Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 10 Feb 1966

Vol. 220 No. 9

Housing Bill, 1965: Report Stage (Resumed).

Debate resumed on amendment No. 44:

In page 37, between lines 17 and 18, to insert a new subsection as follows:

"( ) The report shall include observations as the housing authority may, by resolution, consider should be notified to the Minister".

—(Deputy James Tully.)

Mr. James Tully

When the Dáil adjourned last night, I was discussing amendment No. 44 which I moved. The object of the amendment is that when a report is being issued to the Minister for Local Government under this section, it will include the observations of the members of the local authority. It has come to our notice that managers, when making reports on housing matters to the Department of Local Government, even at the request of the members of the local authorities, simply send the request with their own observations. Since there will now be a statutory obligation on the local authority to send in a report on the housing situation, we believe that unless this amendment is accepted, we shall have a continuation of that situation where the manager will make his own comments, which may not be in line with the comments of the members of the local authority.

If it is made mandatory on the manager to include the comments of the elected representatives, the Minister for Local Government will at least know what the elected representatives want. Otherwise we may have the situation where a manager reports that there are applicants for 150 houses in an area but that there is no land available and that those people are not so badly off for houses at all; whereas the representatives of the local authority may have pointed out several times to the manager that there is an adequate supply of land available if certain steps are taken and that, in fact, most of the applicants for housing are people who should be housed by the local authority. That is the reason we have put in this amendment, the purpose of which is quite clear.

Mr. Clinton

I should like to support the amendment. The need for it mainly arises from the fact that on a number of occasions over the years, the Minister for Local Government has given a quiet directive to the county managers that money is scarce and that they should go slow on building. It has been my experience over the past ten or 12 years that if the estimate of the elected representatives of the housing needs had been taken, we would be much further towards a solution of the problem than we are today. There are many more ways of choking a dog than with butter and it is amazing the number of difficulties that can be put in the way of a housing authority if the manager, backed by the local officials, decides that he is not going to build at the rate decided upon by the local authority.

It is not good enough to put us in the position that the Minister can come in here and attack county councils for having failed to do the job when, in fact, they have never failed to keep up the pressure but have failed to get their representations through to the Department. It is imperative, if we are not to be put into a false position, that we should have the opportunity of putting forward our estimate of housing needs. There is nobody in as good a position to estimate the housing needs of his area as the local representative. He knows the people. They are coming to him, writing to him and are on his doorstep while the county manager and his officials are sealed away from all that. The Minister should accept this important amendment which will at least give the contrast of views as between the estimate of the local representatives and that of the officials of the council.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Local Government (Mr. P. Brennan)

We agree in principle with the motives behind the amendment but we do not think it necessary to have it included in the Bill. There is nothing to prevent local authorities passing a resolution requesting the manager to do what they feel should be done. The proposition here is that the managers will not go as far as the local representatives wish them to go.

Mr. James Tully

The manager will send in his own views and not the views of the local representatives.

Mr. P. Brennan

Can the council by resolution not request the manager to forward their views?

Mr. James Tully

They can, but it is not a thing that you can use section 4 on.

Mr. P. Brennan

Who is to send in the views of the local representatives if the county manager does not do it? If the amendment is passed, the views of the representatives of the local authorities must be included in the manager's report but it is the county manager who must send them up.

Mr. James Tully

He must not do it now and he does not do it now.

Mr. P. Brennan

The county manager is the person who communicates to the Department. If there were a discussion on housing at the county council, the intention is that the views of the local representatives should be passed to the Department but surely it is the manager who would send these views forward?

Mr. James Tully

At the moment he sends forward his own views and not the views of the elected representatives.

Mr. P. Brennan

Surely he will have to send forward the views of the majority of his members?

Mr. James Tully

They are not doing so now.

Mr. P. Brennan

The building programme will be the council's programme.

Mr. James Tully

We will have to get in the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs here because we do not seem to be on the same wavelength at all.

Mr. P. Brennan

This section deals with building programmes. A member of a council has certain views and you want the manager to convey those views to the Department rather than his views. Is that not what he has to do?

Mr. James Tully

It is not.

Mr. P. Brennan

It is the council that decides on the building programme.

Mr. James Tully

But it is the manager who is the housing authority.

Mr. Clinton

The Minister can put the brake on the manager and take it off when he likes with regard to the building programme.

Mr. P. Brennan

It is a long time since the brake was put on, and when it was put on, we know who were in office.

Mr. James Tully

It has been on so long now that it has become rusty.

Mr. P. Brennan

The council may by way of resolution request that the manager convey their views to the Department.

Mr. Healy

If the manager did not send up the views of the council, the council could do so itself. There is no difference in the south between the managers and the councils. The manager sends up a report of what the council decides and what they require him to do. If he did not do that, through what channel could the views of the representatives be sent up?

Mr. Dowling

I think there is much merit in this amendment. Much of the criticism for lack of progress in housing falls on the local representatives but when a communication is sent from the manager to the Minister the local representatives do not see it and do not know what is in it. It is quite evident that it is the views of the manager and not those of the local representatives that are taken into account.

Minister for Local Government (Mr. Blaney)

The situation in regard to the adoption of the building programme is that the adoption of a programme is the right of the elected representatives. The report referred to here will be an integral part of the programme. If a council adopts a programme and a report goes with it to the Minister, it follows that the council should and will be aware of what that report is. The report could scarcely be compiled without their knowing its content since they would know what the programme is as they are the housing authority. Such a report could scarcely be compiled and omit the views of the council as they are the elected representatives.

If the council have any fear that that should happen, the manager is obliged to inform them as to the manner in which he proposes to compile this report or any other report for submission to the Minister, under subsection (2) of the City and County Management Act, 1955. If they have a manager whom they suspect of holding strong views contrary to those adopted in the programme, they can require him to inform them of the nature of the report he proposes to send to the Minister. As Deputy Healy said, normally in matters of this kind, a manager would without doubt represent the views of the elected members as well as his own rather than try to omit the views of the elected body which led to the adoption of the report concerning the programme.

Many circulars will undoubtedly have to be issued subsequent to the enactment of this Bill in whatever form it finally takes. We could specifically mention that we wanted to make sure the views of the elected members would be reported. I do not think they need have any fears that their views will be omitted or ignored. The adoption of the programme is their function. Without their agreement, there really cannot be a programme to report upon, nor would there be any special report such as mentioned in the amendment.

It is not that I am against the idea of a report reflecting the views of the members as well as the manager, but I cannot see how the views of the members can be kept from the Minister. Further, members of local councils are always free to send resolutions to me or any other Minister on all matters, even those not dealing with their council at all. Many of them do indeed pass resolutions on matters as far removed from their business as the moon.

Mr. James Tully

That is not so far now.

Mr. Blaney

If there was any fear of the modes of communication breaking down, they would still have this last link with the Minister. I am quite sure they would use it if they had to, but I do not think they will have to in this context. That is the reason I feel the amendment is unnecessary, not that the intention of it is wrong.

Mr. James Tully

Despite the fact he was a member of a local authority for a long time, the Minister must not be aware of, or probably has forgotten, some of the things that can happen. It is true that the programme must be approved by the members, and that, following that, the report will be made to the Minister; but the Minister must understand the report is made by the manager or on the manager's orders. The result is that the manager can send in a report with his own observations. If the Minister thinks that cannot happen, he should check on what happened in County Dublin not so long ago when the views of the elected members were completely ignored and a contrary report sent in with the recommendation that houses should be built. The same kind of thing can happen again. The elected representatives will not be aware of the fact that it has happened unless the report is rejected or the Minister is not satisfied. Then, when an inquiry is made, a letter may subsequently be found saying that this idea of the elected representatives is a lot of hooey and that the manager does not agree with it at all. The fact that the members draw up a report does not mean that the manager either accepts or approves it.

Deputy Healy referred to the situation in Cork. He is in the happy position of having a good manager who believes it is his job to carry out the wishes of the elected representatives. Some of the managers—not all of them because a number of us are dealing with county managers who are ordinary, sensible people—have still got the idea that they are little tin Caesars who can do anything they like, that God created a special type of person to be county manager who knows more than everybody else. The result is that the report will come in with the county manager's view and not with the views of the elected representatives.

Mr. Blaney

Section 2, where you have a queer fellow.

Mr. James Tully

We have heard of section 2 and section 4 before. If the Minister is insisting on this, I am prepared to let it go. But I am giving him this warning: on his own head be it. If it does not work out as he says, he will be hearing a lot more about it in this House.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 45:

In page 37, line 27, before "authority" to insert "housing".

As can be seen, this is purely a typographical error.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 46:

In page 37—

(i) in line 36, to delete "programme" and insert "programme, and"; and

(ii) between lines 36 and 37 to insert the following paragraph:

"( ) such other matters as the Minister may specify from time to time."

This amendment will enable the Minister to specify additional matters to which the housing authority shall have regard in preparing the review of the costs of their housing services which they are required to do by section 54.

Mr. Clinton

Could the Minister give us any idea of the types of things that might arise on which we would want additional information?

Mr. Blaney

We have section 54 specifically outlining what they should do. This is merely a sort of umbrella cover in case we should be confined to that.

Mr. James Tully

I think the view was expressed on all sides of the House that this should be included.

Mr. Blaney

Generally, anyway.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 47:

In page 37, line 42, to insert "either at least once in every five years or" and "being less than five years" before "at" and "as" respectively.

Amendment agreed to.

An Ceann Comhairle

With amendment No. 48, amendments Nos. 51 and 52 might also be taken.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 48:

In page 37, line 43, after "prepare" to insert "and adopt".

These amendments make the adoption of the building programme under section 55 a reserved function of the members of the housing authority. The amendment generally is, I think, the result of almost a unanimous request by the Deputies here on Committee Stage.

Mr. James Tully

That is right.

Amendment agreed to.

An Ceann Comhairle

With amendment No. 49 might be taken amendments Nos. 54 and 55.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 49:

In page 38, line 2, after "require" to insert ", and the housing authority may, if they think fit, include in the programme, an order of priorities relating to any one or more of the following:

(a) particular projects;

(b) projects in particular areas;

(c) projects to provide housing accommodation for particular categories of persons."

The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that a housing authority may include in a building programme an order of priorities relating to particular projects in particular areas or projects to provide housing accommodation for particular categories of persons. The amendments, for instance, would enable members of a housing authority to require that more emphasis should be given to particular areas in a county which apparently had been neglected for one reason or another in previous housing drives of the particular authority. The amendment goes some way, not all the way but certainly some way, towards meeting the case made by Deputy Tully in amendments Nos. 54 and 55.

In his two amendments, Deputy Tully proposes that a housing authority should be enabled by resolution to decide to provide houses or building sites in any area or within a specified time or direct the county manager to take steps to acquire an immediate number of building sites. If, in the unlikely event of a manager failing to comply with an order of priorities laid down in a building programme, the members of the authority could require him to do so under section 4 of the 1955 Act. In other words, if amendment No. 49 is accepted, the Bill would then read in such a way that should the manager fail to act on the priorities as indicated under the power of amendment No. 49 then section 4 would come into operation to require him, by the members' resolution, to do whatever he had failed to do that was an omission from their priorities as adopted.

Mr. James Tully

This does go a portion of the way to meet amendments Nos. 54 and 55. We had in mind the position where there is not an adequate number of sites available. We believe that if sites can be made available the manager should make them available. I have a recent example of where housing sites were badly needed in an area where a small farm became available which would almost have met the requirements. The matter was brought to the notice of the county manager and he was asked if he would take the necessary steps to try to acquire this small farm. He did not do so. The farm was sold, with the result that there are now no sites available in the area, nor are there likely to be sites for a considerable period. We want to make it a specific responsibility of the manager to do this. The Minister has gone a good deal of the way. Is there any possibility that he would reconsider the matter with a view to going the remainder of the way before the Bill goes to the Seanad? Níl sé ag éisteacht liom.

