair were dealt with, those houses plus the flats would solve the Dublin housing problem.

Mr. Blowick

I only want to put a question to the Minister. When this Supplementary Estimate is passed will the arrears of grants, particularly the second instalments of housing grants, which are long overdue, be paid? I would ask the Minister to insist on their being paid at once. I am sure the Minister, who comes from a country constituency, knows the difficulties. In some cases people are being pestered by the building contractor who supplied the material. I do not blame the contractors. They want their money. They have provided material. I would ask the Minister to clear up the situation as soon as possible. I do not wish to give a list of cases. I shall quote one, where completion of a house was notified to the Department by the Inspector in August, 1957, and the second instalment of the grant was not paid until December last, 16 or 17 months after the completion of the house.

Mr. Blaney

Could we have the name? I am just interested.

Mr. Blowick

The grant was paid last December. I shall give the name if the Minister is anxious.

Mr. Blaney

Just as a matter of interest.

Mr. Blowick

I do not see what useful purpose it will serve now.

Mr. Blaney

We may find the reason for the delay.

Mr. Blowick

Every little tuppencehalfpenny excuse is made by the visiting inspectors when a house is completed in order to delay payment or to have the grant reduced. I do not agree with that kind of thing. In one case a concrete footpath 2' 6" wide was constructed around a bungalow type house and the owner was compelled to take it up simply because it was 1/4" or 3/8" too high. These are ridiculous and petty points. The people in the country may appear very stupid, perhaps, to the Minister or his inspectors but they are not stupid. They know that these petty things do not count where a good job of work has been done. I am not being too harsh when I say that it is little short of blackguardism to make excuses like that simply for the purpose of reducing the grant by £5 or £10.

Deputy O'Malley amused me. He gave a misleading slant to the whole picture of housing. In 1952, I want to tell Deputy O'Malley, there were 12,644 new houses built; in 1953, 14,000; 1954, 11,000; 1955, 10,490; 1956—the first year in which we took office again after Fianna Fáil were in for three years—there were only 9,837 houses built. In the following year, the second inter-Party Government were in office and the figure went to 10,969. Fianna Fáil were back in 1958. In our last year we built 11,000 houses. Fianna Fáil cut that down to 7,480. Last year there were 4,893 houses built. Reconstructions in the same period were: 1952, 22,092; 1953, 22,573; 1954, 4,200; 1955, 4,900; 1956, 6,400; 1957, 8,157; 1958, 7,162; 1959, 6,109.

Yesterday, at Question Time, on a question relating to this Estimate the Minister was very anxious to tell the House the good job of work the present Government are doing in regard to housing. In 1955 we spent £1,995,000 on housing. In 1956, we spent £2,247,000; in 1957 practically the same figure—£2,167,000. In 1958, the year in which Fianna Fáil brought in a Budget after coming back to office, they cut it down from £2,167,000 to £1,527,000; and last year it fell still further to £330,000. These figures of expenditure I have given are the certified figures from the Comptroller and Auditor General's Office and they cannot be refuted. That is a deplorable state of affairs. We know that through conquest over the years, by reason of poverty and various other causes, the housing conditions of our people 20 or 30 years ago were wretched. I suppose we were one of the most backward countries in Europe at the time. It is essential that we should have proper housing for those of our people who are left. Whatever other way the Government may effect savings, the worst possible way would be to try to effect such savings by cutting down on housing grants.

Mr. P.J. Burke

It was very interesting to hear the last speaker giving these figures. What I am concerned with here is the statements that were made in the House in 1956. In 1956 350 applicants in my constituency were turned down, involving a sum of £700,000. In my constituency also a number of contractors jumped the boat and did not bother about housing.

Mr. O'Donnell

Did they get the money since?

Mr. P.J. Burke

I can give you the date they got it. In fact in May, 1957, three months after the Minister took office, he tried as far as possible to prevent people who had not already gone to the four corners of the earth from leaving the country. As I often said to Deputy O'Donnell when he was Minister for Local Government, it was not a crime to be short of money but it was a crime to tell the people that there was money ad lib and that they could go ahead and build.

Mr. O'Donnell

Was there a solitary person who built who was not paid?

Mr. P.J. Burke

That suggestion is a terminological inexactitude.

Mr. O'Donnell

Will the Deputy give us the name of one person who was entitled to a grant and did not get it?

Mr. P.J. Burke

I could give the Deputy the names of 50 in county Dublin and in Dublin city.

