Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 14 Feb 1962

Vol. 193 No. 1

State Lands (Workhouses) Bill, 1961— Second Stage.

I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time.

Workhouse lands and buildings are at present vested in the State and the purpose of the Bill is to transfer these properties to the local health authorities. The lands and buildings in question became vested in the State under the Constitution of 1922. They remained the property of the State although, concurrent with their transfer, the workhouse system was dismantled. However, under the Constitution, they could not be alienated. Under the State Lands (Workhouses) Act, 1930, they may be leased by the Minister for periods up to ninety-nine years, or for shorter periods by the local public assistance authority, as the Minister's agent. In either case, any net income received is applied to offset local expenditure on health services.

Under Bunreacht na h-Éireann, State lands may be sold or transferred to other bodies or persons in accordance with legislation. The State Property Act, 1954, provides for such sale or transfers of State lands generally, but not of the workhouse lands. Thus there is as yet no statutory power under which the Minister for Health could dispose permanently of any of these lands.

It is only by an accident of history that these lands are vested in the Minister for Health and not in the local health authorities, as successors of the old local Poor Law Guardians. Nowadays lands on which a local authority institution is built are normally vested in that authority. Indeed, when, under the Tuberculosis (Establishment of Sanatoria) Act, 1945, the Minister for Health received power to acquire land for the building of sanatoria, he was specifically required by the Act to vest in the appropriate local authority when a sanatorium was completed all the lands requisite for the needs of the institution. I consider it a logical step to provide at this point for the vesting of the workhouse lands in the health authorities, who occupy many of them and who, but for some quirks of constitutional and administrative history, would now be the actual owners or lessees.

Section 1 of the Bill contains the necessary definitions. Under Section 2 it is proposed that, on the Act coming into operation in relation to a parcel of workhouse land, that parcel will, without further legal formalities, be vested in the health authority in whose area it is situate. The legal interest which will thus pass to the health authority is that which is at present held by the State and varies from parcel to parcel. In some cases it is freehold or fee simple ownership. In other it is ownership on a fee farm grant, that is, it is freehold but subject to a perpetual yearly rent. In the remaining cases the lands are held on leases of varying lengths.

Workhouse lands which are not used by the local health authorities are generally let by the Minister to other persons for miscellaneous purposes. Under Section 2 the benefit of leases and licences issued to such persons will be transferred to the health authority. The net effect of this will be that rents receivable will go direct to the health authority, instead of first to the Minister and from him to the health authority.

Land transferred to a health authority under the Act will be regarded as having been acquired by the authority under the Health Act of 1947 for the purposes of their powers and duties. This will mean that the land can be used for some health purpose or, if it is not needed for such a purpose, may be put to use by the local authority in the discharge of some of their other functions—for example in the provision of houses. If the health authority do not wish to put the land to any such use, they will have power with the Minister's consent to sell, exchange, let or otherwise dispose of it—subject of course to any standing commitments under existing leases or licences such as I have referred to.

Some of the workhouse lands are at present held by county councils for purposes other than health purposes. Such lands will continue to be held for their present purposes. Amongst other things this will facilitate many county councils in schemes to vest the ownership of any labourers' cottages which are situated on workhouse lands in the tenants of those cottages.

Under Section 3, it is proposed to make provision that reports will be laid before each House of the Oireachtas at half-yearly intervals giving particulars regarding any of these lands, for the disposal of which the Minister has, during the preceding six months, given his consent. Leases for periods of less than twenty-one years will be exempted from this requirement. These provisions are similar to those for state lands, as contained in the State Property Act, 1954. It could be held that the procedure is not necessary in the case of the workhouse lands as their disposal by the health authority will have been effected in accordance with the procedure laid down in Section 83 of the Local Government Act, 1946, involving adequate prior notice to each member of the authority and the power of veto exercisable by the members on the disposal itself and on the terms of such disposal.

Further, as the disposal and the terms of disposal are subject to the sanction of the Minister, the Minister is accountable to the Dáil and can be required to defend his action in conveying sanction. However, it is, I think, appropriate that, although the ownership of these lands will now pass from the State, the Oireachtas should receive information at regular intervals on their eventual disposal.

There are about 140 of these old workhouses in the State. Some have been adapted for county homes. Others have been maintained for other uses, but many of the buildings are in various stages of decay. The total area of land involved is about 1,700 acres. The annual rentals payable to the Minister for Health for the lands that are leased amount in all to about £2,250 and the local authorities are also in receipt of smaller sums in respect of short leases granted by them. The amount of property which will be subject to the provisions of the Bill is, therefore, relatively unsubstantial.

To sum up, this Bill will make a minor but useful change in the law and I commend it to the House.

On behalf of the Fine Gael Party, I wish to say that we are prepared to accept this Bill, as it appears to be a purely administrative change turning over certain lands from the Department of Health to the local authorities. That, in itself, is a desirable thing in any of the matters relating to health. I have always been in favour of localising these matters as far as possible. This appears to be a Bill for the transfer of workhouse lands and the Minister has said that it really does not concern workhouse lands as they are already in the possession of local authorities. That puzzles me.

They are not in the ownership of local authorities. They have not the power of disposal. They are in their occupation but not their ownership.

The Minister's statement says that some of these lands are already held by local authorities.

They are in their occupation but not in their ownership.

Then the Bill proposes to transfer them in fee simple?

Then the Bill just transfer the ownership from the Department of Health to the local authority even though the lands are already in the possession of the local authority. There is the other small clause making it possible to have cottages vested in the local authority. We accept the Bill.

We believe this Bill is long overdue and we think it makes a very necessary change. The whole point is that the lands at present in the occupation of the local authority will pass to their actual possession so that they will be entitled to vest houses and cottages. That is the really important point. In Meath there is a number of houses built on such lands and, while cottages built on local authority lands can be vested in the tenants, cottages built on workhouse lands cannot be so vested. For that reason, we think the Bill will solve this problem and there should be no opposition to it. It is welcomed by us and I am sure will be welcomed by everybody else in the House.

As has been recognised by the House, this is a minor change. I think it is one which will make for greater economy in the administration and for greater convenience and flexibility in the handling of these lands, and if the House is agreeable, I should like to get all Stages of the Bill today.

Question put and agreed to.

Is it agreed that all stages be taken now?

No; there are a few things we should like to study.

Very good. Shall we let it stand over till next week?

Surely there is nothing to study in the Bill. After all, we did know it was coming along. I think it is important to these people who are involved in it. It is just a waste of time.

I have the greatest respect for Deputy Tully. Would he allow us to hold our own view?

The Deputy is perfectly entitled to hold his own view, but it is rather a pity he did not take the time to study the matter before he came to the House.

If Deputy O'Higgins wishes, we shall leave it until next week. We can take it only with unanimous consent.

Committee stage ordered for Wednesday, 21st February, 1962.
Top
Share