Mr. Clinton

I do not think that what the Minister is proposing in amendment No. 49 is sufficient to meet the case. It is all right to say that the local authorities or the housing authorities can insist on priorities being decided but that is not sufficient if the effort elsewhere is insufficient. In an area like County Dublin, particularly, or similar areas, into which people are moving very rapidly, if we are to keep in touch with the housing needs at all, and if we are not to have an ever-increasing backlog, the first thing that is fundamental is sites. We should be able to anticipate that sites will be needed in the various areas.

We know, more or less, what our development programme is, say, for ten years ahead. We know where we will extend services and what is likely to be the shape of the development in those areas. Unless the members of the council are in a position to insist that at least a certain area of housing sites is reserved and made available in all these areas, we shall never catch up on the demand that is there. We hope there will be considerable industrial development as well. Side by side with this, unless we have these areas secured for the council, we cannot decide to build houses—and, when we go to look for sites, they are just not there or they are extremely expensive. It is good business to move in, in advance of development, and to ensure that we have got sites to meet our housing needs.

If it is left to the county manager and the officials in the council, all the time they will err on the side of caution. You will have this excess of caution leaving us in the position we have been in for years now so that, when we had the "go ahead" to build we had not the sites and when we were ready to look for sites there was no money. That is the present position. That is the start and unless we have these sites we cannot build the houses. I think Deputy Tully's amendment is essential if we are to get the power that we need to supply the housing needs in areas into which people are moving fairly rapidly.

Mr. Blaney

Would the Deputy ever tell the House how, by doing this, he would overcome the main objection, according to his own assertion, that is, the shortage of money at the moment?

Mr. Clinton

We cannot get over it until we get the money.

Mr. Blaney

In fact, you would probably frighten the money off.

Mr. Clinton

Not at the moment, because we cannot get the money to build the houses.

Mr. Blaney

You get a fair share.

Mr. Clinton

When are we to get any?

Mr. Blaney

In Dublin city——

Mr. Clinton

Ah, in Dublin city.

Mr. Blaney

——and Dublin county.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 50:

In page 38, between lines 15 and 16, to insert the following paragraph:

"( ) the provision of adequate and suitable sites for building purposes;".

This amendment is in a sense very relevant to the previous amendments, particularly as it specifically relates to the consideration that must be given in the preparation of a building programme to the provision of adequate and suitable sites. The amendment is specifically directed towards the provision of adequate and suitable sites within the building programme and, read in conjunction with the amendments which the House has adopted, it will give us the full power that has been sought inasmuch as the matter of sufficient sites will then be, as proposed under this amendment, a specific requirement. That is highlighted by the amendment being put down as a special amendment, to emphasise that, lest anybody might read the Bill as originally drafted as substantiating a view that the sites did not really come within the same terms or with the same emphasis as would the provision of the actual houses. This, added to the previous amendment, gives the nearest thing to what was required.

Mr. James Tully

Does the Minister claim that the last amendment and this amendment cover the points made in 53 and 54?

Mr. Blaney

The points raised by the Deputy in relation to those are certainly covered reading the two things together and they would emphasise the question of sites being a consideration in the preparation of a building programme, which building programme and its adoption is a matter for the elected members. Taken together with 55, which makes it a reserved function, the two things give what is sought generally by Deputy Tully and other Deputies in regard to this matter.

Mr. James Tully

The only thing is that there seems to be a new procedure here. Normally, when a Bill is before the House and amendments are introduced which seem to be reasonable, the Minister accepts the amendments. It seems to be a new procedure whereby he introduces amendments of his own which he says are similar to the amendments put down by Deputies and which should be accepted instead. If that is the way he wants it, that is quite OK with me.

Mr. Blaney

It is not instead. It is the same end that is obtained, coming from a slightly different direction.

Mr. James Tully

The Minister's end is different from ours.

Mr. Blaney

I do not think so.

Mr. James Tully

The amendment appears to go a long way towards meeting what we wanted. I do not agree that it fully covers what we want but it is a very big improvement on the original provision in the Bill. I hope it will have the desired effect. We will only have to wait and see.

Amendment agreed to.

An Ceann Comhairle

Amendment No. 51 was decided with amendment No. 48 as was amendment No. 52.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 51:

In page 38, line 24, after "prepared" to insert "and adopted"; and in line 26, after "it" to insert "and adopt".

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 52:

In page 38, between lines 27 and 28, to insert the following subsection:

"( ) The adoption under this section of either a building programme or a variation in a building programme shall each be a reserved function."

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. James Tully

I move amendment No. 53:

In page 38, between lines 27 and 28, to insert a new subsection as follows:

"(5) A housing authority may, by resolution, require a county manager to employ such additional staff (as may be specified in the resolution) to carry out the building programme within a specified time and the manager shall forthwith carry the resolution into effect as soon as possible."

I have made the case for amendments Nos. 53 and 54 which were taken with No. 49.

An Ceann Comhairle

Yes.

Mr. James Tully

I have nothing further to add except again to ask the Minister if he will be prepared to have another look at the amendment and, if necessary, bring in a further amendment in the Seanad to bring it nearer to that point. There are one or two points in the amendment which, as Deputy Clinton pointed out, are not fully covered. As the Minister has gone three-fourths of the way, he might as well go the whole way.

Mr. Clinton

Could I say a word on the staffing problem that is raised in this amendment? At the moment elected representatives are powerless in relation to staff. The county manager can simply throw up his hands and say: "I cannot carry out this programme. I just have not got the people to do it." It is quite right at times to say that it is difficult to get these people. It is also right to say that the Minister may rob the council of some of the staff. It is right to say that the Department of Local Government can take some of the best people on a council's staff, pay them more money and refuse to allow the local authority to pay them when there is difficulty in getting staff. Then the manager can say that the council has lost its best people and that he cannot go faster than he is going. At the same time, the Minister is criticising the county council and everybody says the councillors are useless. The councillors are helpless. The manager says: "I have not got the staff and cannot proceed with the job". There is nothing the council can do except to keep pressing the manager to get the necessary additional staff. I do not know whether or not there is any way around this. I know it could be wrong that councillors would be in a position that they could tell the manager: "You must employ ten more people in that department", but they should be in a position to say to the manager if he says he has not got enough staff: "That is your problem and settle it within a reasonable time because you cannot keep trotting up to us the excuse that you have not got staff. Are you making sufficient effort?" We cannot know whether he is or not. There should be some way of dealing with it. That is the main problem posed in amendment No. 53 and the Minister should in some way meet it.

Mr. Blaney

Deputy Clinton has almost put his finger on the bell in regard to the situation that I know obtains, which is, that far from managers being required by the council to recruit staff, the procedure is the reverse, that far more cases occur where managers propose to recruit staff which the council very often do not agree that they need. In so far as poor Deputy Clinton's county council is concerned, if we are to take the logical line from the argument that the Minister is stealing these people by offering greater incentives and leaving the council in the position that they cannot get on with their work, what about my county and counties west, which are being steadily drained of the best they can get and train by Dublin and other counties in the east? According to that we should not be able to do anything. Yet we struggle on. That has been going on for generations.

Mr. Clinton

I do not remember that we got any Donegal people.

Mr. Blaney

In fact, your county is run by them at the moment and you do not know.

Mr. Clinton

That explains a great deal.

Mr. Blaney

It explains the new revival. It is true that this sort of filching goes on all the time but, remember, this is part of a system which staff as a whole insist upon and have insisted upon down the years, of open competition for all these jobs so that they would have clear and equal opportunity for promotional purposes, whether that promotion is sought for greater status, greater pay or their own personal wish to be in the city or on the east coast or in the more attractive parts of the country from the point of view of schooling, universities, and so forth. This is the situation. I do not see any likelihood of a change in that situation in future. While Dublin County Council may feel slightly inconvenienced occasionally by the fact that some of the good people whom they have attracted from other counties over the years are further attracted into the Department, it is the system and there is not much that we can do about it. I would say, in passing, that the Deputy should think of the greater difficulties of other counties. The further west you go, the greater the difficulty in this regard.

Mr. Clinton

Their job is lessening all the time in relation to housing.

Mr. Blaney

Not lessening, no. The Deputy should go west for a while and find out what the actual position is. Some people employed in some western counties have more to do in a week than some of the Deputy's employees do in the equivalent post in a month. That is well known. It is one of the reasons why we in the western counties——

Mr. James Tully

Slave labour in Donegal.

Mr. Blaney

It is for love of us they stay there, as the Deputy probably appreciates. It is true that this is one of our difficulties and the further west, the greater the difficulty. If Dublin county find themselves in a difficult position, just have a thought for us who find ourselves in a much worse position because the same factors are operating as have operated over the years. Staff are taken from us and disappear into the east. That is happening for various reasons and not just because of promotion or money. We tend to lose and I cannot, therefore, console the Deputy.

Mr. Clinton

It is the size of the job in Dublin that calls for staff.

Mr. Blaney

If Dublin had operated as strenuously as they would now appear to wish to operate, their job, relatively speaking, would not be greater today than is the job in the counties in the west.

Mr. Clinton

The brake was on.

Mr. Blaney

No. Everyone was behind the council, but they did not get on with the job. Now that there is movement, it is true that there is restriction on money, but there is no restriction on staff and Dublin county and city are getting not just their share, as I am sure some of my colleagues from other areas believe, but more than their share.

My first observations are, I think, the ones that are of most weight. Far from having to require, request or drive managers into employing staff, this is one way of stopping them employing staff they do not need. That is my experience of the situation. In regard to vacancies, the council is not just out in the wilderness. If a vacancy exists the Local Appointments Commission are requested to fill it and, if they are not requested, the council should be aware of the fact. They are aware a vacancy is filled and they should likewise be aware if it has not been filled. It is not true to say, if a vacancy is not filled, that the manager comes back and says he tried.

Mr. James Tully

Suppose the appointee does not take up the job?

Mr. Blaney

I am replying to Deputy Clinton's argument, which was that the Department swipes these people and the council is left short. The manager says he has tried and could not get staff and I gather from the Deputy that something can be done about this. It is the job of the Local Appointments Commission to fill the job at the request of the manager and his council. If they do not succeed in filling the vacancy it is not fair to blame the manager. There is no other way in which to get a man if he is not available. He just is not there. He does not offer.

Mr. Clinton

It may be a question of salary.

Mr. Blaney

There is nothing we can do about that. The Deputy will agree that, while all of us think our own job is the more important, at the same time it will be generally conceded, though not in some specific cases, that in the Department we require the best people who have had experience in the local services in order that we may in turn provide a better service for the local council. That is a natural sort of evolution and, while I am sorry in a way that we should deprive councils of these people, the fact is they offer and they are regarded in many cases as the best men. The councils are left short. That is the order of things and it is likely to continue.

The real problem is the fact that the filling of some of these vacancies has proved very difficult, if not impossible, particularly in recent times in relation to highly skilled technical people. We cannot overcome that difficulty overnight. It is not within our competence to do so. I would not think managers have all that difficulty in getting staff and my ambition would be to stop them employing staff they did not really want.