Mr. O'Donnell

And they were never paid?

Mr. P.J. Burke

They were never paid during the régime of the inter-Party Government?

Mr. O'Donnell

Was it due then?

Mr. P.J. Burke

It was. There was frustrating legislation brought into this House to deprive the ordinary worker of the privilege of looking for a loan. If you were earning £9 or £10 a week, you were supposed to be able to look after yourself.

Mr. O'Donnell

On a point of order, no such legislation was introduced in this House. There was never any definition as to what a man of modest means was. No legislation was ever introduced to define it.

Acting Chairman (Mr. Sheldon)

That may be a matter of fact; it is not a matter of order.

Mr. O'Donnell

The Deputy alleges that legislation was introduced here to define who should get loans under the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Acts. No such legislation was ever introduced.

Acting Chairman (Mr. Sheldon)

That is not a matter of order. The Chair is not concerned with the accuracy of the facts presented by Deputies.

Mr. O'Donnell

It is a matter of truth.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I shall bring in the reference on another occasion. In my estimation, the Minister for Local Government is doing a very good job. He is encouraging people to reconstruct their houses. As far as my constituency is concerned, if there is any delay, it is between the inspector from the Department and the inspector from Dublin County Council. There should be a little more co-operation between these inspectors. The Local Government inspector may agree to give the full grant but then the Dublin County Council inspector goes out and finds some fault in respect of bye-laws, and so on. Therefore, we have had delays in getting the second part of the grant paid by the Dublin County Council. I suggest that one examination should be sufficient and that if it is necessary to have two inspectors they should both do the inspection together, so that people will get the grant without delay. I have two or three cases in mind with which I have been dealing during the week, and that is the only difficulty I see in relation to this question.

Statements have been made here by the Opposition this morning which cannot be sustained in the light of the evidence of the past few years. We cannot get away from the facts. When Deputy O'Donnell was Minister for Local Government, I put more questions to him than, perhaps, any other Deputy. They were not personal because I have nothing against the Deputy personally—he is a very likeable character—but at that time I was trying to get information for a number of contractors who were in a very bad way. It would have been all right to tell them there was no money for them but to tell them there was plenty of money and that they should go ahead on that basis was a very serious matter which affected applicants for grants, builders and providers.

When we took over the Government in March, 1957, the housing position was chaotic and I suppose the confidence of the people came back when the new Government assumed office and when more money became available. The then Minister for Local Government was able to pay £1,300,000 to clear up some of the outstanding debts that had accrued over the years before that. I do not think the Opposition have any right to criticise the Minister. He is doing a good job and there is no necessity to create panic. I have every confidence that anybody who has applied for a reconstruction grant, provided the work is approved, will be paid.

Mr. Belton

It is most interesting to listen to some of the Deputies on the other side of the House speaking on this Estimate. I think everybody will agree that this Estimate should be approved because nobody would like to see any delay in the housing programme. Deputy Burke has said there is some serious trouble in the housing situation. He has even admitted that he had two or three cases last week of building contractors in county Dublin approaching him to help to solve their problems and give them alleviation.

I might point out that he is a Deputy for County Dublin. With the recent extension of the city boundary there is not a lot of building development being carried out in County Dublin and two or three cases a week is quite a sizeable average for any Deputy to deal with. I can ask any Deputy who is a member of the Dublin Corporation if he has had any complaints within the last six or seven months in regard to the delay in the payment particularly of loans and to a lesser degree of grants. I myself have been almost living in the small dwellings section of the Dublin Corporation since last October with the valuer of the Dublin Corporation to enable some builders to be paid money.

Some of these builders have had to cease operations; the bank manager was on one side of them breathing down their necks and the builders' providers were on the other side. Money legitimately due to them on houses completed and passed has not been forthcoming from the local authorities. The housing situation in 1956 was not very good. It was not rosy but bear in mind that this country had carried out a most extensive housing programme over the previous ten years. As has been pointed out by Ministers of the previous Government, and by Ministers of the present Government, the housing position had to reach saturation point at some time. I agree with that viewpoint but the Fianna Fáil Party during the 1957 general election paraded the country and criticised the previous Government because of the housing position. They said if they were elected as Government they would improve the position considerably. I suggest that the position now is worse than it was in 1956-57.

