Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 11 Dec 1929

Vol. 13 No. 6

Housing (Gaeltacht) Bill, 1929—Second Stage.

Question proposed: That this Bill be now read a Second Time.

Minister for Lands and Fisheries (Mr. Lynch)

This Bill is really the result of the recommendations of the Gaeltacht Commission in connection with housing, and adopted by the Government as set forth in the White Paper. I may say that the Gaeltacht Commission's recommendations also govern the Schedule to the Bill. The Gaeltacht Commission's recommondation was that all places where more than 25 per cent. of the population are Irish-speaking, should be embraced in the Gaeltacht. There was an internal definition, if you like, of Fíor-Ghaeltacht and Breac-Ghaeltacht. For the purposes of this Bill we have adopted the recommendation that the 25 per cent. Irish-speaking district would generally be called the Gaeltacht, and the Schedule of the Bill is based upon that. We had then to get the areas which are 25 per cent. Irish-speaking, and the only place where we could get such definite information was in the 1926 census of population. The Schedule is, therefore, based on the 1926 census of electoral areas which are 25 per cent. Irish-speaking or more.

This measure is one generally to give certain special facilities for the building of dwelling-houses and poultry houses in those areas to which I have referred. I do not think there is any necessity for me to go into oratorical flights to describe the conditions of the Gaeltacht. Most members of the Seanad are familiar with them. They are familiar with the barren tracks of mountainous land divided up into small holdings entirely uneconomic; they are familiar with the squalid dwelling-houses which are there; they are familiar with the small window which gives bad light and bad ventilation, or in many cases, none. They are also probably cognisant of the facts that this applies chiefly to areas that may be called the "Fíor-Ghaeltacht," the most Irish-speaking districts—Connemara and Erris, in Mayo, the Rosses in Donegal, and a few areas in Cork and Kerry, which are also most Irish-speaking. These are the "Fíor-Ghaeltacht," and probably the areas where conditions from the point of view of dwelling-houses, are worst.

Now, the conditions in these particular places are in fact so bad that nearly all legislation in the past escaped them. There were various Acts between 1924 and 1928 passed by the Oireachtas dealing with Housing. These applied generally to the Gaeltacht, but in fact they were not availed of to any extent in the Gaeltacht, or, at any rate, one can say that they were not availed of by persons for whom this particular Bill is intended. There were 114 houses built in the Gaeltacht under the Housing Acts passed by the Oireachtas, but these were built by people who had, at least, some capital or other. This Bill is for those who have been most submerged, if one might say so. It aims at getting at the lowest strata from the point of view of housing, because those people had not been able to avail of former Acts. These people were in this extraordinary position. The old Labourers Acts passed them by. These old Labourers Acts provided that persons should have less than one acre of land. All these people have one acre of land, if one could call it land, and because of these miserable patches of land the Labourers Acts could not apply to them. They missed the Labourers Acts, and they were unable to avail of the existing legislation passed by the Oireachtas for housing. In the Dáil there were many wreaths laid on the grave of the old Congested Districts Board. I pointed out there that I should be the last to say a word against the old C.D.B. because, in fact, in my Department we are, to a great extent, carrying on the work of the C.D.B., and a great part of our policy is based on the groundwork that they had prepared. I think we are doing somewhat better under the new arrangement. The C.D.B. passed by these people. They did a great deal of work in the way of striping of land and so on in the congested areas of the Gaeltacht, but when they came down to certain places they were so bad that they felt they could not be remedied, and they passed them by. We are hoping to get at them here. We are hoping that this Bill will help even those people who were passed by by the C.D.B.

It is a fact, though, that the problem is somewhat simplified by certain things that are in the Gaeltacht and that are not elsewhere, as far as I know. I know the conditions in the Gaeltacht perhaps better than conditions in other rural districts. I know that practically every one of the small holders in the Gaeltacht is a bit of a stone mason. Every one of them can put up his own little outhouse. When he wants to put up his outhouse he builds the walls and makes the roof. He puts up a comparatively substantial outhouse. Of course, it is a thatched roof with scraws over a certain amount of rafters. It is that type of skill that will be useful under this Act. We are taking cognisance of the fact that that skill is there because the Bill is based on the fact that the skill in the man himself who is looking for this grant will be utilised in putting up a house.

I will come to the point where there is more technical skill required, that is, in putting on a roof, in putting in window frames and placing the doors. For that, he will have to get some technical help. There, again, you have something that is rather peculiar to the Gaeltacht. You have what may be called the journeyman handyman, the handyman who travels around from parish to parish, who gets his keep in the particular house where he is working and is paid perhaps £1 or £2 per week while he is doing certain work. He is a journeyman and handyman. He is neither a slater, a carpenter nor a stone mason. He is a jack of all trades and does his work quite efficiently. We have taken cognisance in the Bill of the fact that that man is available. He is not at all a rare commodity. I know in the parish where I was born there are three or four such persons who go around putting in windows or roofing houses, putting on slates or setting up doors and so on. These are available in the Gaeltacht, and we have taken full cognisance of the fact that they are. That, of course, simplifies the problem. You have that skill available.