Mr. James Tully

I was under the impression when speaking earlier that amendments Nos. 54 and 55 were being taken with No. 49. It was my own fault and not the fault of the Chair. Amendment No. 53 appears to bear no relation whatever to the other amendments and I do not know how it came to be mixed up with these. Amendment No. 53 is the one which deals with staffing and I am sorry if I failed to refer to it when speaking earlier. The amendment says:

In page 38, between lines 27 and 28, to insert a new subsection as follows:—

"(5) A housing authority may, by resolution, require a county manager to employ such additional staff (as may be specified in the resolution) to carry out the building programme within a specified time and the manager shall forthwith carry the resolution into effect as soon as possible."

Deputy Clinton has put his finger on portion of the problem and the Minister apparently appreciates what the situation is. But that is not the whole story. When the recent Planning Act was passed a situation arose in which more work had to be done in regard to housing and most of the county managers took the easy way out. They recruited their planning staff from the housing office of their own county. The result was they left a number of vacancies in the housing office. These were filled eventually. Whether the people who filled them are or are not as efficient as those who went before them is not the point at issue. They were new to the job and that naturally held things up for a considerable period. Deputy Clinton says the managers say they are unable to get the staff they need; even if the council are forcing the manager to go ahead with the job he says, particularly with regard to technical staff, that he cannot get them. That is a problem in many counties and not alone in Donegal and others.

Councils find they cannot get engineering staff at the present time. The engineering staff which they have is put to normal work and it would be very difficult to get any additional staff for housing. This has resulted in a number of schemes in various counties being held up, whether or not the money is available. The amendment suggests that the housing authority may insist on the county manager getting the staff. We believe that in many cases county managers are not getting extra staff. They are conscious of the fact that they want to keep the rates down and if there are a large number of people looking for houses and getting houses and if they have to employ extra staff for housing schemes, this will increase the rates. The county manager could say that the staff just is not available. I asked the Minister what happens when an officer is appointed and does not turn up——

Mr. Blaney

He is looking for a better job.

Mr. James Tully

This means that a further period is involved of from three to six months. The Parliamentary Secretary will be aware of circumstances where a county council becomes so fond of an official that apparently they will not let him go.

Mr. P. Brennan

That is a matter for the official himself.

Mr. Blaney

There is no transfer fee. It is not like the transfer of a footballer.

Mr. James Tully

I am GAA and I would not know anything about that.

Mr. Blaney

No, purely an amateur.

Mr. James Tully

The point I am making is that if the county council feel that the manager is not doing all he should to get staff, he should be forced to do so by the county council. The manager tries to save some money simply by refusing to find the staff and the only way to deal with that is to give authority to the elected representatives to order him to find the necessary staff. Then he cannot say that there is no staff available which is a better excuse than saying that the Department would not provide money.

Mr. Blaney

If I thought that there was the germ of a possibility in this, if it would get staff where they are not obtainable——

Mr. James Tully

There are two points involved. One point is that certain staff are not available, and the second point is that where staff are available, the manager will not make the necessary provision to get them. The Minister can ask any of his colleagues and I am sure they will tell him that most managers do not want to employ extra staff and do not want to replace members of the staff who leave.

Mr. P. Brennan

If they cannot hold them——

Mr. James Tully

If the Minister finds that they are being taken away by the offer of a higher rate of remuneration, then he should have them better remunerated.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendments Nos. 54 and 55 not moved.

Mr. James Tully

I move amendment No. 56:

In page 38, between lines 52 and 53, to insert a new section as follows:

"(1) Whenever in any urban area or in any non-municipal town area (or in any rural housing district defined by the housing authority) the authority has no land suitable for the purposes of sections 56 and 57 of this Act it shall be the duty of the authority to acquire land as soon as possible.

(2) Within one month after the passing of this Act (and thereafter in the months of May and November in each year) the manager of a housing authority shall, in respect of each urban area, non-municipal town area and each rural housing district, report the following particulars to the authority:

(a) the area of land and site capacity.

(b) the number of applicants for houses and sites, and

(c) the number of houses provided by the authority in which more than one family resides."

The purpose of this is to bring up to date the amount of land available for housing, the number of people looking for and entitled to houses and it will cut out what the Minister at present specifies, that sites in advance of need should not be provided. If we attempt to take over land which is in advance of the immediate need, the county manager will say that we are not entitled to do so. The Minister may shake his head but we have had instances of it in County Dublin where the Minister said that the area of land was unreasonable.

Mr. Blaney

I think we should leave County Dublin out of this. It is confusing the——

Mr. James Tully

If the greater Dublin plan of Mr. Wright is generally adopted, Trim and Navan will be in it.

Mr. Blaney

I get you now—it is the greater Dublin area.

Mr. James Tully

I do not propose to allow an opportunity like this to pass by if we are——

Mr. Blaney

Do you want to join them?

Mr. James Tully

No, I think it would be a terrible thing.

Mr. Blaney

Do not blame me.

Mr. James Tully

Let them go down to Donegal.

Mr. Blaney

That would be the day.

Mr. James Tully

The county managers could be forced to take over sites in advance of need, particularly in areas where it is likely that there will be a need for a number of houses later on and where land may come on the market now and if sold, may not come on the market again. There were one or two cases of this where areas of land amounting to ten or 20 acres were being sold and while four or five acres would meet the need, the county manager said he would not be entitled to take over the whole lot. The result was that the land was sold and now no other land is available or likely to become available. This means that extra money has to be paid for sites. In the village in which I live, a farm consisting of three fields was being sold. The council at the time estimated that 34 houses would be required and they bought land which would cater for 44 houses. There was a third field which the council refused to buy and which they were offered for £450. The council eventually built houses on the two fields, the demand kept growing and last year they had to buy the third field for £1,650. That is a typical example of where money could be saved if the right to buy land in advance of the need were accepted by the Minister and county managers.

Mr. Clinton

We have partly discussed this amendment on other amendments and Deputy Tully has discussed it fairly comprehensively. I know that the Minister may feel that some of the recommendations made by the elected representatives of County Dublin sounded a bit ridiculous or a bit unbalanced. Housing needs today have to be anticipated and the position often arises where we might want 20 acres and the only place where we can get them is on a farm of 55 acres. I am quoting an actual example in this. The man says: "I will sell the lot but if you take 20 acres, you will leave me with an uneconomic unit". If the housing need in the area is great, and this is the only site suitable or available, the council should have the right to buy the farm. The way to dispose of the balance should be made easy and there should be co-operation and consideration of these difficulties not only in the Department of Local Government but in the Land Commission as well. There should be an easy way to subdivide the land and sell the balance to adjoining farmers, perhaps to bring their holdings up to an economic level, or give them land which they could use, and at the same time ensure that the housing needs of the local authority in the area would be met.

I do not think that by and large the elected representatives are likely to go completely mad on this question or that they are going to insist that every big farm that becomes available should be purchased by the county council in anticipation of needs that may not arise in the next 100 years. If we know that an area is going to become a development area in the foreseeable future and that land is available there, it is reasonable that the council should insist that a real effort is made to buy land, and they should have the authority to dispose of whatever they consider surplus to their requirements in the normal way. They should also be facilitated through the Land Commission in relation to subdivision and all the other measures necessary in order to implement this type of provision. The amendment has a lot to recommend it and the Minister should very strongly consider accepting it.

Mr. McAuliffe

The Minister would be very wise to accept this amendment. I have in mind the position in Cork over a long number of years where we have been less fortunate than other areas, due to the fact that we have a county manager and two assistant county managers; the position of assistant county manager has become vacant and the temporary man does not take the same interest in the housing problem. Time and again we have asked the assistant county manager for North Cork to make provision for houses. The answer he always gave us was that he would have to see the county medical officer of health or have a survey made of the locality in which we were interested. The result is that a considerable amount of land has passed away which could have been acquired by the local authority.

There is a little place convenient to the town of Mallow, and the Minister's colleague, Deputy Corry, came in here time and again and pressed the Minister in relation to housing around Mallow, and rightly so. We find that outside the urban boundary of Mallow, it is hard to get sites because builders acquire all the available sites, and the parcels of land that are in the locality are not large enough. If we were in a position to examine the housing programme, as is suggested in this amendment, so as to know exactly what the commitments in respect of land and housing requirements were in the area, we would be safeguarded in regard to the housing of our people. This amendment is a step in the right direction and as a member of a local authority over a long number of years, I would suggest to the Minister that he should accept it. It is necessary and it is the only way by which the local authorities can act.

Mr. P. Brennan

The official view here is that the amendment is unnecessary. Section 56 provides that the local authorities may erect houses. Section 57 provides that they may provide building sites, but they can neither build houses nor provide building sites if they have not got the land, and they are entitled to purchase land in keeping with their building programme, whether it is a five-year or a ten-year programme. Under the 1946 Local Government Act, they could acquire land by agreement. Under section 76 of this Bill, they will be able to buy land by compulsory acquisition for the purpose of providing sites for the erection of houses within their own area. Deputy Clinton talked about his baby out in north County Dublin. Whether it was reasonable to allow them to purchase 260 acres when their needs were only seven acres is very doubtful, but if the local authority have a genuine building programme, they must have land and they are entitled to acquire the land under this Bill.

Mr. James Tully

We shall have to send for the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs again because there is something wrong with the lines of communication. What we have been talking about and what the Parliamentary Secretary has been discussing are miles apart. Section 56 (1) says:

A housing authority may erect, acquire, purchase, convert or reconstruct, lease or otherwise provide dwellings.

That refers to dwellings. It has nothing whatever to do with sites.

Mr. P. Brennan

Dwellings cannot be provided without sites.

Mr. James Tully

We are referring to sites in advance of need. That is an entirely different thing from what the Parliamentary Secretary has been talking about. Section 57 says:

A housing authority may provide sites for building purposes on land acquired or appropriated by them for purposes of this Act and in connection with the provision of such sites may construct roads and lay out open spaces ...

That has nothing to do with the amendment.

Mr. P. Brennan

What about section 76?

Mr. James Tully

The Parliamentary Secretary did not mention section 76.

Mr. P. Brennan

I did.

Mr. James Tully

Let us see what section 76 says: "A housing authority may be authorised to acquire compulsorily"—this is coming nearer to what we seek but it still does not meet it—"for the purposes, and in accordance with section 75, of this Act, land not immediately required for those purposes, provided that the Minister is of opinion that there is reasonable expectation that the land will be required by the authority in the future ... " Here again this is something we want to do away with. How would the Minister know whether or not the local authority would require the land in the future?

Mr. P. Brennan

By the housing programme.

Mr. James Tully

We want to give the elected representatives on the local councils the right to say, as they alone know, where land will be required or is likely to be required in an area. We do not believe that if a farm is up for sale the elected representatives should have to wait to tell the manager that there is land available, to wait until the manager writes to the Minister and until the Minister sends his reply in the usual way and will not decide upon it even within three months, and eventually the land is sold. We are trying to give authority to the local representatives, when a farm is being sold, to say to the manager: "We think we need that land in the future. You go out and make arrangements to acquire it."

Mr. P. Brennan

Is that in keeping with the local building programme?

Mr. James Tully

Again the Parliamentary Secretary is not at all on the same wavelength as I am. I am not blaming him for that. Possibly it is my fault—I am talking about one thing and he is thinking of another.

Mr. P. Brennan

We are both speaking in terms of land for building purposes.

Mr. James Tully

I live in an area in County Meath where in 1943, there were only 450 people living. This is 1966 and there are about 1,250 people living there. Inside the next ten years, if land is available, that area could double in size because it is a convenient area. It is designated as a building area but the land is not available. If the Minister wants to be sticky about it, the manager cannot tell him that he requires sites for a further 300 houses in that area although the council are satisfied and have passed a resolution that 300 houses should be built in it. The whole catch about this is that as the Bill is framed, if the local authority wanted to acquire sites in advance of need, they must, first of all, ask the county manager. The county manager will ask the Minister. If there is a farm being sold, by the time the Minister gets round to it, the farm will be gone. We are trying to shortcircuit this.

