Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 26 Jun 1979

Vol. 315 No. 7

Adjournment Debate. - Certificates of Reasonable Value.

Mr. Keating

On 15 May a number of questions were put down to the Minister for the Environment on the question of certificates of reasonable value and, although some of them were different in nature, they were all taken together. Arising out of the Minister's reply to those questions many people were extremely concerned about what, in the most charitable terms, can only be described as replies that were grossly misleading. I am pleased to have been given this opportunity to raise this matter so that the Minister can reconsider the replies he gave on the first occasion. My question related to the practice of a building firm asking would-be purchasers to sign to the effect that they were aware that the building firm in question would not be applying for certificates of reasonable value for the houses with the result that the would-be purchasers would not be entitled to the famous £1,000 grant.

Certain documents accompanied my question and the words "details supplied" were included with the question on the Order Paper. However, on more than one occasion on that day the Minister chose to ignore any of those details and, instead of dealing with the issue of the question, he said repeatedly that he did not have any idea of what I was speaking about. His exact words were: "I have no knowledge of what the Deputy is talking about" and later he stated, "I do not have any knowledge of it". The Minister also stated that he had no knowledge from the Department of what I was referring to. Many of us were surprised at that reply. We understood that the questions were difficult for the Minister for a variety of reasons but, nevertheless, his blanket denial that he was even remotely aware of any detail of the essence of the questions when he had been supplied with adequate details mystified many of us. I wonder if the Minister was misinformed.

After studying the Official Report of the debate on those questions I am convinced that the Minister did not do his homework and genuinely was not aware of what he was talking about at the time or else—I hope I am wrong in this—told the House a deliberate falsehood. I am not aware that the Minister did the latter but that is what it looks like from the evidence staring us straight in the face. It is my hope that the Minister will be in a position to refute that suggestion but I believe it will take some doing. I brought this matter to the Minister's attention but I should like the Minister to tell the House if the Taoiseach, some weeks prior to my question, had also drawn this matter to his attention. Is the Minister aware that there is in existence a letter from the Taoiseach's office to a constituent of mine thanking him for supplying the Taoiseach with the details relating to the case of certificates of reasonable value and stating that the Taoiseach had drawn this matter to the Minister's attention. That letter is in existence and it makes all the more mysterious—to use a very charitable word—the Minister's denial that he had any knowledge of what I was referring to on 15 May.

If the Minister did not have any knowledge, then it only speaks of the grossest incompetence or a deliberate mischievous falsehood. A certificate of reasonable value attaches to the purchase of new houses. Unfortunately, it is voluntary in the sense that the builder does not have to apply for it. However, it was the will of the previous Government and is the will of this Government that the scheme of CRV's would be honoured by all reputable building firms. The Minister is on record asking the building industry to see to it that CRV's were applied for in all cases. In other words, it would be something which would have a bad odour about it if a builder did not apply for such a certificate.

Following the Minister's denial of having any knowledge of a matter that was drawn to his attention on two occasions—once by his political boss—I lifted the stone and discovered a number of things under it which made me very unhappy. It does not give me any great pleasure to raise this matter but it is my duty to do so. I would be doing a disservice to the House if I did not put the facts as I know them on record. I have photocopies of letters from a building company called Abbey Homesteads Limited——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy should not make charges or allegations against an outside firm who have no possibility of defending themselves within the House. He can make his case without naming firms or people.

Mr. Keating

I am aware of that. I have not made any charges against the company as yet and I shall not do so specifically against the company. I have letters from that company. There is nothing essentially illegal or improper about these letters. All they do is ask would-be purchasers to sign to the effect that particular houses are going to be built and that there will not be applications made for certificates of reasonable value. People are asked to sign that they are aware of this and that therefore they will be foregoing the Government-sponsored, Government-initiated £1,000 grant. I want to ask the Minister if his repeated denials in this House, despite very massive evidence that he must have known more than he said in the House about the issue, have anything to do with the fact that there are very strong connections between this building firm and members of his own party. I do not wish to name anybody who is not here——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is now making allegations that he should not make. Allegations should not be made against people who have no opportunity of defending themselves.

Mr. Keating

All I am saying is that there are members of the Fianna Fáil Parliamentary Party who are involved in the board of this particular company which is flying in the face of repeated Government admonitions and in the face of Government policy which has been spelled out time and again by the Minister opposite. How can the Minister and the Government expect the average builder to apply for CRVs when the Minister has within his own party people who daily adopt that particular practice? Further, does the Minister now admit that he had extensive knowledge of the circumstances here prior to 15 May and that he had ample opportunity to have that knowledge but that instead he took refuge in a bland statement that he "had no knowledge of what the Deputy is talking about". So far as I am concerned, unless the Minister takes this opportunity of apologising to the House for a statement that was not only misleading but totally untrue—there are other options he could consider—I shall be saying that this is nothing better than a cover up for people with strong political affiliations to his own party. I hope the Minister will be able to tell us the facts of the case and explain how on that occasion he was able to reply as he did despite the fact that the Taoiseach had on 15 March replied to my client in a letter which said "I have drawn it to the Minister's attention". This was in answer to a letter which my client had written to the Taoiseach on 6 March, considerably before 15 May. The question was tabled long prior to 15 May giving more than ample opportunity for full investigation and assessment of all the relevant facts. Nevertheless the Minister here blandly and dogmatically insisted that he "had no knowledge" in replying to questions specifically on this issue put by both myself and other Deputies including Deputy Harte, who were likewise astonished. They could not understand it, as they had never before witnessed a situation where a question which had in parentheses "details supplied" could be answered by saying: "I have no knowledge of what the Deputy is speaking about." Those two statements do not jell. They could never be complementary to each other and they hint at something that should be put frankly and fully before us.