Those things have been taken cognisance of in the costs. The money that will be provided in the Bill is £250,000 between grants and loans and the purposes are specified as you go through the Bill. The chief purpose, of course, is the building and improving of dwelling houses. Minor things were put in, poultry houses and, a little bit further down, piggeries, but at any rate building and improving above and beyond anything else. After that, poultry houses and piggeries, with very little money allotted for these purposes. We want the greater part of the money to be spent on dwelling houses.

Again, a case was made in the Dáil for extending the provision to cattle houses, for instance. That matter was very carefully threshed out before the Bill was introduced at all. We felt that in many cases where there was a cow there was something in the nature of a cowshed. If there was not, and if there was a house built, the old house could be used for the purpose. There was £250,000 to be spent, and there is no more money to be available under the Bill. We felt we did not want that to be spread out over anything beyond what we now specify in the Bill—that is, dwelling-houses, and the minor questions of poultry and pigs. If you extend it to cattle, you must cut something down somewhere else. Probably it would mean the dwelling-houses, because the building of the cattle houses would cost more than is spent on poultry and pigs. If you extend it to the cattle houses, you will build fewer dwelling-houses. I take my agricultural outlook from the Department of Agriculture. I take my advice from them. They say these are the stock that will best pay the persons for whom we are catering under this Bill. They are so definite about it that we have made it a condition of their getting any grant for building or improving a house that a person shall make some provision for accommodation for poultry or pigs or for both, unless the Minister is of opinion that, having regard to all the circumstances, the occupier of such a dwelling-house could not be expected to keep either poultry or pigs. That is the Minister, of course, in consultation with the Minister for Agriculture. One of the points that have been put up in connection with poultry, pigs, and everything else, is that they require comparatively small capital. That is from the smallholders' point of view.

We contemplate from 24 to 30 hens and perhaps a sow or two in the little holding. The capital would not be extensive and the probable income with care and supervision would be of very considerable importance to that type of holder. It would put the particular small holder in a position, when applying for the loan that goes with nearly all the grants, of being able to repay. The difference in his income if he had poultry and say a pig, would ensure that he would be able to repay his loan. That is what is in our mind in this matter. That some provision of the kind is required is illustrated by the fact I mentioned in the Dáil, that of the 80,000 odd holdings in the Gaeltacht there are only 11,789 who have satisfactory housing for poultry at the moment. There are 45,810 with unsatisfactory accommodation, and 22,581 with no accommodation whatever for poultry. The pig situation is similar, if not indeed worse.

In the Dáil, a Deputy entered into a discussion as to the comparative value of a wooden house or a stone house for poultry. I do not suppose there is any need to go into a discussion of that kind. In fact, we are providing for a stone building. Since that discussion in the Dáil, I met a distinguished Senator who breeds a considerable number of poultry. I think he keeps 400 hens. He is a strong advocate of the wooden house. Incidentally, he mentioned that he eats 150 of his own young cocks in the year. Senator Milroy, I am sure, will say that he has something to crow about.

Mr. Johnson

Is it the advice of the Department that a stone house is better than a wooden house?

Mr. Lynch

I thought it better to consult the Department on that matter. In the past, the Department insisted on a wooden house for poultry under their Poultry Station Schemes, but after some experience in the Gaeltacht they now refuse to give grants for wooden houses for poultry in the Gaeltacht or in such wind-swept areas. They say that the proper houses for poultry in the Gaeltacht are stone houses.

The maximum grant for the building of a new house is to be £80, with a possible loan of not greater than £80—that is, for a standard dwelling house. I might say that our idea of a standard dwelling-house is an ordinary one-storey house with a large kitchen and three bedrooms— one for the parents, one for the boys of the family and one for the girls of the family—and with certain other amenities that can be provided with this particular grant.

Mr. Farren

A thatched or slated house?

Mr. Lynch

Certainly not thatched. A particular type of cheap slating can be provided. A great portion of the virtue of this Bill is that there can be a lesser grant for a smaller type of house. We are not tied down to a particular specification. If a man builds a slightly worse house than the standard house he may get a grant accordingly. At least, the house will be better than the one he is living in now. The measure is more elastic than former housing Acts in that respect. Under former housing Acts you had definite specifications for a five-roomed house or a three-roomed house; it was cut and dried. Under this Bill a man can get a grant of £80, or he can get a lesser grant in accordance with the type of house he intends to build.