We are also asking that twice a year the manager should report to the council the area of land available in the district, the site capacity of that land, the number of applicants for houses and the number of local authority houses in which more than one family resides. It is true to say that there seems to be no record of our housing needs at the present time. Some years ago the Minister asked a number of local authorities to comment on this and by the time the last reply came in, the first replies were altogether out of date. In county Meath 1,600 houses were required. In County Mayo, the number was 400. Nobody believed that.

Mr. Blaney

The number was 4,000 and nobody believed that either.

Mr. James Tully

The first estimation was that there were 460 houses needed and figures supplied now could still include a great number not originally included. The whole thing depends on standards. Each local authority should be able to say with certainty that certain particulars have been kept up to date and that they know where they stand at any time. If these figures are obtained now and not obtained again for ten years, the whole thing will have to be started from scratch all over again. There is great merit in this amendment and we intend to see, as far as we can, that it is included in the Bill.

Amendment put.

The Dáil divided: Tá, 28; Níl, 45.

Tá

• Burke, Joan T.
• Clinton, Mark A.
• Coogan, Fintan.
• Corish, Brendan.
• Cosgrave, Liam.
• Creed, Donal.
• Desmond, Eileen.
• Dunne, Seán.
• Dunne, Thomas.
• Esmonde, Sir Anthony C.
• Gilhawley, Eugene.
• Harte, Patrick D.
• Hogan, Patrick (South Tipperary).
• Hogan O'Higgins, Brigid.
• Jones, Denis F.
• Kenny, Henry.
• Kyne, Thomas A.
• L'Estrange, Gerald.
• McAuliffe, Patrick.
• McLaughlin, Joseph.
• Murphy, Michael P.
• Murphy, William.
• Norton, Patrick.
• O'Connell, John F.
• Reynolds, Patrick J.
• Spring, Dan.
• Treacy, Seán.
• Tully, James.

Níl.

• Blaney, Neil T.
• Brady, Philip.
• Brennan, Joseph.
• Brennan, Paudge.
• Breslin, Cormac.
• Briscoe, Ben.
• Burke, Patrick J.
• Calleary, Phelim A.
• Carty, Michael.
• Childers, Erskine.
• Clohessy, Patrick.
• Crinion, Brendan.
• Crowley, Flor.
• Cunningham, Liam.
• Davern, Don.
• de Valera, Vivion.
• Dowling, Joe.
• Egan, Nicholas.
• Fahey, John.
• Fanning, John.
• Flanagan, Seán.
• Foley, Desmond.
• Gallagher, James.
• Gibbons, Hugh.
• Gibbons, James M.
• Haughey, Charles.
• Healy, Augustine A.
• Hilliard, Michael.
• Kenneally, William.
• Kennedy, James J.
• Kitt, Michael F.
• Lemass, Seán.
• Lynch, Celia.
• Lynch, Jack.
• McEllistrim, Thomas.
• Meaney, Tom.
• Millar, Anthony G.
• Molloy, Robert.
• Moore, Seán.
• Nolan, Thomas.
• Ó Briain, Donnchadh.
• Ó Ceallaigh, Seán.
• O'Connor, Timothy.
• O'Malley, Donogh.
• Smith, Patrick.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies James Tully and O'Connell; Níl, Deputies Carty and Cunningham.

Amendment declared lost.

Amendment No. 57 not moved.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 58:

In page 41—

(i) in line 15, to delete "the" and insert "there is no";

(ii) in line 16, to delete "let" and insert "provided";

(iii) in line 21, to delete "let by" and insert "of which";

(iv) in line 22, after "Limited" to insert "is the owner";

(v) in line 23, to delete "shall have terminated" and insert "whether by reason of the termination of a tenancy or otherwise"; and

(vi) in lines 24 and 25, to delete "any person by whom the dwelling or building or any part thereof is actually occupied" and insert "there is an occupier of the dwelling or building or any part thereof who".

An Ceann Comhairle

I think amendment No. 61 may be taken with this amendment.

Mr. Blaney

During the Committee Stage, I indicated my intention of reconsidering some aspect of the section to ensure that trespassers in local authority houses could be readily dealt with. This amendment provides that this will be done. It will clarify the power to recover possession of a house by action in the district courts and apply to a house, whether or not there was a tenancy in it.

Amendment No. 61 is consequential. It will ensure that notice under section 3 can be served on an occupier, even though his name is not known.

Mr. James Tully

It means the same thing except that it is more explicit? It does not change the meaning of the section?

Mr. Blaney

It would include circumstances where local authority houses have been built but no tenants have yet taken up occupation and somebody goes in as a trespasser.

Mr. James Tully

I would not fancy his chances.

Mr. Blaney

It can happen.

Mr. James Tully

I have never known it to happen.

Mr. Blaney

It will ensure it does not continue.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 61:

In page 41, lines 36 and 37, to delete "person in possession" and insert "occupier".

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 62:

In page 41, line 39, after "application" to insert "duly made".

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Amendments Nos. 70 and 110 are cognate to this amendment and may be taken together.

Mr. Blaney

These amendments are really of little more than typographical significance.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 63:

In page 41, line 41, to delete "may" and insert "shall".

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Amendments Nos. 71 and 111 may be taken with this amendment.

Mr. Blaney

The purpose of these amendments is to state in the statute what is in fact the actual position at present in regard to the recovery of possession of local authority dwellings. The amendment will provide that, if the court be satisfied that application for recovery has been duly made, then it must issue its warrant for possession. This is the line taken by the courts at present under the existing law. We are really writing it in here.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 64:

In page 41, line 43, after "sections 86" to insert ", 87".

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Amendments Nos. 72, 101 and 112 may be taken with this amendment.

Mr. Blaney

The purpose of these amendments is to apply the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant Law Amendment Act, Ireland, 1860, to the service of a summons for the purpose of getting possession of a cottage or dwelling to sections 62, 66 and 105 of this Bill and to section 24 of the Labourers Act, 1936, as amended by section 101 of the Bill. Section 87 of the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1860, provides for the service of a summons either personally or by leaving the same with some person being in occupation of such house or part of a house or tenement or, where the tenant of such house or part of a house or tenement was not residing therein, by serving the summons personally or by leaving the same at the place of abode of the tenant so holding over as aforesaid four clear days before the day appointed for the hearing of the matter of the said summons provided that if the person so holding over cannot be found and admission into the premises so over-holding cannot be obtained and the place of abode of such person shall not be known, the posting of such summons on some conspicuous part of the premises shall be deemed to be good service by such person. This provision, I should say, is necessary in cases of difficulty in recovering possession of premises because of inability to serve the necessary summons because the defendant is not there or has gone abroad, and so on.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 66:

In page 42, line 12, to delete "twelve" and insert "ten".

During Committee Stage, Deputies urged that we should reduce the age by reference to which overcrowding is calculated from 12 to ten years. This is to meet that point.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 68:

In page 43, line 51, to delete "specified in" and insert "necessary to comply with the requirements of".

This amendment provides for a minor change in section 66. It is designed to make clear the intention that a housing authority need not in a repairs notice specify the works that require to be carried out.

Mr. Clinton

I should like to hear from the Minister why he considers it necessary and desirable to bring this in. Why does he want further to relieve the housing authority of the necessity to specify the repairs needed in a particular instance? He has not really made the case for this amendment. He just says that the local authority should have this power and, because that is so, he is asking the House to accept this amendment. Why does he think this power is necessary for the local authority?

Mr. Blaney

Section 66 gives us the power as already circulated and discussed here. In that section, the reference to this notice does not require that the works should be specified. We are merely saying here in the amendment, in order to make it clear, that this in fact is the intention of the section, rather than leaving it open to interpretation in both manners.

Mr. Jones

Would the Minister not think it desirable that the housing authority, which has all the facilities at its disposal to consider whether or not a house is unfit for human habitation, should inform the individual why they consider it is not fit and give him a chance of carrying out the necessary repairs?

Mr. Blaney

What they will indicate by way of notice are not the specific individual works that they feel are required to cure a certain fault: they will require that the fault be cured. Suppose it is a damp wall. Instead of specifying the steps that should be taken to cure it——

Mr. Clinton

Say to eliminate dampness.

Mr. Blaney

——we will say that he should carry out works to eliminate the dampness. If it is something in the roof, we will say that he should carry out the necessary works to put it in proper condition. This is why we are doing it this way. We say: "Cure this. Do the works necessary to remedy this" rather than: "Strip the wall. Put a French drain around your outside wall" and maybe we might leave out something else that, in that particular case, might be far more important than the two things we asked him to do.

Mr. James Tully

Plaster with sea-sand is weeping, anyway.

Mr. Blaney

The whole purpose is to cure the defects. We are merely asking that the notice will say that the defect is to be cured instead of setting out a specification as to how it is to be done, which specification might be right or could be wrong. Indeed, if the full detailed specified works had been carried out, if we did it in that way, the defect might still remain uncured and the person could say: "We did all you asked us to do and it is unreasonable to ask us again to do more".

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 69:

In page 45, line 40, to delete "section" and insert "subsection".

This is a drafting amendment of a typographical error.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 70:

In page 46, line 18, after "application" to insert "duly made".

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 71:

In page 46, line 20, to delete "may" and insert "shall".

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 72:

In page 46, line 23, after "sections 86" to insert ", 87".

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 74:

In page 47, line 43, after "order" to insert "or demolition order".

This amendment provides that any rent paid for a house to which a demolition order applies may be recovered from a person receiving it.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. James Tully

I move amendment No. 82:

In page 52, between lines 12 and 13, to insert a new section as follows:

"(1) A housing authority may acquire by agreement any land situate within or without their functional area although the area or tract of land offered for sale by auction or by private treaty is in excess of the reasonable requirements of the authority for immediate and further need, and, having reserved sufficient land for immediate and further needs, the housing authority may dispose of any surplus land.

(2) A housing authority may acquire land which is not suitable or convenient for the purposes of this Act provided that the land is acquired with a view to an exchange of that land for suitable land.

(3) The power conferred on a housing authority under this section shall be in addition to their powers to acquire land under section 82 of the Local Government Act, 1946.

(4) This section shall come into operation on the passing of this Act."

There are two principles involved in this amendment. The first is the right of a local authority to acquire land very much in excess of needs and to resell any portion of the land which they may not require. I understand that in many cases if this had been permissible under existing legislation the local authority would have had cheap houses. They could have bought land. They could have used the portion they required for housing and could have sold the remainder at a handsome profit. Because of the fact that it was not covered by legislation they were unable to do this. They lost the ship for a ha'porth of tar. Because they required a small portion, they were unable to get the big portion.

The second point is that it would be possible for a local authority to acquire a portion of land which may not be suitable for housing but which if acquired could be exchanged for a portion of land which would be suitable for housing if somebody was prepared to give them an exchange. There are specific cases where such an opportunity occurred and had to be let slip because of the fact that the legislation did not allow of its being done.

The terms of the amendment are specific. We believe that there is no reason why the Minister would not accept it. It would improve the legislation before the House and ensure that local authorities will not be left without sites because of the fact that the only land available or likely to become available is greater than they need. It cannot be suggested that the land will be left on their hands. The amendment would allow them to resell it at a reasonable price.

