asked the Minister for Finance if there are any modern buildings for which rent is being paid by the State and which are not at present occupied; and, if so, if he will state the location of such buildings, the period for which they have been under rent and unoccupied; and the amount of rent which has accrued to date for such unoccupancy.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - State Renting of Buildings.
22.
The State is under rent since 13th January, 1967——
I cannot hear a word of what the Parliamentary Secretary is saying.
I am not surprised because the Deputy was being interrupted by his own men.
It is good manners for the Parliamentary Secretary to wait until other people have finished.
Deputy Sweetman knew the reply before I began to give it, even though he says he cannot hear me. I shall begin again. The State is under rent since 13th January, 1967, in respect of the office block of 72-76 St. Stephen's Green, which will be occupied by staffs of the Departments of Justice and Finance, the Estate Duty Office and the Comptroller and Auditor General's Office. To date, the premises have not been occupied because of the necessity of having to carry out preparatory work consisting mainly of partitioning and an electrical installation. This work is well in hand and it is expected that occupation will commence within the next two months.
In Ansley House, Mespil Road, which is held on lease from September, 1965, the ground and first floors are as yet unoccupied. These floors have been reserved against the needs of the Department of Labour and the recently-established Comhairle Oiliúna. An Chomhairle's immediate requirements will take up the greater part of the space. For the time being the balance will be utilised to accommodate certain staff of the Department of Agriculture. It is hoped that the whole of the space will be ready for occupation by the end of September.
It is not the practice to disclose the amount of rents payable in respect of properties such as those in question as the figures concerned are confidential as between landlord and tenant.
While I have no information in relation to the Mespil Road premises, is it not a fact in relation to the other premises the Parliamentary Secretary mentioned that the taxpayer has been paying rent at the rate of £75,000 a year since 1st January last for empty premises purely because the various Departments of State were unable to make up their minds until now, and on that basis the taxpayer has been charged £40,000, purely wasted money?
It is not the practice to disclose the figures involved because they are confidential as between landlord and tenant. I think Deputy Sweetman is merely speculating. The Deputy will be aware that it is necessary to have in readiness a large area of office space against the requirements I mentioned.
If the Parliamentary Secretary will not disclose the figures, will he challenge that I am correct and will he make sure that the Comptroller and Auditor General will be advised of these facts and that the appropriate officer, whichever member it is, responsible for this delay and waste of public money, will be surcharged?
Out of his salary.
Deputy Sweetman's effort to insinuate, first of all, that there has been a deliberate waste of public money——
There is.
——is incorrect and his effort to elicit from me confidential matters will be just as unsuccessful.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary leave it to the Comptroller and Auditor General to say whether I am right or wrong that more than £50,000 of the taxpayers' money has been wasted — £40,000 in one case and £10,000 in the other?