The maximum improvement grant is £40. We are absolutely satisfied that that is a sufficient improvement grant, especially when the man who is going to spend £40 on improvements can always apply for an amount up to £40 as a loan. The question of giving £60 has been raised. If one goes to that one might say, "Hang it all; one might as well go and build a new house." When you go beyond the £40, it might be more economical to go for the £80 and build a new house.

Provision is made in the Bill for a grant for the demolition of the old house. We felt that a grant would induce a great many of them to destroy the old houses. In many cases the stones in the old houses would be used in the building of the new ones. At any rate, we wanted some inducement to a man to break down the old house. If it is worth his while for the amount of the grant, he will destroy the old house if he is not going to use it for cattle —for a cow, a donkey or a horse. We are not, by the way, going to provide by way of grants the full cost of the dwelling-house, or of the poultry house either. The most we are doing is to provide by grant something fairly near the amount required. Then the man who wants to build a standard house will have to go for a further £80 by way of loan in order to build that type of house. He will have to give his own labour and his own skill in putting up portion of the house, and in the provision of material. We believe that the cost of the house will be something like £275. A rough estimate of the man's labour and materials will be about £95. £160 will be provided by way of grant and loan.

I said in the other House that the giving of loans would be very carefully considered. Loans will only be given where, first of all, we are satisfied that they are necessary in order that a man should build the particular type of house he said he would build. Number two, we want to see about the man's capacity to repay. I am entirely against giving loans that mean grants. If you want to give grants, call them grants. If they are loans, let them be called loans, and let the person feel that he has the responsibility of repaying. We hope that a man's income may be so increased by the things specified in this Act and in others, that he will be in a position to repay. Whether he wants to build this particular type of house or not, we want to make it perfectly clear that when a loan is being given and where a man takes on himself the burden of repaying, it is expected that he will repay. We are not giving loans as grants. If we were, we would call them that.

Mr. Johnson

Would the Minister say whether there is any relative sum for loans as compared with grants?

Mr. Lynch

Roughly speaking, we calculate that there will be £150,000 in grants, and £100,000 in loans.

Mr. Farren

I am sure that the House will welcome this Bill. There may be some differences of opinion with regard to whether the sum provided is adequate. We are all agreed, however, that this is a good first effort to deal with a very serious problem in our State. I do not profess to have a great knowledge of conditions in the Gaeltacht, but I have visited certain portions of it, and when I came home from these particular places I felt ashamed that some of our fellow-countrymen should be condemned to live under such awful conditions. I think it is no exaggeration to say that some of these unfortunate people are living in houses that are not fit to house swine. Any farmer who has regard for his cattle would not house them under conditions such as I have seen human beings living in, in certain portions of the Gaeltacht. For that reason we must welcome this effort on the part of the Government to deal with this sad condition of affairs.

The Minister has explained the provisions of the Bill. He told us that the Bill provides for £250,000, which will be at the disposal of his Department for the purpose of enabling people who are badly housed in those areas to provide themselves with decent accommodation. He estimates that the amount of money that will be disbursed in grants will be £150,000, and in loans £100,000. He indicated that it is the desire and the intention of his Department to endeavour to aim at the erection of a standard type of house. I think the Minister is to be congratulated upon all that. I am not sure whether he elaborated it, but he mentioned that he has made provision in one section for assistance to be given to people who will be building houses in the direction of procuring lime, sand, and the use of scaffolding and other plant. It is my intention on the Committee Stage to move an amendment so that that principle will apply to other materials as well. The Minister specifies lime, sand, and the use of scaffolding and other plant, but they are not all the essential requirements in the building of a house. I think the Minister would be well advised to include other materials. I will elaborate that point later, and I hope I will satisfy the Minister that my intentions are not to hamper the work of the Department, but rather to assist in the matter about which he is so concerned.

The Minister explained the conditions to us, and he mentioned the type of individual who would be building these houses. I think he is called a gobán or in some cases a gobán saor. Although I am a skilled artisan, I am not going to raise any questions or lines of demarcation with regard to the building of houses. Our only desire is to see that these people are properly housed as speedily as possible. There are certain things, however, I would like to refer to. In the course of the discussion in the Dáil, and from his statements here to-day, the Minister indicated that what his Department aims at is a standard type of house, built of whatever type of stone suitable for building exists in the locality. So far, that is good. It is very desirable that the materials used in the erection of the walls of these houses will be of Irish manufacture.