Mr. Clinton

I have more or less covered the points in the amendment in referring to the various problems that have arisen from time to time in an area where it is difficult to ensure that sites will be available always for the building of local authority houses. The manager can say, and in fact has said: "It is not our job as a local authority to deal in the buying and selling of land". That is a very ready answer to give the members of the council who see an opportunity of acquiring land adequate to the needs of the council not only for the present but for ten years ahead.

The amendment is not an amendment that is particularly attractive to a Minister because a Minister gets very little credit for allowing money to be spent or spending money on sites. The only thing he gets credit for it the production of houses. If the houses are provided, there is no immediate credit for the provision of sites either for the members of the council or the Minister. There is no politics in it, let us say. Nevertheless, it is a means of satisfying the housing needs. The Minister may say: "You did not do it when the money was available". We want to be in a position to do it when the money becomes available and we cannot be in that position unless we have the sites.

It must be accepted that you can buy cheaper sites if you buy a whole farm than if you go in to buy a field or small plot. You can get a bargain in a big farm. A local authority can provide that sort of money at the time the farm comes up for sale. They can buy a big farm at a cheaper price. Invariably they are in a position to resell the portion that they believe is surplus to their requirements, say, over the next ten years. They can sell it in parcels if they are facilitated in sub-division by the Land Commission and thus improve adjoining holdings. It is an advantage very often to the adjoining holders who would not be in a position to buy the big farm but would be in a position to pay a reasonable price for a portion of it. It would meet not only the needs of the housing authority but local needs of uneconomic holders at the same time.

I know that the fear may be lurking in the Minister's mind that if he accepts the amendment and it becomes part of the legislation county councils will go mad and buy every big farm that comes on the market, regardless of cost. I do not think there is any foundation for that anxiety or worry because I do not think it will happen. Occasionally a crackpot councillor may make a proposition in order to satisfy his vanity and show the local people that he was able to get the council to buy a particular farm but that will always be met by common sense in the council. A proposition will not even reach the Minister unless it is a reasonable proposition that the council consider worthwhile, not only in relation to present needs but looking five or ten years ahead.

It does not follow that the land so acquired will be in any way misused in the meantime. It can be properly used and can bring in an income to the council and provide an important amenity for local people also.

Mr. Blaney

I am very glad to see the concern that has been shown by the Deputies who have spoken about this matter of site acquisition for forward needs. I am glad that Deputies are in favour of this idea. At the same time, I would remind them that I have been seeking to have this done for quite a considerable time. Of course, it is necessary to have some idea of how much land one might want in order that there may be realism in regard to acquisition for forward needs. The law has been there and has been completely ignored by housing authorities, the law that required them to have an annual survey of their entire situation in regard to housing. It was not done despite the fact that it was the law that it should be done.

Starting in 1960, and not with 100 per cent success since then, to say the least of it, I have been trying to get local housing authorities to see the wisdom of the law which has been there for a long time which dictated that surveys should be carried out and kept up to date annually, for the very good reason that local authorities should know their needs as nearly exactly as could be expected.

In any event, there now seems to be a growing appreciation of the wisdom of that sort of assessment and survey in relation to the forward purchasing of sites for future development, not only taking into account the immediate situation as revealed by surveys, where these have been properly done, but other calculations which can only be regarded as informed guesses as to future demand. These needs must be taken into consideration in regard to site acquisition if we are to have the programming, which is a very big element in this new legislation, the rational programming of building related to requirements not only as of today but projected into the future under all the various headings that can be of some use.

We need not rely only on what is proposed in this Bill. The House will recall that there are very definite and very wide and useful powers in relation to which I wrote to local authorities by way of circular letter on 25th May, 1965. I shall quote the relevant excerpt:

When the assessment of needs has been made and the resultant programmes prepared steps should be taken immediately to select and acquire sufficient sites to enable building to proceed on the basis planned in the programme. Site acquisition should be proceeded with well ahead of the programme requirements. Particular attention should be paid to the difficulties which may be experienced in the first years of the programme in this respect. Account should also be taken of the delays which may be involved by the probable need to resort in some cases to compulsory purchase order procedures. Continuity of the building programme can only be assured by making certain that sites are available ahead of requirements for some years to come. The new powers available to local authorities for forward site acquisition in the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1963, should be fully utilised particularly in towns and larger villages where suitable sites should be acquired if necessary ahead of environmental services so that the benefit of the provision of services accrues to the local authority, its tenants, or to house purchasers.

That is on housing site acquisition.

The Act to which I have referred, though it does not deal with housing, deals in a very full way with the various matters raised by the Deputies supporting these amendments. Practically everything advocated in the amendments can already be done and has been advocated by me in the circular letter to which I have referred. In addition to that, we have the more immediate and direct provisions of this Bill. By agreement, local authorities may now acquire land without really knowing for what purpose they want it and there can be no question of their being tied down ever again. By voluntary agreement, a council can acquire land without actually knowing the purpose to which they will put that land. The difficulties outlined by Deputies have very little realism now. However, in section 76 of the Bill there is provision that, for the reasonable requirements of the council, compulsory acquisition powers are given. Reasonable requirements can be pretty wide.

If all these things are taken into account, it will be readily appreciated, I think, that far from there not being freedom available to local authorities in this matter, there is a greater degree of freedom now than they ever had before. Indeed, I cannot imagine them requiring any more freedom. It is difficult in discussing a measure like this to divorce oneself from what the practice is. It is difficult to transpose oneself from the present into the future. It is difficult to imagine what will be capable of being done when this measure becomes law.

Mr. James Tully

The Minister has not adverted to the amendment at all during his entire discourse. He has made an excellent case to show why amendments Nos. 54, 55 and 56 are not necessary.

Mr. Blaney

Perhaps I have taken my cue from the Deputies who spoke on this amendment and talked about another amendment; I am replying now to the other amendment in answering this amendment.

Mr. James Tully

The Minister is completely wide of the mark.

Mr. Blaney

I have made a complete circle. It was discussed.

Mr. James Tully

On the previous amendment, yes.

Mr. Blaney

And on this one— not only that but some part of what should have related to this amendment was also discussed on a previous amendment.

Mr. James Tully

That is so.

Mr. Blaney

There is then the question of the disposal of land.

Mr. James Tully

That is the one.

Mr. Blaney

Section 87 provides:

(1) Any land acquired for the purposes of or appropriated for the purposes of or under this Act by a housing authority may be sold, leased or exchanged subject to such conditions as the authority may consider necessary having regard to the purposes of this Act.

I think Deputy Tully will find in that section that selling, leasing and exchanging will meet his requirements. Where land is needed, it is merely a case of the local authority having power to acquire it. By agreement, they can acquire land for practically anything and they can also acquire land compulsorily. Where it is necessary to acquire ten acres but the acquisition of that ten acres requires the acquisition of 20 acres, the local authority have power to acquire the full 20 acres in order to get the ten acres.

Mr. James Tully

May I interrupt? Section 57 fully covers the points. That will shorten the discussion.

Mr. Blaney

I want to put it on record that we are giving definite power to acquire land for the purposes of housing. If, in order to get that land, there is no other way of getting it than by buying more than is needed, and provided no other suitable land is available, then the local authority can go ahead and acquire the land. If this is the only land, the only way is to buy much more land than you want. As I say, you have that power, the power to acquire more land than you need. If this is the only way to get what you want and there is no alternative, the law empowers you to take whatever course is open to you. Then you can have recourse to section 87 and you can sell, let or exchange. I think we are fully covered there.

Mr. Jones

The Minister quoted the circular which came after the Town Planning Act. It was very laudable and certainly for the courageous county manager, it was an inducement to do what the Minister says. But am I correct in my recollection that there were plenty of submissions to be made to the Department which might have discouraged the more cautious manager?

Mr. Blaney

No, I would not agree at all. In fact, the purpose of the circular was——

Mr. Jones

I agree, but there are so many submissions later on in the circular——

Mr. Blaney

I concede that there probably are quite a few but the primary purpose was to try to cut down by clarification the amount necessary——

Mr. Jones

Section 87 would be more operative than the circular.

Mr. Blaney

The choice would be there.

Mr. James Tully

Section 87 tells us how we can dispose of it. The Minister says we have the power.

Mr. Blaney

You have the Planning Act and you have the Housing Act.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. James Tully

I move amendment No. 83:

In page 52, between lines 25 and 26, to insert a new subsection as follows:

"(2) A housing authority may be authorised to acquire land by agreement or otherwise for the purpose of facilitating the acquisition, by agreement, or otherwise, of land under tillage, within or adjacent to an urban area, non-municipal town or an area serviced by water and sewerage."

Does the Minister think that this is also covered by the section he has quoted?

Mr. Blaney

I think what Deputy Tully——

Mr. James Tully

I will give the Minister the opportunity to do the big thing.

Mr. Blaney

I think it is just a question of whether you can acquire land under tillage. Of course you can, which is the obvious answer, but that is not what Deputy Tully has in mind.

Mr. Clinton

I think I know what Deputy Tully has in mind.

Mr. James Tully

I want to find out what the Minister thinks about it.

Mr. Clinton

There are certain areas in which extensive tillage is carried out on smallish holdings which happen to be in an area in which the services necessary for houses exist. These people would be quite satisfied if they could get an exchange of lands further away from the services and perhaps get the advantage of a small additional portion of land to compensate them for going a bit farther out. That is the sort of exchange which Deputy Tully has in mind because immediately certain circumstances come to mind in which that type of problem exists for us. If that power were there, then even by agreement we could make arrangements whereby we could give somewhat larger plots of land to these extensive market-gardener type of producers and in exchange, get a field conveniently situated for housing nearer to a village or town.

Mr. James Tully

At present it is a good argument that land is being used for extensive tillage if an attempt is being made by a local authority to acquire it, even though services are right beside it. I am suggesting that if the circumstances warranted it, this power should be given to the local authority. Does the Minister think it is already there?

Mr. Clinton

It would be very undesirable to rob these people.

Mr. P. Brennan

Would not most lands in rural Ireland be potential tillage lands?

Mr. Blaney

I would be inclined to follow somewhat the same reasoning as I mentioned in regard to buying more land than you want. Where it is the only way, I would be prepared to follow the same lines. If this is the only way in which you could get it, then you take steps accordingly. It is hard to spell out the various devices in which one might find oneself in following this reasoning. It is the reasonable and sensible line to follow, that you want something and there is only one way of getting it and therefore you take the only way open to you. It seems reasonable and even if this sort of shuffle is required, then you must continue the shuffle.

Mr. James Tully

The Minister will be aware of areas adjacent to towns where some old crotchety person owns the most desirable piece of land and is making little use of it. It could be readily developed and would supply the needs of a large number of people if the local authority could acquire it. I want to ensure that such a person cannot use the argument that it is being used for tillage and prevent its acquisition. Land like that is fairly well protected, even by the courts. If somebody attempts to get land like that for sites, the courts take a very lenient view.

Mr. Blaney

The question of tillage has no particular significance other than that which is made of it in a given set of circumstances. It has no more relevance than if it were used for rearing sheep or cattle or poultry.

Mr. Clinton

Is employment not an argument?

Mr. Blaney

It depends on which crop you are growing.

Mr. James Tully

It has been used as an argument.

Mr. P. Brennan

The value of the land?

Mr. James Tully

It is being used as an argument.

Mr. Blaney

I wonder would it be the old Labourers Act which Deputy Tully is thinking about, in which there was a provision that you could not acquire the homeland in or around a holding?

Mr. James Tully

That is what has prompted the amendment but it applies with equal force to the present legislation where people may have an orchard—I have a case in mind— which they claim is valuable and so far have held on to it.

Mr. Blaney

That I think is what has rightfully prompted the amendment but it is not relevant because it is not so continuing in this Act. Orchards would be regarded as homeland under the old Labourers Act but not in future.

