In other circumstances, the Minister responsible for housing would be crawling around this House, hiding his face, at the very thought of the tremendous number of people who, at this present time, are in need of housing, the tremendous number of people who are only too anxious to sink their savings and to incur liabilities so as to provide themselves with homes, even though they have to pay 7½ per cent for the money to do so. Yet, this Minister comes gaily in here and tells us, in his quiet voice—he is normally quiet when he speaks—that problems are arising due to the shortage of money. There was no problem due to any shortage of money this time last year—no problem at all. There was no problem up to the middle of the year. Possibly the Minister is not responsible for the situation. It may be that he is only a junior Minister in the Cabinet but he has been there long enough and his colleagues have been long enough in ministerial office to have a fairly good idea of how the winds of finance were blowing. Even if they were blowing in a slanting fashion in another country, they have been blowing fair in some countries but this was a secret they managed to keep closely guarded.
I will give this Government credit for knowing that the Irish public can be gulled because they have been gulled by this Fianna Fáil Government on a number of occasions. Less than 12 months ago, the gullible Irish public were satisfied that the housing drive was going full steam ahead, that there would be no delay, that thousands of flats would spring up almost like mushrooms in north Dublin and that in other parts of the city, houses would spring up and people would buy their houses and there would be no difficulty in regard to approval from the Department or anything else. That was the situation. In the autumn, the hard facts of life started to come home to the very same people and in the middle of this winter the situation has been very grim for many families.
Up to this moment, I am not aware that the Minister has announced any change in the situation or has given any comfort. He has provided many ways by which local authorities can give away money they have not got. He has provided many ways under the Bill by which local authorities can lend money and grant money they have not got. What is the Minister and what are the Government doing to implement the proposals to deal with a serious housing situation? That is a secret they are keeping close to themselves at this particular time.
The Minister failed to give any great comfort to those who are anxious to provide their own dwellings by agreeing to increase the State subsidy. However, by precept and example, he was very active in advising the same people that he was careful to remove no powers from the city and county managers in relation to the exercise of their authority to impose higher rents on the tenants in their estates. Let nobody inside or outside this House relieve the Minister of the prime responsibility for that situation. The Minister has made it quite plain, not only in discussions with representatives of local authorities but else-where and in public. Some city managers and county managers may be nice polite gentlemen. Some of them may be prepared to go some part of the way with local authorities, but there is one thing for which they are known, that is, that they follow very closely the line of policy laid down by the Minister for Local Government. If the Minister indicates by circular or otherwise that the gentlemen who sit in the seats of power in local authorities should impose increased rents on tenants, that is the way those gentlemen will operate and that is the way they are operating. I want to make it quite plain, and I feel the public should know, that in this respect the Minister cannot relieve himself of responsibility for this type of thing happening, whether in urban or rural areas.
When the Minister is replying to the debate, I hope he will indicate that there is some gleam of light in the darkness. It is too much to hope that we can possibly convince him. The Minister, having set his mind completely against giving greater assistance to persons purchasing their own homes and against continuing State assistance, where such applies, in cases where local authorities are prepared to introduce tenant purchase schemes for existing tenants, it is too much to hope that the line drawn as to the level of supplementary grants will be removed or, at least, put on a realistic basis. I suppose it is too much to ask that those who contribute so heavily through rates to housing, health, social welfare and all other charges should not be treated inequitably as they are under this Bill. It is too much to hope that the Minister will at this stage change his mind. All we can do is to ask the Minister at this stage whether he can at least announce an easement in the position as regards sanction for schemes submitted and lying on his table, in some cases for months.