The Minister proposes, in order to prevent these unfortunate people being exploited by persons who, realising that a grant or a loan has been issued, will put on the screw and charge more than should be charged for lime, sand and scaffolding, that there will be a systems of combined purchasing arranged by his Department with a consequent reduction in prices to the individual who contemplates building. There was a similar provision in a former Housing Act with regard to the joint purchasing of building materials, but I am sorry to say it proved to be a dead letter; it was never brought into operation. I hope that in this instance it will be taken full advantage of. I suggest that the Minister, on the Committee Stage, should accept an amendment setting out that the assistance to be given shall apply to other materials. Replying to a question, the Minister said that it was not proposed to have the usual thatched roof placed upon these houses and that it was intended they should be roofed with a type of slate. I suggest that whatever slates are being used, the combined purchasing system should be applied to them and should further be applied to window frames, sashes and other things of that sort.

Cathaoirleach

Materials and fittings are mentioned specifically in one of the sections.

Mr. Farren

They are not mentioned in the section I have in mind.

Mr. Lynch

The Senator will find that matter referred to in Section 12 (1).

Mr. Farren

I am glad that the matter has been given consideration in the Bill. We are all glad that this special effort is being made to preserve the Gaeltacht, to preserve the real Irish-speaking people. I hope that this is but the first of many such endeavours. I desire to lay a special emphasis upon the advisability of using Irish manufactured materials. It would be a regrettable thing if the real Irishman whose culture we are trying to preserve should get up in the morning to find himself confronted with a foreign-made window and its foreign-made sashes or be obliged to walk through a foreign-made door. Let us hope that the roof over his head which will shelter him, and the little ones who, in their time, will help to perpetuate Gaelic civilisation, will not be of foreign manufacture.

I sincerely trust that all the materials used under this scheme will be of Irish production. Apart from the point of view of sentiment, it is good economy. The Minister indicated that the labour of the handy man would work out at £50, and that £130 would be spent on materials. If that £130 is to be sent out of the country for the purchase of foreign materials, it will be bad economy. I do not want to saddle the unfortunate man in the Gaeltacht with increased prices for Irish manufactured articles. I speak with some knowledge of the subject when I say that if the Minister carries out in its entirely the provision with regard to joint purchasing and the building of standard houses, it will bring about a situation in this country when manufacturers will be prepared to produce window sashes and doors, and other necessaries in house building, and supply them as cheaply as any foreign-made article. If these things are made in large quantities, and made according to a standard prescribed by the Combined Purchasing Board, they can be made in this country—I will not specify any particular district in which they can be made—more cheaply than any unfortunate individual can go in and buy them, buying one article or so at a time. They can be bought in that way as cheaply as the foreign made article. Apart altogether from sentiment, it is very bad economy if the whole of this £250,000 that is to be put at the disposal of these people is going to be sent out of the country. It is bad economy to import foreign materials of this sort, if through combined purchasing we can get the materials as cheaply at home, thereby giving employment to people in other districts. In that way we will help other areas in the State that are helping to contribute this money. I think the Minister is to be congratulated for having introduced this Bill. The amount at his disposal is not sufficiently large to deal with the whole of this terrible problem in the Gaeltacht, but it is at least a commencement, and let us hope that before this money is exhausted the Minister will come here again with another Bill for money when, I hope, every Senator here will be prepared to vote all the money that will be required for dealing with this problem.

It is an awful thing to consider the amount of money that has been spent on housing in this country within the past few years, and to remember that at least 50 per cent. of that money has gone out of the country in the purchase of foreign materials. Now, in addition to the other matters I have mentioned, we do manufacture in this country metal pipes and castings that are required in the building of those houses. I know that they will not be required to any great extent, but I think the combined purchasing arrangement might be availed of there also. I think we could buy these materials of Irish manufacture in that way as cheaply as we could import them. In that way we may in some measure stop this continual drain of money out of this country. Last year there was over a half a million pounds sent out for the purchase of cement alone. If that drain continues, we will have no money left to spend on the building of houses or anything else.

Mr. O'Doherty

I wish to state on behalf of my Party that we are glad that the Ministry has at last taken these preliminary steps to deal with housing in the Gaeltacht. In considering the Bill, it is well for us to keep before our eyes that this is not an ordinary housing Bill. It is a Bill that was designed in the interests of the Fíor-Ghaeltacht, but it is being extended to cover other areas. In the words of the Minister, this Bill includes any area in the Gaeltacht having a population 25 per cent. of whom, according to the census of 1926, speak Irish. The amount of money at the disposal of the Minister for the carrying out of the scheme outlined in the Bill is £250,000. The Schedule attached to the Bill shows that a very wide area is included. The amount of money that is made available by this Bill, therefore, is not going to produce any very great results in that way. I am convinced that the Minister could get better results with the amount of money at his disposal if the area in the Schedule were curtailed. In Section 11 (4) it is stated that.