Mr. James Tully

That clarifies the matter.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. James Tully

I move amendment No. 84:

In page 52, between lines 25 and 26, to insert a new section as follows:

"(1) Before allocating any land for the purposes of the Land Acts the Land Commission shall inform a housing authority of the area and location of such land and the manager of the authority shall place any such communication before the next meeting of the authority.

(2) Whenever a housing authority informs the Land Commission that the authority needs land in any specified area for their powers and duties and certifies that all or part of the lands in the hands of the Land Commission is suitable, the Land Commission shall first make an allocation of suitable land to the housing authority before allotting the lands for the purposes of the Land Acts.

(3) Whenever any local authority has land surplus to their needs that local authority shall, before disposing of the surplus land, offer the land to the housing authority."

The intention of the amendment is to ensure that when the Land Commission acquire a farm, before they allocate it, they should notify the local authority that the land is being allocated in order to make it possible to have sites made available on that land. There are in County Meath, for instance, a number of big farms which have been taken over by the Land Commission and allocated to various tenants. Occasionally the local authority find that a farm has been taken over in an area where the local authority badly needs sites and sometimes they are able to contact the Land Commission in time and get the Land Commission to allocate portion of the farm for housing. On occasion, however, it has happened that the Land Commission have taken over the farm and reached the stage where the allocation of the farm has been planned and when the local authority ask for the sites they are told there is none available. Another case is where the Land Commission take over a farm and, while it does not happen often, it does happen, the farm is allocated before even the local people are aware that it has been fully taken over by the Land Commission.

There are certain areas in County Meath—and I am sure the same thing applies all over the country—in which because of their proximity to towns and to the city, land is very valuable. Around the Dunboyne-Clonee district the Meath County Council have been asked for £2,000 for an acre of land on which to build a county council cottage. The Land Commission have acquired land in that area and there is no reason why they should not be asked, in cases such as this, to make sites available for housing before any other matter is considered.

It will not break the Land Commission's heart to notify the local authority, when they take over a farm in the functional area of that local authority, that they have acquired that farm. A simple letter to that effect, or a stencilled or printed letter which could be used again and again, would suffice. The local authority will then know that land has been taken over by the Land Commission and can apply for sites if they require them.

Mr. Clinton

It is reasonable to require that housing should be regarded as having priority over everything else in land use. There are circumstances arising in every local authority area where the Land Commission are operating. They go in and buy a big holding and they can get land that would be suitable for housing at a much lower price than it can be bought in the normal way when it has to be purchased in small parcels. This priority should be acknowledged, and the local authority should get the opportunity of saying: "We need a certain area of this land for housing. We need some of it immediately and we estimate that over the next five years, we shall need so much more. Therefore, we would ask you to reserve a certain area for us where it would be easy to service houses."

That again is just a question of setting up a system whereby there can be co-operation between the Land Commission and the local authorities. Local authorities may have land surplus to their needs. We have examples of this and when the approach is made there is a reasonable response and it is accepted that the first call on the land should, perhaps, be to meet housing needs. However, it would be an additional safeguard if it were written into legislation that the Land Commission were required to offer this land first to the local authority to meet housing needs. Everybody acknowledges that housing should have priority over other forms of land use in any area.

Mr. Blaney

All that the Deputies have said is probably relevant and one could not take much exception to their line of approach. However, since the Committee Stage, we have been in communication with the Land Commission and we have had a careful look at this matter ourselves. The situation is that I cannot in this Bill dictate what the Land Commission should do in a matter of this kind.

Mr. James Tully

We had an example from the Minister for Social Welfare the other day where he very neatly introduced something which had nothing at all to do with his Bill, and he made the excuse that it was the only opportunity he got.

Mr. Blaney

I am not trying to say that we do not take things into the Bill that we have never touched on before; if that were so, there would be no such thing as new legislation. All I am saying is that so far as the Land Commission are concerned, this is not the way we can bring such a proposal about.

Mr. James Tully

Can the Minister do it any other way?

Mr. Blaney

We have been in touch with the Land Commission and we are assured by them that up to the moment they are fully co-operative in all cases where they are approached in regard to land adjoining any town or any local authority area for housing or other local authority purposes. I take it they are quite prepared to be as co-operative in the future as they have been in the past. If it were a question of their not being co-operative in any circumstances, they do allot the land eventually. I might add that we are still in consultation with them and with other bodies as well to the effect that we want more closely-knit co-operation in this matter of land use, land disposal and so forth. We are trying to bring about a rational approach to the disposal of land, whether it be by Government agency, by a board, and so on, so that it will not be found that a sale has taken place without the knowledge of the local council who wanted the property, which has been sold to somebody else and is gone for ever. We want to get around to this and I think we can more by co-operation than by compulsion. If it ever comes to the point that it is thought that this approach is not sufficient, then we shall have to be on the look out for a suitable measure under land legislation to have it enacted as a specific legal requirement rather than attempt to achieve it in this Bill.

Mr. James Tully

The only snag in the Minister's suggestion is that if the land is allocated or divided, it will be much more difficult to acquire a portion of land from a 20, 30 or 40 acre farmer than from a Land Commission estate where there might be 200 or 300 acres involved. If the Minister would be prepared to indicate to the Land Commission that it is the view of this House that when they take over a farm in the area of a local authority, they should drop a note to that local authority to say that they have acquired the farm, it would meet a lot of our arguments.

It must ultimately be included in some legislation that the local authorities have the right to acquire land from the Land Commission for housing. I am sorry that the Minister thinks it cannot be included in this Bill. Even though the Land Commission can claim to have been reasonably co-operative, the position is that if the local authority find out immediately that the land has been acquired and request the Land Commission to make sites available and can prove that they need the sites, the Land Commission will, after a pretty lengthy time, make the sites available. If the Land Commission get the farm and get an opportunity of dividing it before it comes to the notice of the local authority, then the local authority are out.

If the Land Commission take over a farm and if the local authority ask for sites, even before they divide it, the Land Commission can still dicker. They can say that they do not consider it a suitable place to have a house erected. I am amazed at the tendency of people who come from a congested district to object to a county council cottage being erected in close proximity to them. If the Minister can indicate to the Land Commission that he and this House consider it desirable that this be done, it would meet the point for the time being.

Mr. Blaney

I regard the idea as necessary but from our communications with the Land Commission, I understand that the local authority cannot fail to be aware soon after acquisition that this has happened. It is drawn to their attention for the purposes of rating and valuation.

Mr. James Tully

That is not correct. The Land Commission may take over a farm now and the fact of its being taken over will not come to the notice of the local authority for a considerable time. It has been known in the case of farms taken over by the Land Commission that the local authority continues to serve the notice for the rates on the original owner, although the Land Commission have possession of it. It can be up to a year or 18 months before the matter is brought officially to the notice of the local authority that the land has been acquired.

Mr. Blaney

I had it in writing from the Land Commission that all lands acquired are notified to the secretaries of county councils.

Mr. James Tully

They do not say when.

Mr. Blaney

On the take-over.

Mr. James Tully

If the Minister says this, I am prepared to take his word for it but I would like more particulars.

Mr. Blaney

I would agree with the view that this information be made available to the local authorities at the earliest possible moment. I am told that it is and I will ask that in fact it be done.

Mr. Jones

Is it not a fact that the position becomes known through the plans of the local authority for zoning arrangements?

Mr. Blaney

I was going to say that.

That would be relative to the use to which the lands may be put.

Mr. James Tully

Would it be too much to ask the Minister to indicate to local authorities that the matter of a farm being acquired should be brought to the notice of the members of that authority?

Mr. Blaney

The members of the county council in County Meath must be very innocent. Most local authority members know that land is going to be acquired before it is acquired.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

An Ceann Comhairle

Amendment No. 85 is clearly a drafting amendment.

Mr. Blaney

That is right. I move amendment No. 85:

In page 56, line 1, to delete "subarticle" and insert "paragraph".

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 86:

In page 56, line 12, to delete "for" and insert "to".

The same applies here.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 87:

In page 58, lines 9 and 10, to delete "paragraph" and insert "subarticle".

This is also a drafting amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 88:

In page 58, lines 23 and 28, to delete "for" and insert "to".

This is the same.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 89:

In page 59, line 11, to delete "housing" and insert "local".

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 91:

In page 59, lines 18 and 19, to delete "relation to which Act of 1936 applies" and insert "respect of which an application may be sent under section 16 of the Act of 1936."

Amendment agreed to.

An Ceann Comhairle

Amendment No. 92 went with amendment No. 89.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 92:

In page 61, line 1, to delete "housing" and insert "local".

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 95:

In page 63, lines 49 and 50, to delete "or the plot or any part of the plot held with the cottage".

This will tidy up a loose end in section 87. It provides that only the portion of the property that is proposed to be taken from the original would be required to be redeemed and in proportion to its value in regard to the whole.

Mr. James Tully

Has the Minister notified the local authorities yet of the rule of thumb he suggests they should use when assessing (a) the amount which it will cost to redeem the unpaid period of the annuity and (b) this particular——

Mr. Blaney

No, that has not gone out yet. It will go out in a few days.

Mr. James Tully

The Minister is aware that his officials informed me before Christmas that it would be out in a few days?

Mr. Blaney

They informed me before Christmas, too, They were not able to manage it in the meantime.

Mr. James Tully

You might take it as being all right, but I take a poor view if some official tells me this will be cleared in a couple of days and six weeks afterwards——

Mr. Blaney

Imagine how I felt.

Mr. James Tully

You can do something about it.

Mr. Blaney

You cannot do the impossible sometimes.

Mr. James Tully

The position is that a number of local authorities have a list of houses, the redemption of which they are attempting to finalise, but they cannot do it until they get this. It is most unfair that it should be held up.

Mr. Blaney

On the other hand, the Deputy knows as well as I do from the bills his council receives that phones are not spared. They seem to be in town frequently and any little matter like this that has to be dealt with in a hurry can usually be cleared up.

Mr. James Tully

The matter was discussed with the Minister's Department and the reply was that this would be cleared up in a couple of days. Again and again, to the local authority officials, to me and, apparently, to the Minister, that was told, but it has not been done. I suggest that a couple of days should be a couple of days and we should have it this week.

Mr. Blaney

We do not always get that.

Mr. James Tully

But we should. The Minister is very efficient.

Mr. Blaney

Trying to be too efficient and too courteous takes more time than I thought.

Mr. Clinton

We have not seen that side of the Minister.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 96:

In page 63, line 56, to delete "subsection" and insert "section".

This is to correct a typographical error.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 97:

In page 64—

(i) in line 5, to delete "premises" and insert "a cottage, plot or part of a plot held with a cottage,";

(ii) in line 6, to delete "are alienated or are" and insert "is either alienated, or is";

(iii) in lines 12 and 13, to delete "premises" and insert "cottage, plot or part of a plot";

(iv) in line 13, to delete "are" and insert "is" and after "annuity" to insert ", as respects the cottage, plot or part of a plot,".

This amendment will substitute a reference to "a cottage plot or part of a plot" for the word "premises" in section 99. The reason for it is that there was a possibility that the word "premises" might be taken to mean, as in ordinary usage, only a building.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 98:

In page 64, line 15, to delete "shall" and insert "may".

This amendment is to make it clear that local authorities have discretion to make or not to make an order that the statutory conditions shall cease to apply to premises where the annuity has been redeemed only in part.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 100:

In page 65, to delete all words from and including "on" in line 29 down to and including "and" in line 34.