A question was raised about the reduction of a small sum of money in the payment of a grant. That system is completely wrong. The grant should be paid in full or not at all. If the inspector who goes out to inspect a house decides that there are a few minor faults and that in view of those faults he cannot, in his report, agree that the full grant should be paid, then the builder should be instructed to remedy those faults. If he does not remedy them, the grant should be withheld. It is ridiculous to my mind that where a grant of a certain sum of money is due to be paid on a house a trivial sum like £5 or £10 is retained.

I would urge the Minister to stress with local authorities the importance of clearing up some of the rivers, streams and water ways going through new housing schemes. I see the occupant of the Chair looking at me, as if I were not keeping to the terms of the Estimate.

Mr. O'Donnell

We dealt with fish earlier.

Mr. Belton

I suggest that I am keeping far closer to the Estimate than many others.

Mr. O'Donnell

We had fish and bus fares already.

Mr. Belton

Money is provided for the building of private houses. I suggest that in the development of private schemes one of the most important things is to have proper facilities and amenities. If uncontrolled water ways are flowing through them, as occurs in the city of Dublin, the position should be remedied. I could refer to Artane and Donnycarney where there are two rivers flowing through housing schemes. The Dublin Corporation applied to the Department of Local Government for a grant to culvert these streams but that permission has not been given to the Corporation.

Acting Chairman (Mr. Sheldon)

That appears to be a matter for the main Estimate. There is nothing about it in this subhead.

Mr. Belton

I have nothing further to say on that matter. I would urge the Minister for Local Government to inquire from the Dublin Corporation if there have been any complaints about delays in the payment of small dwelling loans. There have been very serious delays. I can give details to the Minister about the houses and people in question, if he desires. To my mind one department in the Corporation is blaming the other department. In one case I paid two visits to two separate departments—four visits in one day— and I got a contradictory answer each time.

Deputy Burke also suggested that, in 1956, 350 applicants for small dwelling loans were turned down. I suppose that is understandable. Many people apply for loans whom the local authorities in their wisdom or otherwise, feel could not meet their commitments. There are people who apply for small dwelling loans whose incomes are not sufficient and there are people who apply and who do not qualify for them in the area in which they have applied.

It has been stated here that Deputy Smith, as Minister for Local Government, made £1,300,000 available in May, 1957, to meet the debts left by the previous Government. That £1,300,000 was a sum of money that would have had to be provided by any Government in office, by the inter-Party Government or the Fianna Fáil Government, because it was a commitment that the inter-Party Government entered into with the local authorities. It was when the local authorities asked for these moneys that the payments were made. It happened to be an accident of time that Deputy Smith was Minister for Local Government in May, 1957.

Mr. Carroll

I have little to say regarding the general position of housing with the exception of the fact that I do know, further to my representations within the last week to the Minister, that some six weeks elapsed before an inspection took place on a certain scheme. I made representations a week ago but it is a month since a builder said that he would have to disemploy some 16 to 18 operatives by virtue of a delay in the completion of the loans.

I shall pass on from that question to the reconstruction grants. When the Minister was amending the Housing Bill I was very interested and I pointed out that I did not think the intention, behind the Bill, of creating greater employment would work out. The reconstruction of houses and the grants for that work as presently administered are a complete failure. I could give details of one case which involved four years, and another, three years. I am not suggesting, as others have suggested, that there is any question of a lack of money, but the administration is pathetic.

Deputy Burke mentioned the local government inspectors. It sometimes looked as if work of the local authorities was to be followed up by the inspectors. I believe that is unnecessary expenditure. I do not know what qualifications are required of those inspectors. Lest I be misunderstood as being in any way attacking the inspectors individually, let me give a concrete case. A person makes an application for a reconstruction grant. He submits an estimate and an inspection takes place. The work proceeds and is completed eventually, the work to be done having been specified in detail.

Finally, when one or other of the inspectors comes along, he may look up and see a chimney which was built 50 or 60 years before with flashing slates. Despite the fact that work necessitating the expenditure of a sum of £400 or £500 has been completed, work which qualified for the complete grant, that grant will be held up because the inspector decides against the slate flashing which has given good service, and has been perfectly satisfactory for that house and the adjoining houses, say in a terrace block. The grant will not be paid until the slate flashing is removed and copper flashing installed. There is no doubt about that. In fact, I was the victim myself.

I should like the Minister to consider the fact that the applications for this reconstruction work are made lest the houses fall into complete disrepair, and, because of the fact that the persons concerned have not the money to make the necessary alterations, we subsequently may have to build a house to accommodate them. A condition should be made that this work should be executed by contractors or at least tradesmen. My experience is that these grants and the work they entail have not resulted in any increase in employment. The work is being done at night by individuals who are holding down a job in the daytime. I hope the Minister will take the necessary steps to see that this work will be executed in the manner envisaged by most of us and I am sure by himself in particular when the Bill was introduced.

