andMr. Meaney asked the Minister for Defence the progress he has made regarding the re-housing of overholders in married quarters during the past year.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Defence Forces Housing.
33.
There are 90 overholders in married quarters at present —an increase of ten since this time last year. As I have stated on a number of occasions these overholders are a special case and I shall continue to urge the local authorities concerned to treat their applications for houses accordingly.
No doubt the Minister is aware that Kildare County Council provided three places in their local authority scheme at Newbridge with a further place to be allocated for overholders. Is it not only fair to expect as much interest to be shown by the Minister and that he would do something concrete in this regard? Would he not adopt a suggestion put forward some time ago by Kildare County Council—that land be provided for purchase type houses to be made available for Army personnel at an early stage in their careers and, in this way, to eliminate eventually the problem of overholders?
I have been investigating this matter. One of the snags is the expense involved in arranging for sewerage and so on at the Curragh. I cannot say whether I will succeed in finalising such a scheme but I have been trying to get it off the ground.
Is the Minister aware that in respect of the allocation of local authority houses there is a tugof-war in a constituency such as ours between civilians and military personnel and that we have shown good faith——
A short question, Deputy, please,
——but that the Minister is not indicating any interest?
I am showing every interest possible but I should hope that a married soldier would have an equal chance with any civilian in the allocation of a local authority house.
34.
asked the Minister for Defence the number of county managers who have been approached by officials of his Department with regard to the provision of houses for married personnel of the Defence Forces; and the arrangements, if any, that have been made in this regard.
In recent times my Department have approached four local authorities regarding the provision of houses for married personnel of the Defence Forces. This was done in the context of particular needs.
The basic position in this matter is that soldiers have an equal claim on local authority houses with other members of the community in the same income group.
This reply is very unsatisfactory because the Minister makes no mention of the exact position regarding the provision of houses. Would he not agree to take a more definite line in this regard and inform county managers in regard to recruitment and movement of personnel?
Every county manager is fully aware of the position, that is, that a soldier is on an equal footing in regard to local authority housing with any civilian. I doubt if county managers would treat a soldier differently from a civilian. There may be the impression of a tug-of-war atmosphere but I should hope that a county manager would not disqualify a man from obtaining a house because he was a soldier.
Would the Minister not agree that members of our Defence Forces, men who are prepared to defend our country with their lives, if necessary, should be given some priority in relation to housing? Is it not the duty of the Minister to ensure that members of the Defence Forces are housed properly? The granting of priority in this area would encourage more people to join the Army.
It has been always departmental policy that the provision of housing is primarily the responsibility of local authorities and that soldiers have an equal claim on local authority houses with other members of the community in the same income group. However, I shall do all in my power to encourage county managers to give special consideration to soldiers in this regard.
In the opinion of the Minister, are soldiers entitled to priority?
I do not wish to comment on that. I regard soldiers as being entitled to the same consideration as any member of the public who is in similar circumstances regarding income, number of children and so on.
Can I take it, therefore, that the Minister has no intention of approaching county managers to persuade them to give priority to soldiers?
The Deputy is being mischievous.
Deputy MacSharry.
The Minister is not answering the question.
The Deputy has been repeating himself. The Chair has called another Deputy.
The Minister is supposed to defend the Army.
Can the Minister say whether he is receiving the full co-operation of county managers in this regard?
Yes. I contacted four county managers in the not too distant past. In one case the inquiry concerned Dundalk Urban District Council housing, another concerned Cavan Urban District Council housing, another related to Monaghan Urban District Council housing and the other to Donegal County Council housing. In each case I received a satisfactory report.
Would the Minister agree that difficulties do not arise in regard to married soldiers living in private housing but in relation to married personnel living in accommodation at the barracks but who wish to move, and also in respect of overholders?
I agree that there is difficulty in that regard.