So far as may be practicable having regard to the number and local distribution of the cases in which it appears to the Minister to be proper to make grants under this Act and to the foregoing provisions of this section, at least three-fifths of the moneys available for making grants under this Act shall be applied in making grants to occupiers of dwelling-houses situate in district electoral divisions in the Gaeltacht in which the valuation under the Valuation Acts of all hereditaments (other than hereditaments valued at more than twenty pounds) in the district electoral division when divided by the population of the district electoral division according to the census of 1926 yields a sum not exceeding twenty-one shillings.

I have before me a list of the district electoral divisions in the Schedule with a valuation per capita of twenty-one shillings. That Schedule comprises fourteen in Cork; 35 in Donegal; 18 in Galway; 13 in Kerry; 28 in Mayo; 9 in Waterford; one in Cavan and one in Limerick. I can speak with some knowledge of the Northern Gaeltacht, Donegal, having had the privilege of representing the county for ten years, and I would respectfully submit that these 35 electoral divisions with a per capita valuation of twenty-one shillings include in entirely the Gaeltacht area of Donegal. The Schedule attached to the Bill includes areas which would not or could not properly be described as Gaeltacht areas. I am anxious that the Schedule attached to the Bill, therefore, should be curtailed, and that instead of spending three-fifths in the electoral divisions with a valuation of twenty-one shillings, five-fifths of the £250,000 should be spent there. In the Committee Stage, I will introduce an amendment to that effect.

There is no provision in the Bill excluding those who to my mind should not be entitled at all to grants or loans for building purposes under the terms of this Bill. These are people, for instance, whose valuation would exceed ten pounds, people who are in receipt of a State pension or pension other than Old Age Pension; people who are in receipt of moneys from the State for Post Office work, and so on. I think that this money should be applied specifically to those in the Gaeltacht who are living under conditions that would make the heart of any Christian, not to say an Irishman, revolt. It is only in that way that the full benefit of the money at the disposal of the Minister will be made available for the Gaeltacht proper.

Again, I think that there should be a time limit fixed somehow for the expenditure of this money. In other words, the Ministry should not be permitted to struggle on year after year expending yearly a small proportion of the money. I have not given much thought to the date, but I think it might be well to say that inside two years the total amount of the money at the disposal of the Minister should be spent. The Minister takes to himself the right to alter the Schedule. I believe that the Schedule should be fixed by us, and that a National Committee, either representative of Parties or non-political, composed of those who are interested in the revival of the language from the national point of view, should act in consultation with the Minister, and inquire into the possibility of extending the fixed Schedule suggested by him. That would obviate the possibility of any injustice being done to any large part of the Gaeltacht at the present time.

I heartily endorse the references by Senator Farren to materials required for the building of the houses. I hope the Minister will keep that matter before him when he is dealing with the matter of joint purchasing. If it is the decided policy of the Minister to employ in the building nothing but Irish materials, I think it would be an incentive to those engaged in the manufacture of such articles to lower the cost of production. This would help to lower the cost, for as many as possible of these articles could be produced together, and acquired by the Joint Purchasing Board.

Again, I say I am glad the Bill has been introduced. I trust that the Minister will not have as fixed a mind in the Seanad as he had in the Dáil, but that he will meet the suggestions put forward by way of amendments to the Bill, and accept these amendments in the belief that we are putting forward our views, not as taking away from the full effect of the Bill, but rather for the purpose of strengthening the original intentions of the Bill— namely, to provide better housing for the people in the Gaeltacht.

The McGillycuddy of the Reeks

I congratulate the Minister on this Bill. There is an impression in the West—it is quite wrong, of course-that very little State money gets further than 20 miles from Dublin. But after this Bill I feel quite sure that when the Minister returns to Cahirciveen he will be accorded a reception like the reception that once before was accorded to another great Irishman. There are one or two things which I think he will have to be careful about. The aim of this Bill, as he has told us, is to improve the conditions of life of those in what he calls the bottom strata. He should be very careful to make some provision in the Bill so that the better educated people, who are well able to make applications, should not come in first and be first served. That is an important and an essential point. I hope he will pay attention to that. I quite agree with some of the exceptions made by Senator O'Doherty with regard to appointments. They are the well educated people and will come in first, and I think that should be guarded against. Every possible publicity should be given in the Gaeltacht with regard to the provisions of this Bill. Otherwise we will not get the right people. With regard to Section 14, I would like to have some explanation from the Minister. That section states that "the Minister shall not exercise any power, determine any matter, or form any opinion under this Act in relation to accommodation for domestic poultry or pigs without previously consulting the Minister for Agriculture in regard thereto." It seems to me that he is there rather following the example of Esau and the mess of pottage, and that in regard to the sum of £250,000 provided in the Bill he has bound himself heart and soul to the Minister for Agriculture so far as doing anything under the Bill is concerned.