After a contractor has completed work for which he tendered, and submitted a detailed itemised estimate, an inspector from the Department can say: "Oh, you must remove that slate flashing before we can pass this." Time will go on and there will be unnecessary work which will hold up the payment of such moneys as are due. That creates embarrassment for those concerned so I feel that the administration of this Act should be completely revised and overhauled, so that the intention originally behind it may some day be implemented.

On the question of the loans to which I referred I had only one complaint but I felt justified in mentioning it because others had made complaints. I am not making sweeping statements; it is only fair to say that I had an assurance from the Minister's Department that the matter would be expedited and that the delay was not caused by the Department but by the local authorities. It is only fair to say that, but the delays in grants and payments in regard to reconstruction must lie entirely with the Minister's Department.

Mr. O'Sullivan

The debate has now practically exhausted the criticism we had to offer in relation to the attitude of the Minister at Question Time yesterday, and in his introduction of the Supplementary Estimate this morning. This Estimate must be passed in order that the people who have waited so long for grants may receive them. It is unfortunate that the Minister attempted to put something across, both yesterday and today, which cannot be substantiated by facts.

It was regrettable, and I am sure nobody regretted it more than the Minister, that Deputy N. Lemass should make the contribution he made this morning. He was, of course, forced to his feet by the fact that the chorus of approval present at Question Time yesterday was noticeably absent this morning. Deputy N. Lemass made a very extraordinary statement. He said it was the Dublin housing situation that brought down the previous Government and that this Government actually got in on the undertakings they gave in relation to housing. If that was the foundation, upon which the Government were elected, and continue in office, they certainly must be quaking to their foundations. If it is on that point they are going to establish a record in office, incontrovertible figures have been presented by many Deputies—I shall not weary the House by repeating them— in relation to the fall-off in the building of new houses since this Government came into office. The record of the previous Government in this regard is also there and cannot be controverted.

Deputy Lemass was speaking in a political sense and he said that, in his opinion, there was such a resurgence, and an improvement generally in the economy of the country, that we could look forward to the housing of a greater population. He must have come into the House this morning without having read the Estimate.

The Government in their published Estimates indicate a reduction of £17,000 for next year for children's allowances which would seem to indicate that the falling-off in housing is synonymous with an expected falling off in population. Consequently, it is hard to reconcile the Estimates with the remarks of Deputy N. Lemass. There is no doubt that the situation he described of the frequency and the vehemence with which members of the Dublin Corporation had to attend the Custom House and barrage the previous Minister for Local Government is a fact. There is no doubt that that occurred. However, it would now appear, from the absence of Deputy Briscoe from this House and from his lack of any interest whatsoever in housing problems in Dublin since the change of Government, that that was a politically-inspired campaign conducted for no reason other than to bring down the previous Government. Deputy N. Lemass confirms us in that view by his remarks in this debate.

I am at one with several Deputies on both sides of the House who, over the past month or two, have been barraged by constituents who have been held up by all these niggling requirements to cover up the fact that the Government were not in a position to pay these grants, not even in relation to local and private grants. I know contractors who have been waiting since 1955 for moneys due to them for work performed on housing schemes in North Cork. That must be dealt with. Consequently, we cannot delay the passage of this Supplementary Estimate.

It is very regretable that the Minister should have been condescending to Deputies yesterday and this morning and should have consequently sparked off this protracted discussion on this Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. Blaney

It is rather difficult to sit here and appreciate to the full that the members of the Opposition who led off this morning, notably the former Minister for Finance, Deputy Sweetman, and Deputy O'Donnell, my predecessor in the Department of Local Government, should come into this House on a matter of the provision of moneys for housing and blandly make any accusations whatsoever against any Minister or any Government, for, as they say, the withholding of moneys, the suppression of housing and the holding back of payments. What is hard to understand is that no two members of this House would have had the same humiliating experience as they themselves would have gone through in bringing about just such a situation as they are now trying to accuse me, my Department and the Government of. In trying to get across the case they have been rather lamely making this morning, they quote a welter of figures in regard to allocations of new houses, reconstruction, repair grants. Then we get the payments made, which are other figures which cannot be compared with the first lot.

