Vol. 274 No. 9
asked the Minister for Local Government if he is aware of a statement made by the Construction Industry Federation to the effect that 5,000 building workers may become redundant within the next few weeks; and if he proposes to take any action to avoid this occurrence.
103.
asked the Minister for Local Government if he is aware of a statement made by the chairman of the Irish Timber Importers' Association to the effect that some of its members have shown a fall-off in sales of up to 49 per cent in the first six months of this year; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
104.
asked the Minister for Local Government if his attention has been drawn to an article (details supplied) concerning housing problems; and if he will make a statement on the contents of the article.
105.
asked the Minister for Local Government if he has received any estimate of the number of new dwellings left vacant because of the inability of intending purchasers to obtain housing loans to meet their commitments.
106.
asked the Minister for Local Government if he will provide a £20 million subsidy to building societies to enable housing loans to be paid to house purchasers.
107.
asked the Minister for Local Government the estimated housing needs for the next five years.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 102 to 107, inclusive, together.
I am aware of the Press reports and statements mentioned. I would refer the Deputy to my opening remarks in the debate on my Department's estimate for 1974, which dealt with the questions of employment and level of activity in the house building industry, additional finance for house purchase and the misinterpretation by various people of recently published housing statistics.
In so far as the Government's housing targets are concerned, I would refer the Deputy to my reply to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 25 to 30 and 32 of 10th July. In this reply I indicated that the Government's target figure for housing output in the 12-month period ending 31st March 1975, is 25,000, of which I expect local authority housing output to account for about 7,250, the balance to be provided by the private sector. Pending the completion of an up-to-date assessment of housing needs, an annual housing output of 25,000 is considered to be the present annual minimum need.
I think it is rather unfair for the Minister to take so many questions together—I do not know what the reason for it is—but could I ask him if he has received any request to grant a capital injection through the building societies to the construction industry, and if the sum of £20 million has been mentioned, or if he considers there is need at all for any extra capital to be made available?
The answer to the first question is, yes; to the second question, no, and to the third question, I am at present considering whether there is a need.
Could I ask the Minister if he has told the CIF that the figures were wrong——
Which figures?
That 5,000 people at work may become redundant.
They did not state the figure of 5,000 to me.
I am going on the printed question.
They did not quote the figure of 5,000 to me.
Did the Minister say to them: "The figure of 5,000 is wrong? The Government are quite satisfied that there will be no redundancy."
Yes.
What did they say to that?
The figure they gave me was very much under 500. They suggested they would possibly have to lay off people and they wanted to know if I would say that the Government would continue to make money available in order to keep the building industry going, and I assured them that the Government would.
I take it there will be no redundancy in the building trade?
I understand the trade unions have already satisfied themselves that there should be no redundancy and they will contest any attempt by builders, for political or other purposes, to lay off workers.
Is the Minister satisfied?
I am perfectly satisfied.
Is the Minister aware that redundancies have taken place already.
I understand that a small number of people have already been laid off, but the trade unions are contesting this with the employers, and I am hoping the result will be that these people will be re-employed.
Is the Minister suggesting that workers are laid off for political reasons?
I shall leave that to Deputy Brennan—he might know more about it than I do—but the suggestion has been made that there was no necessity to lay these people off, and personally I can see no reason why they should be laid off.
Does the Minister think builders would lay off workers just for political reasons?
Could I ask the Minister if it has already been pointed out to him by representatives of the construction industry that the position is such at the moment that the financial aid which he says he will make available is needed now.
The construction industry representatives made the same points which they and Deputy Molloy made almost 12 months ago. I pointed this out to them and that, in fact, when they proved that money was needed the necessary money was made available, and the further reply which they then made was "Of course, only we pointed it out to you it would not be made available", which I thought was rather foolish.
The question I asked the Minister was, has the construction industry pointed out to the Minister that the financial aid which he says he will make available is required now?
No. They mentioned that they expected that unless money was made available, particularly to building societies, there was a danger of a lay-off in their industry. I assured them there was no necessity to worry about that aspect of it.
Is the Minister aware that there are builders who have large numbers of houses on their hands which are reaching completion stage and for which no payments have been received by the intending purchasers? How does the Minister expect such contractors to continue in existence serving loans to construct houses for which they are receiving no payment?
I have no knowledge of what Deputy Molloy refers to, but it is not my responsibility to ensure that all houses are sold before their construction is completed. I understand that there are a number of mainly high-cost houses which have been constructed and have not yet been paid for. This is something which occurs from time to time, but I assured the building industry representatives and the trade unions that the Government propose to ensure that the building industry is kept going at a level which will produce 25,000 houses in the year ending 31st March next.
Is the Minister aware —just to give him one case of which I know all the facts—that there are 45 houses in one scheme which are nearing completion—they have all passed the roofing stage—and not one penny has been paid to the builder, which would normally have been paid at the roofing stage when the first payment of the loan would come through. None of the persons who have indicated willingness to purchase was able to obtain a loan. The builder in question does not know what the future holds for him other than a vague promise from the Minister that money will be made available if needed. They say the money is needed now and that with the holiday period coming they cannot go into the winter with such heavy financial commitments and with such little action on this important matter.
I am not aware of the houses to which Deputy Molloy refers, but if the builder concerned gave to me the particulars which he appears to have given to Deputy Molloy, perhaps I could have the matter investigated. That information was not given to me, nor was there any concrete evidence given to me. As I said, a number of builders referred to the fact that they were completing some houses and would expect that the money would eventually be made available for the purpose of having them bought. But no particulars of sites or numbers of houses or anything like that was given to me. Indeed, the confederation of builders are aware that if they want to discuss the matter or give particulars to me they are welcome to come at any time and do so. However, as I assured the House last week and last night on my Estimate, the matter is being considered, and if money is required to keep the building industry going that money will be provided.
Would the Minister say whether in a recent deputation he received from the Construction Industries Federation a member of the deputation pointed out to the Minister that he had 200——
The Deputy may not furnish information of this kind. It is not relevant.
We have taken seven questions together.
I appreciate that, but the Deputy must ask a supplementary question.
I am asking a supplementary question if you will allow me. I am asking the Minister whether one member of a deputation he received recently said to him that he and his company had 200 houses lying idle for which the intending purchasers were not able to get loans. Is that a fact?
No. One of his colleagues pointed out that this man had 200 houses. I asked if that was so and he said he thought there might be about that. I asked him to give me details of the numbers. He found 20 or 30 in Dublin but he could not remember where the rest were.
That is the Minister's answer?
I am quite sure that throughout the country he may have that number, but it is possible he did not have the information with him. I am not contradicting the statement, but I did not get particulars of anything like 200 houses which were supposed to be unsold—and 200 houses out of a total of 25,000 is a very small number.