Mr. Lynch

No, only so far as poultry and pigs are concerned.

The McGillycuddy of the Reeks

I do not think that the £250,000 will go very far. I think that Senator O'Doherty was wrong in suggesting that we should cut down the area. I think that in time it will be found that this sum will not go half as far as it is expected to go.

Mr. Johnson

I think there can be no question in any part of the House but that it is desirable to make provision for the housing of the very poor in that part of the country known as the Gaeltacht, particularly that part which is marked green on the map. My fear in this matter is that this Bill is not going to do very much to effect a remedy.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

took the Chair.

Mr. Johnson

The Minister gave us certain figures this afternoon. From these figures it seems to me very unlikely that you are going to get many standard houses erected in that poor Gaeltacht. The standard house is estimated to be worth £275. The total grant is to be £80. That leaves a remainder of £195. How is that £195 to be obtained? Possibly, £80 may be granted by way of loan, provided that the Minister can be well assured that there is good security for the loan, but even though a person gets that loan there is another £115 worth of labour or material, or both, to be put into the house. How much of that will be labour and how much material, I do not know, but certainly a moderate proportion of it will be material that will have to be bought. I gather from the Minister's statement in the Dáil that he does not anticipate a very general grant of loans, that this is to be treated rather as an emergency. As a matter of fact, I think the Minister said somewhere that he did not expect that more than 50 electoral divisions would be included in this three-fifths provision. We are really dealing with the poorest of the people, and, as it seems to me, we are making the assurance at the beginning that only non-standard houses, or at least very few of the standard houses, will be erected in the poorest part of the country. Therefore, it seems to me we are aiming at small grants for the improvement of the existing houses in these the poorest parts of the country. There is another point that I wish to touch on before I get into the main criticism that I have to make on the Bill. Under sub-section (2) of Section 16 it is provided that "in so far as the provisions of any local Act or of any bye-laws, rules, regulations, or scheme, under whatever authority made, relating to the construction, laying-out, or drainage of new buildings or new streets are inconsistent with the regulation made by the Minister under this Act those provisions shall not apply to a house to which such regulation applies."

That means that wherever there have been bye-laws regulating the conditions under which houses are to be built, in regard to sanitation, sewerage, lay-out and construction, etc., they will no longer apply. The Minister's regulations will override them. That may be right and proper in regard to most of these districts where there are no regulations of the kind, but within the Schedule of this Bill, as drawn, there are two or three places which are urban areas, where there are certain regulations with regard to house construction, drainage and the like in force. These apparently are to be over-ridden by any general instructions that the Minister may make as affecting the Gaeltacht in general. I think that is a little bit doubtful and ought to be considered.

In regard to the Schedule, I am not able to understand the meaning of it at all, and I think it had far better be abandoned. It is useless. It is likely to excite hopes and expectations that cannot within the scheme be fulfilled. It is likely to excite all kinds of jealousies and discords and will be very harmful. It will not be beneficial and will be of no value whatever to the scheme. I do not know what difference there may be between the census returns of Irish speakers compared with the Gealtacht Commission's report of Irish speakers. We have not had the privilege of examining or even seeing the census returns in regard to Irish speakers, as it has not yet been published. The Minister appears to have had access to these returns. We have had no such access to them, and therefore are not able to examine them. But as only eight months elapsed between the taking of the census by the Gaeltacht Commission and the census of April, 1926, one can fairly well take the Gaeltacht Commission's report unless we are to assume that there is a very considerable conflict between the two reports. The Gaeltacht Commission made their examination specifically by the aid of the Gárda Síochána, plus personal observation and plus examination of the 1911 census. I think when one takes into account the fact that the 1911 census was not in the time of full flood of the Irish movement it would probably record more or less accurately the number of Irish speakers, and that the 1926 census, which followed rather closely on the Gaeltacht Commission's report, if anything, would err on the side of generosity as to the number of Irish speakers, one can fairly well take the Gaeltacht Commission's report as being as reliable as anything else in regard to the density of the Irish-speaking population.