By and large, a fairly decent effort was made by them to create a smokescreen with figures that cannot readily be assimilated and compared in order that an answer to their unfounded charges cannot be made readily, quickly and in an understandable manner now. They made great play with the fact that figures for housing, as they would point out, were higher in 1957 than in subsequent years. They would lead us to believe, from the manner in which they dealt with that matter, that house-building and houses in course of construction are something that, by pressing a button, you can get to go ahead and, by pressing another button, can be stopped.

Some Opposition Deputies quoted a number of figures and totals a few times, starting back in 1952. They gave a figure of 14,000, followed the following year by 12,000 in respect of houses erected or completed, followed by a figure of 10,000, followed by a figure of 9,000. They take us to task because, as they say, in the first year we came back into office, the figure became 7,000. During the three glorious years of their occupation of the Government benches, there was a declining trend in these figures which they themselves have quoted here to-day.

Mr. O'Sullivan

I beg the Minister's pardon. I challenge him to give the number erected in 1957.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy O'Sullivan must cease interrupting.

Mr. Blaney

Would the Deputy mind keeping quiet?

Mr. O'Sullivan

The figure is 10,969. The Minister deliberately skipped it.

Mr. Blaney

Will the Deputy deny that the figure quoted earlier for 1952 was 14,000?

Mr. O'Sullivan

That was for 1953.

Mr. Blaney

The fact is that according to the figures being used here to-day—I am using their figures, not my own—it is shown that during the Fianna Fáil term of office, 1953, if you say so, the figure was 14,000. It was stated, again by those same Deputies, to have dropped to 10,000 after the three glorious years of the occupation of this House by the Coalition Government——

Mr. O'Sullivan

No—10,969.

Mr. Blaney

——against 14,000 four years before. Is that not correct? Does the Deputy want to deny those two figures? They are the figures given this morning. They are the figures which they themselves have quoted.

I want to draw the attention of the House in relation to these same figures they are making play with, to the fact that during their term in office the figure established in 1952 or 1953 dropped by a very appreciable number by the time they vacated office and that a further drop which took place thereafter cannot surely be attributed immediately to the change of Government.

Mr. O'Sullivan

No. The Minister is wrong.

Mr. Blaney

The Minister is quite right.

Mr. O'Sullivan

There was an increase in 1957 over 1956 from 9,837 to 10,969. The figures were moving upwards. They dropped to 7,480 and last year, to 4,893. You can make anything you like out of these figures.

Mr. Blaney

I should very much like to hear the Deputy make a further speech, if he wants to, on these figures. Apparently, he does not want to.

Mr. O'Sullivan

The Minister is trying to twist the figures.

Mr. Blaney

If we go back to 1954-55, or before it, if you want it, you will find that a grand spree, as it were, by the Coalition Government was made evident during those years of 1954 and 1955 and that, in so far as housing and other works of advancement for the economy of this country were concerned in 1956, the dead hand of that administration had begun to close on building in this country.

Mr. O'Sullivan

Now give us 1957.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Order!

Mr. Blaney

Will the Deputy make my case?

Mr. O'Sullivan

I shall not allow the Minister to skip the last year we were in office.

Mr. Blaney

Possibly the Deputy does not want the Supplementary Estimate to go through——

Mr. O'Sullivan

He does.

Mr. Blaney

——so that we can pay for the increasing number of houses being built and reconstructed this year. The dead hand of the Coalition was evident in 1956. In 1957, because the dead hand was seen by the public and because of public unrest and demand, we had a general election which brought about a change of Government. The first job of the new Government then was, as has already been said in this House today, to start off by paying the debts and commitments already entered into in regard to housing and related matters by the Coalition Government.

To give only a very few figures, and not to confuse the position, taking money issued from the Local Loans Fund for the payment of supplementary grants by our local authorities, excluding Dublin and Cork, the figure in 1955-56 was £400,000 under that heading. In 1956-57, it was £340,000. In 1957-58, £1,000,000 was drawn from that fund to pay those supplementary grants through our local authorities. In 1958-59, the level of the draw had come back to a normal figure and £300,000 only had then to be drawn.

I want to show that the gap between the falls, as we have seen them— £400,000, £340,000 and £300,000 as against £1,000,000—was brought about by the fact that in April, 1957——

Mr. Dillon

The Fianna Fáil Government took office.

Mr. Blaney

——£350,000 had to be made available by the Minister under the new Fianna Fáil Government to pay the commitments and the debts left by their predecessors, the Coalition Government, in so far as these supplementary grants to local authorities were concerned.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.