Finally, is the Minister now willing to try to introduce into the ranks of his own party the standards he demands to be applied by private builders outside? Does he recognise that the example which should start at home, so to speak, will not be followed by people outside if they do not see the Minister honestly making the necessary effort? I know he does make an effort in regard to the whole housing sector but in this particular case it was so distorted and misleading, so grossly and widely wrong in the way the Minister answered here that one could, under certain circumstances be forced to ask the Minister to accept that the standard he adopted in his replies on that day would lead in the normal course to his resignation in any other Parliament. Did the Minister tell a lie? If he did not tell a lie how was it possible to reply as he did when on at least two occasions, once by his own Taoiseach, he had been given sufficient details to be able adequately to answer the question put to him? Instead, he first took refuge in lumping a number of questions together. The record will show that I objected to them being taken together because there was no connection between them, three being of an extremely general nature and one from me relating to a specific case related to a backbencher of his own party who is involved in this building firm. The Minister lumped all the questions together and in my view hoped to get away with it on the day. Does the Minister not now agree that that sort of standard, if I properly and correctly interpret what happened on that occasion, does a disservice to this House and to the standards of his own party or any decent, reputable party and should be denounced by any right-thinking person? If we have no other standards here, whatever the faults and failings of the House, let us at least tell the truth. On that particular occasion I suggest the truth was not told but was buried under a concoction, a front, under a cover-up for the most shoddy and devious purposes. I hope the Minister has a very full answer to this.

It is extremely lamentable that a Minister who is known to be doing his best in so many areas was repeatedly as far as I am concerned—I do not want to keep on saying that a man is telling lies but certainly telling——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is completely out of order even to suggest that any Member of the House is telling lies.

Mr. Keating

Whatever the Parliamentary substitute is for the word "lie" I am saying the Minister was guilty of it on that day in the absence of any adequate denial. He has had ample opportunity since. I tried to raise this matter on a number of occasions. I am quite happy that there was no collusion by anybody else involved in the fact that the matter has not been raised so far; that is the normal course of events, but the Minister must have known from my expression of concern on that day, from my repeated attempts to raise it last week and this morning that I was extremely concerned about it and he could, if so minded, have used the opportunity but he has not done so. I can only reasonably conclude therefore—the debate does not allow me a bite of the cherry after the Minister has spoken, quite rightly perhaps—that the Minister intends to put the bravest possible face on it, keep his head down and hope it will be all right. At this stage, on the evidence I have, as far as I am concerned, it can only be considered to be corruption and that I despise.

Minister for the Environment (Mr. Barrett)

The Deputy has made some wild accusations as he often does. First, I want to emphasise that the CRV introduced in 1973 by the previous Fianna Fáil Government is not and never has been mandatory on all builders of houses. The purpose of the CRV is to keep some brake on house prices and to date it has succeeded in doing that to quite a significant extent. In regard to making it mandatory in the case of people who will avail of loans from the loan agencies, I have ensured this will happen under the new Housing Bill which has been introduced and which we shall possibly be debating tomorrow so as to get the Bill through and give it the necessary teeth to ensure that it is used with fullest effect in order to exercise some control over house prices. Those prices have been the subject of much criticism here by many Deputies including Deputy Keating. I am taking the matter seriously and ensuring that it will be mandatory in the case of all houses for people who avail of loans, grants and so on under the new Housing Bill which I expect to be through in a matter of days, hopefully.

In the matter Deputy Keating has raised as regards—call it what you like—misleading information given by me, he is quite incorrect, because since it is not mandatory nobody can be accused of evading or avoiding applying for CRVs. If it is not mandatory it is impossible to evade it. That is the logic of it in my opinion. On that occasion Deputy Keating asked if I was aware that members of my own Oireachtas Party were deliberately avoiding applying for CRVs and that, as a result, purchasers of those houses were subject to major financial losses. I said that I had no knowledge of what the Deputy was speaking about and I stand over my statement. What was mentioned was a particular housing scheme or development. Names were not mentioned. Even if he had mentioned company names I could not be expected to know the chairmen or directors of the companies. In no way will I attempt to try to keep up-to-date with what happens at the AGM of any company.

The Deputy has made wild accusations about individuals and companies. For the Deputy's information, that company were not trying to avoid applying at that time. I answered the question on 15 May. On 24 May an application was made to my Department for CRVs for that housing scheme. That application has been processed in the usual way and further information has been sought in relation to this matter. In fairness to whoever was responsible for building the scheme, it seems to me that their intention was to apply because they applied on 24 May.

Mr. Keating

I have a letter in my hand——

Mr. Barrett

I am not concerned with the Deputy's letters.

Mr. Keating

The Minister lied.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The statement has been made that the Minister was telling lies. That statement should be withdrawn by Deputy Keating.

Mr. Keating

I withdraw the allegation but I believe what I wish to believe. The Minister is covering up for Mr. Gallagher.

Mr. Barrett

I dealt with the subject matter of the question put down by the Deputy. When I said that I had no knowledge of what the Deputy was speaking about I told the truth. The Deputy can be assured that I will not deliberately lie in this House. I have done more to strengthen the CRV system than my predeccessor did in giving the system the necessary legal effect. CRVs will now be mandatory.

Mr. Keating

What did the Taoiseach draw to the Minister's attention?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Keating should let the Minister speak.

Mr. Barrett

My only concern is the subject matter of the question put down by the Deputy.

Mr. Keating

The Minister is covering up.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.25 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 27 June 1979.