As far as I can see in this Schedule the districts which, for the purpose of this Act alone, and for no other purpose, are to be deemed the Gaeltacht run very sharply in conflict with the Gaeltacht Commission's report, which was adopted by the Executive Council as determining the course of policy. The Gaeltacht Commission report indicated certain areas, marked "a" and "b," which taken in combination would be considered the Gaeltacht. I do not know whether the Minister has examined this closely, but it will be found on examination that the Gaeltacht as defined by the Schedule differs materially from the Gaeltacht as defined by the Gaeltacht Commission's report. Quite a considerable number of those areas which were marked "b," that is partly Irish-speaking, after being examined by the Gaeltacht Commission from personal observation, they are in fact left out of the Schedule, while a considerable number of areas which are put in the Schedule, were not considered to be Gaelic speaking in the Gaeltacht Commission's report. I find, for instance, by the report that there are 70 areas in Cork which are considered to be Gaelic by the Gaeltacht Commission, ten of them being 80 per cent. or over Irish-speaking, and 60 being between 25 per cent. and 80 per cent., whereas in the Schedule there are 97 such areas. For Galway the Gaeltacht Commission report gives 130, and the Schedule gives 152. For Mayo the report gives 88 and the Schedule 104.

Leas-Chathaoirleach

Are they both district electoral divisions?

Mr. Johnson

Yes. The Schedule indicates Cavan, Leitrim, Limerick, Louth and Roscommon, whereas the Gaeltacht Commission's report makes no mention of them at all. I think there is no possibility under this scheme that many of the areas mentioned in the Schedule are ever going to obtain one halfpenny worth of benefit under the Bill, and it is the Minister's intention that they should not. Why put them in the Schedule? Are you not exciting hopes in the minds of the residents of those districts that they may get assistance when there is a clear intention on the part of the Ministry, and it is part of the scheme in the Bill that they shall get no such benefit?

There are 113 district electoral areas marked in the map as being within the poverty region—below 21 shillings per capita valuation. 47 of these are 80 per cent. and upwards Irish-speaking, 66 of them 25 per cent. to 80 per cent. Irish-speaking, and it is more or less told to us in the Bill that not more than these 113 areas as defined on the map will receive any benefit from this Bill. Why should we deceive people by putting no less than 658 areas in the Schedule when we are anticipating that only 113 of them will ever receive any benefit from the Bill? May I point out when taking the Gaeltacht Commission's report as a guide to the Schedule, that of the 658 areas recorded no less than 28 per cent. of the 175 divisions are under the 25 per cent. limit of Irish speakers in the Gaeltacht Commission's report.

The members of the Gaeltacht Commission were not so easily taken in as the Minister seems to have been in drafting the Schedule from the 1926 census, for if, according to the returns they received of Irish speakers, there were 20, 30, or even 40 per cent. Irish speakers, and the Gaeltacht Commission, from their own observation, knew those were not really the Irish districts, that perhaps some enthusiastic Gaelic Leaguer, or perhaps some member of the Dáil, in taking records, wanted to show big in respect of the particular area and returned a large number of Irish speakers for it, if the Commission found those were not in reality Irish-speaking—they did not mark them as Gaeltacht—so that the Gaeltacht Commission's report is much more reliable from the point of view of Gaelic-speaking districts than the census returns. Yet no less than 28 per cent. of the districts named in this Schedule comprise less than 25 per cent. of Irish speakers according to the Gaeltacht Commission's report. There is something even worse from my point of view in this Bill. Before going on to that, let me remind the House that the Minister has said he does not consider that more than 100 of the areas mentioned in the Schedule will be affected, and that not more than 50 of the electoral areas will be affected or benefited by the three-fifths clause. That confirms what I have said. I want to refer to some of the districts which are clearly indicated in the Gaeltacht Commission's report as being Irish-speaking, and which anybody who knows, even superficially, some of the areas, would consider should, without any question, be in the Schedule. Take Donegal. There are two divisions, Dawross and Maas. They are not included because they appear upon the census as having only 10.9 and 6.9 per cent. of Irish speakers.

But the Gaeltacht Commission, realising the facts, apart from the figures, entered these two districts as being part of the Gaeltacht, and noting also the fact that in the previous census of 1911 there were 43 per cent. and 38 per cent. respectively of Irish speakers there. I have not gone exhaustively into some of these counties. In regard to Sligo I find a district which in the Gaeltacht Commission is shown as being 33 per cent. Irish-speaking, marked specifically as being a Gaelic-speaking district, but not shown in the Schedule, while other districts which are shown as having 4 per cent. and 2 per cent. are included. I cannot reconcile that with reason or with the report.

Take Mayo, which is a county that I have not examined closely—Aghadower North with 28 per cent. is included, but Aghadower South with 31 per cent. is not included, although clearly marked as being within an Irish-speaking district. Mountfalcon is not included, although it has 36 per cent. and is marked by the Gaeltacht Commission as an Irish-speaking district. In Clare there are three districts not included, Kilrush rural, St. Martin's, and Kilkee, although noted as being in the Gaelic-speaking areas by the Gaeltacht Commission report. In Killadysart rural district, Coolmeen with 5.6 per cent., Killofin with 12.3 per cent. are not included, but Killadysart with 11.9 of Irish-speakers, Kilfiddene with 5.9, Kilmihill with 3.5, Glenmore with 1.7, and Cooraclane with 7.9 are included. In Cork there are numerous instances of a similar kind, but I had better not delay the House in dealing with them. Galway is similar, but not quite to the same extent. Some places are included with 9 per cent. and 7 per cent. of Irish-speakers, not indicated by the Gaeltacht Commission as being Irish-speaking districts, while not included are such places as Moneivea and Colmanstown with 19 per cent. and 25 per cent. respectively indicated as being Irish-speaking districts by the Gaeltacht Commission report, and yet not in the Schedule.