This arises from our discussion on Committee Stage. Many Deputies raised objection to the proposal that the Minister's sanction was necessary before the local authority recovered possession of a vacant labourer's cottage. I indicated then I would consider their objections and this amendment will delete the requirement of consent. In other words, the local authority may proceed for the recovery of a vacant vested cottage without approaching my Department. The amendment also clarifies the procedure for the service of a summons initiating proceedings for recovery in the district court. I hope you treat them nicely now.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 101:

In page 65, between lines 43 and 44, to insert the following:

"( ) in subsection (4), `sections 86 and 87' is hereby substituted for `section 86', where that reference first occurs".

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 102:

In page 65, to delete all words from and including "the" in line 50 down to and including "certificate" in line 55.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment No. 104 not moved.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 105:

In page 67, line 35, before "shall" to insert "or as to whether or not works are required by this section to be carried out by a housing authority".

An Ceann Comhairle

Amendment No. 108 may be taken together with this.

Mr. Blaney

This will include among the matters which the Minister may deal with on appeal the question of whether works are required by the section to be carried out. Amendments Nos. 107 and 108 are to meet the case made by Deputies on Committee Stage that more guidance should be given in the type of work a local authority would be required to carry out in order to put the cottage into good structural condition for sale or vesting. These two amendments provide that in deciding on works to be carried out the local authority must have regard to the needs set out in the Second Schedule to the Bill and also that the authority need not carry out work which it would be reasonable to expect could be carried out by the tenant of a dwelling under them.

Mr. James Tully

Amendment No. 108 is in fact a reversion to the Minister's original attitude when discussing this Bill on Committee Stage. At first the Minister wanted to have nothing except "good structural repair" included. He made the comment that anybody who was the tenant of a cottage should be expected to carry out repairs which he would be able to carry out. We pointed out from this side of the House that very many people in the tenancy of cottages, because of their age, infirmity or other reasons, would be unable to carry out any repairs to the cottage. I was under the impression the Minister had accepted that view.

He subsequently agreed with me that the section referred to the conditions laid down that a housing authority should have regard to when considering whether a house was unfit for human habitation. This is on page 78 of the Bill. The Minister agreed with me it was reasonable to assume that a local authority should require their own houses to be kept in the same state of repair as a private individual who owned his house would keep his house in repair. A council cottage before being vested must satisfy the conditions laid down in the Second Schedule to the Bill, which are:

1. Stability;

2. Resistance to spread of fire;

3. Safety of staircases and common passages including the state of paving in any yard or open space appurtenant to the house;

4. Resistance to moisture;

5. Resistance to transmission of heat;

6. Resistance to transmission of sound;

7. Resistance to infestation;

8. Water supply, sanitary arrangements and drainage;

9. Air space and ventilation;

10. Natural and artificial lighting;

11. Facilities for preparing, storing and cooking food;

12. The extent to which the house does not comply with any standard or requirement (other than a standard or requirement relating to any matter hereinbefore mentioned) of building bye-laws in force in the area under the Local Government (Sanitary Services) Acts, 1878 to 1964, or building regulations in force in the area under the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1963.

The Minister accepted that. If he does not mind the use of the expression, I think it is sharp practice on the part of the Minister and his Department to introduce on Report Stage this amendment which in fact appears to nullify completely the guarantee he gave to the House on the previous occasion. It appears as if the anxiety now is to get back to the original arrangement whereby, if a house is not in good structural repair, what happens after that is a matter for the tenant and not for the local authority. I pointed out to him at the time that houses in good structural repair might be in a bad sanitary condition. Most of the round towers in this country are in good structural repair but nobody can say they are in good sanitary condition.

The Minister is aware that up to 80 per cent of the appeals by tenants to him against the state of cottages vested up to now have been upheld by him. He is including in this a section which requires a deposit to be paid by a person who is asking to have a cottage re-examined, and which he will forfeit if his request is found to be unjustified. It is most unwise to attempt to put in a subsection such as this. I want to say that as far as we are concerned, we will oppose it.

Mr. Clinton

Amendment No. 108 is objectionable and unacceptable. It only helps, as far as I can see, to reinforce the objectionable subsection (4) of section 104, the subsection to which we referred on Committee Stage. It says:

In determining for the purpose of this section whether or not a cottage or dwelling is in good structural condition regard shall be had only to matters which directly affect or are likely to so affect the stability of its structure.

We felt that that was an unreasonable provision and strongly objected to it at the time. Now, the Minister comes in here today and says he is setting out more or less to meet these objections. In fact, I hold that this amendment reinforces the position and gives all the necessary ammunition to a county manager who wants to do the very minimum. Mind you, the inclination has been not to overdo cottage repairs. I know some have been extremely costly, mainly because they were left for far too long without getting attention.

Mr. James Tully

They were neglected over the years.

Mr. Clinton

If this goes through, it will enable the local authorities to do a very poor job on cottage repairs and a position will eventually be arrived at in which these houses will deteriorate because of the inability of the tenant-purchaser to look after these repairs and to take charge of them because of the cost of them and because of the difficulty in having them carried out. Nearly all the local authorities have, I think, a ready-made organisation for this type of work. It would cost them less and it would be much easier for them to attend to this type of repair. The interpretation of this is what beats the tenant completely:

"( ) Nothing in this section shall be construed as requiring a housing authority to carry out any works as respects which it would be reasonable to expect that they could be carried out by a tenant of a dwelling provided by the authority under this Act."

Who is to decide what it is reasonable to expect could be carried out by a tenant of a dwelling provided by a local authority under this measure? It is reasonable for a tenant to put in a pane of glass or to paint the front door or something of that sort. It depends on who is interpreting what is reasonable and what is not reasonable. Again, experience goes to indicate that responsible officials can be reasonable on the wrong side, often.

Mr. Treacy

When this matter was raised on Committee Stage I made a contribution to the debate. I rather hoped that, by reason of the case made at the time, the Minister and his Department would realise that what they were doing in this new Housing Bill was to take from county council tenants a fundamental right which they had enjoyed under the old Acts of appealing against the kind of repair job carried out to their cottage if they were dissatisfied with that kind of repair. In the present case, if the tenant vesting his or her cottage is dissatisfied with the kind of repair carried out, he or she has a fundamental right to appeal to the Minister, within 30 days of receipt of the notification from the authority, to have a determination, as it is called, carried out. These determinations, these appeals against vesting repairs, are floating into the Minister's Department by the thousand every year. It is a right which tenants widely avail of. It is disturbing in the extreme to realise that, of these multitudinous appeals, some 80 per cent are being upheld in the Minister's Department as being valid and justified and, arising from the further inspection which is carried out, additional repairs are recommended and the local authority are obliged to go back in each instance and carry out these additional repairs.

Here, we have agreed and positive evidence concerning the inadequacy of the repairs at present being carried out for vesting purposes. Instead of solidifying the tenants' rights in this matter, the Minister proposes to filch from them the rights they enjoyed in respect of adequate repair. He wants the tenants to be satisfied now, under amendment No. 108, with repairs of a structural nature only. This amendment provides that nothing in this section shall be construed as requiring a housing authority to carry out any works as respects which it would be reasonable to expect that they could be carried out by a tenant of a dwelling provided by the authority under this Act. We all have experience, as members of housing authorities, of how county managers will construe this particular section. The Minister must be very conscious of it that, in future, it will mean that the comprehensive repair job which was carried out in the past will not be carried out in the future. The house will be inspected for mere structural defects. If there are any evident, these will be repaired. However, the replacement of timber that may be deteriorating or rotten in respect of doors, windows, floors and ceilings will not be included. The remedying of smoky chimneys, as the Minister realises, is a constant complaint as well as the overall necessity to make the house generally habitable and comfortable. All of these detailed repairs which the tenant was used to having carried out in the past, and had a right to appeal against if he was not satisfied, are now being set aside.

It is a pity that the Minister should do this. I appreciate that it must be a great embarrassment to him and to his Department that such a high percentage of appeals are being upheld—up to 80 per cent—and I repeat that this is a clear indication of the inadequacy of the repairs carried out. It is rather a pity that that situation will now be worsened by permitting the managers of housing authorities to carry out mere structural repairs. "Structural repairs" means virtually nothing. As Deputy Tully has said, an old round tower could be said to be structurally satisfactory but that does not necessarily mean that it is fit for human habitation. Adequate repairs and the sanitary services that a family require in these modern times should be provided.

It is a matter of deep regret to us that the sentiments we expressed on Committee Stage in respect of this matter have not been conceded. Indeed, we felt we had the Minister with us in respect of maintaining the rights of the tenants under this section but he seems to have departed altogether from that position.

He has now gone back under this amendment to structural repairs. That is to be deplored. I can only hope the Minister will see the wisdom of conceding our wishes in this matter. We are not asking anything new. We are merely asking that the provisions contained in the old Act will be continued in this Bill, preserving the right of tenants in respect of adequate repairs. When we say adequate repairs, we mean all those things which are of a costly nature and normally outside the scope of the average tenant by reason of lack of skill or finance. They have been done up to now. If a local authority has not been doing them the Minister has compelled them to do them by the many determination orders he has made. It is extremely surprising that the amendment proposed by the Minister today does not improve in any way the position originally outlined in the section on Committee Stage.

Mr. Jones

I do not have to remind the Minister of the situation that exists particularly in rural areas where elderly persons occupy local authority houses. Some of these people at this stage are living on old age pension. In a number of cases, the houses they occupy are old. What to an engineer dealing with a district might appear minor repairs which ought to be done by the tenant could impose grievous hardship on the tenants. For instance, portion of a floor may have become rotted through damp. Window sashes may have become defective. Such things may appear to be minor matters to an engineer having the burden of repairs to be carried out in an area but to the individual they would be serious matters.

The Minister said on Committee Stage that he had a volume of appeals coming into his Department. We are all aware that you can get unreasonable people who feel that much more should be done than could reasonably be expected. As originally drafted, the section gave much more discretion and was more open. A county manager must depend on the information given to him by his engineering officers responsible for cottage repairs who have the burden of work to be done for an entire area as a result of the repair programme not having been properly carried out over the years. There would be a falling back on subsection (4) of the section in regard to matters not related to the stability of the structure.

I am sure the Minister would agree that in respect of the matters to which I have referred, particularly where elderly people are concerned, he should act in the interests of the tenants just as he has to act in the interests of those providing the money for the repairs. The Minister's powers should be exercised in respect of the tenants. The provision was more reasonable as drafted.

Mr. Blaney

After all our amendments on this and earlier Stages, it makes the hackles rise when one has to listen to Deputy Treacy talking about something which obviously he does not know anything about and did not take the trouble to read and to Deputy Tully accusing me of going back on what I said on an earlier Stage. Here is what I did say in reference to this subsection (4) that is being talked about in the discussion on Tuesday, 30th November, Volume 219 of the Official Report:

I think I had better restate what I said earlier on this matter, lest it may not have been understood or, indeed, heard by some of the Deputies here, that is, that in so far as subsection (4) of the section is concerned, my intention, expressed to the House earlier, is that this subsection will be amended so as to bring about the situation wherein repairs which will be required to be done before vesting, and which cannot reasonably be expected to be done by the tenant, will be included.

Further down, in the next column, I said:

This proposed change in subsection (4), in whatever form of words may be thought necessary by the draftsmen, will bring about the situation that repairs, other than those which can reasonably be expected to be done by the tenant, will in fact be carried out by the local authority.

Mr. James Tully

Does the Minister remember saying in answer to a question from me that he considered it reasonable that the items contained in the Second Schedule to the Bill were the matters which should be done before a cottage was vested?

Mr. Blaney

This is what is in the amendment.

