Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 29 Nov 1961

Vol. 192 No. 6

Committee on Finance. - Local Loans Fund (Amendment) Bill, 1961—Committee and Final Stages.

Bill put through Committee, reported without amendment and received for final consideration.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."

I want to refer to two matters. There are many charges which fall upon the Local Loans Fund. I always regarded housing as being one of the most significant and important. It is important for this House to realise that, despite all that the present Government's supporters have said in the past, the record reads that the number of houses built with State assistance— and that includes new houses built by local authorities, new houses built by private persons and public utility societies, new houses built by other authorities—these three taken together, in 1954 was 11,179; in 1955, 10,490; in 1956, 9,837; in 1957, 10,969, that is, in the year ended 31st March for each of these years. With the return of the Fianna Fáil Government in March, 1957, the number of new houses built fell to 7,480 in the year 1958; to 4,894 in the year 1959 and to 5,992 in the year 1960, which is the last date for which I have figures available in Table 150 of the Statistical Abstract of Ireland, 1960.

The other matter I want to mention is this and it is typical of the reckless irresponsibility of an individual like Deputy Noel Lemass. Can you conceive of a Fianna Fáil Deputy who was Chairman of the Finance Committee of the Dublin Corporation, getting up in Dáil Éireann and saying that in 1957 the Government bankers, the Bank of Ireland, refused to accept the guarantee of the Irish Government for a loan for the Dublin Corporation? The statement, of course, is without a shadow of foundation; there is not a scintilla of truth in it but it shows the reckless lengths to which political Party ambition can carry an irresponsible person. If that were given credence outside this House or if the Deputy bearing the name he does were regarded outside this House as a responsible person, serious damage would be done. We know what he is. We know his utter irresponsibility and folly, so we discount what he says but it may be necessary, for the record, to mention that there is not a scintilla of truth in the statement made by Deputy Noel Lemass in that regard.

Question put and agreed to.

This is a Money Bill for the purposes of Article 22 of the Constitution.

Top
Share