I have been as critical as anyone in this House, possibly more critical, of one of the Minister's predecessors. I can recall a time when, if there was a delay in sanctioning a scheme for the development of a site for housing or for the building of houses or the provision of money for various local authorities for loans for house purchase, the Minister and his colleagues would remind one of a pack of dogs in full cry. I was as critical, possibly more critical, as many Deputies of one of the Minister's predecessors who was in difficult circumstances at the time. I do not see the pack of dogs after this Minister. The Minister's backbenchers are very mute. In another place I even had the experience of some of the Minister's backbenchers saying it was a shame and that it was unfair, in a particular local authority of which they and I happen to be members, to refer to the fact that schemes to the extent of over £1½ million were lying on the table of the Minister, that there was no indication that sanction was forthcoming, that men were liable to be put out of employment and major housing schemes liable to be upset. I heard some of the Minister's backbenchers in that local authority expressing shame and horror. Of course, that was another day and another time.
I must to some extent admire the Minister and his colleagues for their ability. I have not seen very much evidence of the type of publicity that was aroused by the speculative builders in other years. One may see a little protest here or there, and an inquiry. The speculative builders may be all good supporters of the Minister. For some good reason that I do not know, they are very quiet. I do not see them making public outcry. I have not seen much evidence of statements being made at dinners to the effect that the whole building industry was falling down and unemployment was facing everybody. I give the Minister credit for the way in which he handles his publicity so that he has managed to keep this type of pressure off himself and his Department. I should like to know the secret; I think we should all like to know the secret.
Every Deputy would like to be able to say to the Minister for Local Government that he is doing a good job of work. Irrespective of the Party to which a Minister for Local Government belonged, every Deputy would be very happy if he were able to say that sanctions were coming through and the house-building programme was going ahead.
The difficulty at the present time is that Deputies, including Deputies of the Minister's Party, no matter how they may endeavour to apologise or to explain the situation in their own local authorities and act the part of petty statesmen, are worried about the situation, very, very worried, because they know, and the Minister knows and everybody knows that when building activity slows down to a particular point, you just do not turn on the tap and have it go full steam ahead again. If acquisition programmes are not timed—most of them have to be timed and planned five to six years ahead— and if development plans cannot be carried out to some set timetable, the result is that housing is held up.
May I make a last brief comment on the general question of housing? Mention was made in the course of the debate of the question of the cubic capacity of rooms. The regulations have been operating to deter medical officers in many cases from putting families early on a priority list. Might I press the Minister to consider whether, in fact, with all the advice he has from the consultants, the town planners and the people who estimate the need for housing at 40,000 by 1975, local authority dwellings are not substandard from the point of view of the actual size of the rooms? Families in our community are on the large side. Efforts have been made over the years to improve the educational standards and the social standards of our people, but houses, certainly those built for tenancy purposes, have not improved because they are, in my opinion, much too restricted in scope. The rooms are too small to permit of normal family development and normal family life. Boys and girls attending school from these houses are not getting a reasonable opportunity to study at home. I know there is a good deal of comment now on the subject of homework and the need for it, but the fact remains that, if there is homework involved, these children are prevented from doing it to the best of their ability because of the limited scope of the houses in which they live.
The size of local authority houses throughout the country needs to be reconsidered. Everyone in this House and everyone in local authorities is aware, as I am aware, that one of the major factors involved, particularly in tenancy houses, is the ultimate cost. If we are going to develop properly, and if our families are to be given adequate opportunity of developing as families within their own homes, and with reasonable opportunities for following their own pursuits within those homes, then I would suggest to the Minister that he take an early opportunity of looking at houses generally, and not merely measuring them by the slide rule of the architect. Architects are very fine people, but most architects are very fortunate because they live in reasonably sized dwellings. I suggest to the Minister that he send his architect and the technical officers of his Department, and the officers of local authorities, to live in these four- and five-roomed houses for about six months. I do not mind laying a small shade of odds that they will go back to the Department and immediately start to revise their ideas of what constitutes adequate accommodation for a growing family.
There are a number of useful sections in the Bill. The Minister failed to hearken to some of the major arguments made in the course of the debate, but it is only fair to say that he was at all times courteous and painstaking in dealing with points raised during this very prolonged and very complicated debate. The Minister is entitled to be paid that compliment. We disagreed with him violently on many occasions but, on the Second Stage and on Committee Stage, he went to great trouble to deal with the various points raised.