Mr. James Tully

No, it is not.

Mr. Blaney

Amendment No. 107?

Mr. James Tully

Yes.

Mr. Blaney

Amendment 107 includes the promise given then and stated twice in the two columns I have mentioned of the report of the debate at that time and I find it difficult to reconcile that with the charge of not only failing to do it but attempting by sharp practice to get away with not doing it by making promises I did not keep. I have kept to the letter of what I said in these amendments and the whole Schedule is being thrown at them now on foot of the promise I then made.

Mr. James Tully

The Minister gave a promise subsequently in answer to a question from me. I asked was it considered reasonable that these should be the terms which should be applied and the Minister said "yes".

Mr. Blaney

That what would be applied?

Mr. James Tully

That the Second Schedule was the term that should be applied—and the Minister said "yes."

Mr. Blaney

And I am saying "yes" still and this is what I am proposing to do.

Mr. Clinton

But is it not qualified in amendment No. 107 by saying "in so far as they relate to the structure of the cottage of dwelling"? You confine it now to the structure, not to the Schedule.

Mr. Blaney

Deputy Tully read down a great part of the Schedule. Is there anything under the sun that is not in it?

Mr. James Tully

But amendment No. 107 is deliberately intended to exclude what the Minister said with reference to the Second Schedule.

Mr. Blaney

All I am saying—and I am not going to repeat it; I have already repeated it twice—is that I am living up to what I said there. If Deputies do not believe me they can seek it out and they will find that that is so. They will also find in regard to further matters about which there is this wailing about what might be reasonably expected to be done by the tenants themselves, that this is a realism that should long since have been brought into the matter of repairs to these houses provided at public expense, badly maintained because of the lack of public moneys through the rates. There are all the little things that one would do if he had any regard for the premises in which he lived being neglected by those well able to do them and then expecting the local authority to do them. A great deal of the trouble is due to the fact that a number of councillors go around telling people what they should look for, in case they would not look for enough. That is a practice not to be condoned. It should be discouraged rather than encouraged. It is a practice of, I hope, a minority of councillors, but it is certainly the established practice in many cases at the moment: what can one get the people to crib about; what can one get for nothing, by some device or other, even though whatever it is could be provided much more cheaply by oneself?

To give an indication of the attitude of mind, I have heard it said that things can be done more cheaply because local authorities have these readymade gangs to go around and do these jobs. I saw a public body the other day doing the job of opening a window that was stuck because of bad painting by the same organisation a short time before. A gentleman arrived and looked at the window. The window was on the ground floor and easily accessible, both inside and out. But the job could not be done without some help and the gentleman went away and came back with two men carrying two ladders and a bag of tools. He supervised the ladders being put up inside and out and the two men opening the window. If that is typical of what one can regard as efficiency, then we may have another think coming.

Mr. James Tully

I think that is Deputy Ryan's example.

Mr. Blaney

I do not for one moment regard that as an economic build-up of an organisation and the sooner we get round to the idea of people doing things for themselves, the better it will be for everybody, including those about whom we are talking here. In view of the objection taken because of difficulty in determining what is "reasonable", amendment No. 105, again as promised, was brought in. If there is a dispute as to what is reasonable, there is an appeal to have the matter determined. No matter what is said, I think these amendments fully meet the promise I gave last November.

Mr. James Tully

May I interrupt once more? Amendment No. 107 refers specifically "to the matters set out in the Second Schedule in so far as they relate to the structure of the cottage or dwelling". That deliberately takes out everything except structure. Prior to that the Minister told me—I am sorry I have not got the Official Report—that everything in the Second Schedule would be considered reasonable.

Mr. Blaney

The Second Schedule referred merely to good structural condition. We are adding to that.

Mr. James Tully

Good structural condition appears in amendment No. 107.

Mr. Blaney

And have regard to all the things in that.

Mr. James Tully

Only in so far as they relate to structure.

Mr. Blaney

But having regard to the structural condition.

Mr. James Tully

The Minister knows the structural condition is not the only trouble. If he is fairminded, he will agree, I think, that it is unreasonable.

Mr. Clinton

Would the Minister agree to delete from his amendment all the words after "Act"?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We are dealing with amendment No. 105.

Mr. Clinton

We are dealing with three amendments——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

No. 108 is consequential. No. 107 stands on its own arising out of Committee.

Mr. Clinton

If the Minister deletes all the words after "Act" in amendment No. 107, that would meet the objection.

Mr. James Tully

If the Minister wipes out No. 108 altogether.

Mr. Blaney

Wipe out the lot.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We have not reached amendment No. 107 yet. We are dealing with Nos. 105 and 108.

Mr. James Tully

We can all agree to No. 105.

Amendment agreed to.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Amendment No. 106 has been ruled out of order since it is consequential on amendment No. 104 which involves a charge on the rates.

Amendment No. 106 not moved.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 107:

In page 68, lines 11 and 12, to delete all words after "had" and substitute "to the matters set out in the Second Schedule to this Act in so far as they relate to the structure of the cottage or dwelling'

Mr. James Tully

This amendmen relates to the same subject matter as No. 108.

Mr. Blaney

They all do.

Mr. Clinton

Is the Minister prepared to delete all the words after "Act"? That would meet the situation.

Mr. Blaney

If these words are deleted, the Schedule will be completely nonsensical. It would have no bearing either on what I am talking about or on what Deputies are talking about when they object to my way of doing it. Facilities for preparing, storing, cooking food: surely we are not going to insist that these be part and parcel, for instance, of the sound structural repair of a house.

Mr. James Tully

The Minister says that anybody who has a private house must comply with those conditions and, if he does not, then the house is not fit to live in. On the other hand, the Minister says the local authority need not do this. It is all right for the local authority, but it is not all right for the private individual.

Mr. Blaney

These are the things to which we require them to have regard.

Mr. James Tully

Regard in relation to the cottage should be the same as it is in relation to the private house.

Mr. Blaney

There is just no point in talking about these amendments. I am sorry I brought them in at all.

Mr. James Tully

Would the Minister agree to withdraw Nos. 107 and 108?

Mr. Blaney

Not unless we withdraw No.105 as well.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

No. 105 has been agreed.

Mr. Blaney

It is not just a case of a pound of flesh. Deputies want more than the pound of flesh.

Mr. James Tully

The Minister may not make that charge against me. I spent more time and attention on this than, perhaps, the Minister has done.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister has concluded on the amendment.

Mr. James Tully

If the Minister is not prepared to withdraw Nos. 107 and 108, we will challenge them to a division.

Mr. Blaney

No. We will pull them out.

Mr. James Tully

The Minister may decide whether or not——

Mr. Blaney

We will pull them out.

Mr. James Tully

All right.

Mr. Blaney

This is what I wanted from the start.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment No. 108. not moved.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 109:

In page 68, between lines 32 and 33, to insert the following subsection:

"() Upon the hearing of an application under subsection (1) of this section grounded upon noncompliance with the special condition mentioned in paragraph (b) of section 88 of this Act, it shall be presumed until the contrary is proved, that the condition has not been compiled with."

This amendment will give effect to a suggestion made by Deputies on Committee Stage that provision should be made on the lines of the provision in relation to vacant labourers' cottages which would put the onus of proof on the owner that a house sold under the Bill was in fact vacant.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 110:

In page 68, line 33, after "application" to insert "duly made".

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 111:

In page 68, line 35, to delete "may" and insert "shall".

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 112:

112. In page 68, line 45, after "86" to insert "87".

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 113:

In page 72, between lines 8 and 9, to insert the following subsections:

"( ) The Minister may by regulations vary the amount of the rent specified in subsection (1) of this section.

( ) Where regulations are proposed to be made under subsection (3) of this section, a draft thereof shall be laid before each House of the Oireachtas and the regulations shall not be made until a resolution approving the draft has been passed by each such House." Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 114:

In page 72—

(i) in line 16, after "interested" to insert "and if, at the time of the vote on any such resolution or question, it is known to the person recording the vote that a member of the authority or committee is beneficially interested in any house or land to which the resolution or question relates, any vote of such member on the resolution or question shall be disregarded in determining the decision of the authority or committee on the resolution or question.";

(ii) between lines 16 and 17 to insert the following subsections:

"( ) A person to whom a dwelling provided under this Act is for the time being let by the housing authority, shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be beneficially interested also in any other dwelling so provided and of which an authority are the owner.

( ) Any person who votes in contravention of this section shall—

(a) in case the person is a member of a housing authority or a member of a committee mentioned in section 108 of this Act

—thereupon cease to be a member of the authority or the committee, as may be appropriate, and

This amendment will strengthen the provision against voting by members on houses or other lands in which they are beneficially interested. It provides that where the interest of a member in land or houses is known at the time of voting, his vote will not be counted. It will also provide for the disqualification of a member voting on a matter in which he is beneficially interested for the balance of his term of office as a member. Finally, the amendment makes it clear that the tenant of a local authority house is to be regarded as being beneficially interested in any other local authority house.

Mr. James Tully

It is only reasonable.

Amendment agreed to.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Amendments Nos. 115, 116 and 117 have been ruled out of order.

Amendments Nos. 115, 116 and 117 not moved.

Mr. James Tully

I move amendment No. 118:

In page 76, in the third column of the reference to the Irish Land Act, 1903, after "Part IV" to insert "except section 96".

The Minister is aware that this will make a material difference in the section and that it will in fact safeguard certain rights which would be taken away if section 96 is repealed.

Mr. Blaney

As I understand it, this section 96 is not required and indeed it is obsolete in that the requirement of the Land Commission to provide houses or land and to allot them for those occupying or going into those lands is being carried out.

Mr. James Tully

That is not my information. I believe that if the amendment is not passed, it will mean that the Land Commission can refuse to accept responsibility which they have at present.

Mr. Blaney

The sections I would rely on are section 31 of the Land Act, 1923, section 27 of the 1936 Act, and section 29 of the 1950 Act. These generally cover the cases which I think the retention of section 96 is aimed at. My information is that it covers them pretty fully.

Mr. James Tully

My information is that it does not and I should not like a mistake to be made at this stage.

Mr. Blaney

The other point is that the Land Commission cannot operate under section 96. What operations they do in this regard are done under one or other of the other sections.

Mr. James Tully

That is not my information. Is there any reason why the Minister should resist the amendment?

Mr. Blaney

The only thing is that much of the purpose of this Bill is to get rid of as many old Acts as we can. We are not saying that every old Act should be jettisoned merely because it is old, but in this matter we find that it is not being used and is, in fact, obsolete and its retention does not seem justified.

Mr. James Tully

Would the Minister agree to check on my statement that it is still necessary and, if he finds it is, to include an amendment?

Mr. Blaney

Certainly we will do that.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Blaney

I move amendment No. 119:

In page 82, line 31, to delete "the rental" and insert "rental, be based on the rental".

This amendment is to correct a typographical error and does not involve any change in the substance of what was originally intended.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Blaney

Last night I gave an undertaking to amend amendment No. 73, which has accordingly been amended as follows:

In amendment No. 73 ", until the contrary is proved," deleted, and after "such use", the words "unless, without prejudice to any other defence, he shows that he did not receive, directly or indirectly, any payment or other valuable consideration in respect of the use and that he took appropriate action to terminate the use" inserted.

This is the matter we discussed last night and Deputy O'Higgins and Deputy Tully agreed that if we could find some form of words to give effect to this, it should be a good defence.

Amendment of Amendment No. 73 agreed to.

Bill, as amended, received for final consideration.

Fifth Stage ordered for Wednesday, 16th February, 1966.

Business suspended at 2 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.