Another fault that I find with the Schedule is that there are, for instance, in Galway three Cloonkeens, one in Loughrea rural district, one in Mount Bellew rural district, and one in Tuam rural district. It will be found both in the report and on the map that there is a Cloonkeen in Loughrea, Mountbellew, and Glenamaddy rural districts, but no Cloonkeen in Tuam. It is on the list, but not on the records. There is one Aughrim in the Schedule—in County Galway—which Aughrim is it? There is an Aughrim in Ballinasloe district with 15.2 per cent. Irish speakers and an Aughrim in Galway, with 9.2 per cent.—which is intended? Obviously the people of Ballinasloe will say we are in that district, because we have 15 per cent. of Irish speakers. But I presume that it is the people in Galway district that are really intended to be included, so that we are exciting hopes in one of these places which cannot be fulfilled. I find that in Clare there is a place with no less than 87 per cent. of Irish speakers—Glenroe—not included in the Schedule. I do not know how to account for that. Even as far back as 1911, before the enthusiasts for recording got on their feet, they had 52 per cent. of Irish speakers, while in 1925 they had 87 per cent., but they are not included in the Schedule.

Mr. Wilson

They do not want houses.

Mr. Johnson

Then I have Kilmurray, in Kildysart rural district, marked as being an Irish-speaking district, and Kilmurray (Kilrush rural district), also marked as an Irish-speaking district. Kilmurray (Kildysart) has 32 per cent., and Kilmurray (Kilrush) has 16.3 per cent., but there is only one Kilmurray in the Schedule. Which is intended? Clooney, in Ennistymon rural district, is marked as an Irish-speaking area by the Gaeltacht Commission, with 54 per cent. of Irish speakers, but there is a Clooney in Tulla rural district, in the same county, with 23 per cent. of Irish speakers. There is only one Clooney in the Schedule. Which is it? And so one can go through the various counties and find that the Schedule is utterly unreliable and of no value whatever, and I submit ought not to be put into the Bill. It does not do the Bill any good; it does it a good deal of harm. I suggested earlier that it will deceive the residents of these districts. Somebody is going to be disappointed and somebody is going to get blamed. If we were nearer a General Election one might be tempted to say that it was intended as an electioneering dodge. I do not think that that is so, but one can never tell. I suggest to the Minister that there is no occasion for going outside the hundred or so district electoral areas which he has confessed the Bill is only intended to apply to. The Gaeltacht Commission's report and the census returns, with the valuation test, fairly well agree as to which parts of the Gaeltacht are in special need of houses under this grant, and it would be very much better. I think, very much more honest and satisfactory to everybody, if we did not put into the Bill no less than six hundred places. intending as to five hundred of them that the Bill should have no effect at all.

I do not think that that limitation would damage the Bill, and if we are determined that there shall be on record in legislation a definition of the area which is to be called henceforth the Gaeltacht, we should not adopt this classification, we should be much more scientific if we are going to embody in legislation an area which shall henceforth be officially known as the Gaeltacht. I do not know whether that was in the mind of the Minister. If that is thought necessary I submit that the more scientific enquiry which was undertaken by the Gaeltacht Commission was a more reliable guide for that purpose than the census of 1926.

Mrs. Wyse Power

There is one thing that is not to me very explicit in the Bill, that is in fact not explicit at all. That is the conditions under which loans may be made. "The Minister for Finance may make regulations in relation to all or any of the following matters." If you follow that up you will find it is the issuing of loans, making the charging orders and the repayment of loans. If the Minister knows anything of the conditions under which loans will be granted I think he should throw some light on the matter.

Mr. Comyn

Senator Johnson has subjected this Schedule to a very close analysis, and I think he has rather brought out the fact, which is obvious to anybody, that these electoral divisions are very much scattered. Of course, that was inevitable having regard to the fact that the Minister, I suppose, went by the census return. A good many people who have looked through these electoral areas have come to the conclusion that in many cases the census returns must have been wrong, that a number of people who spoke Irish cannot have been returned as Irish speakers, and, on the other hand, as I am sorry to say, a number of people who know very little Irish, if any, must have been returned as Irish speakers. That is a fault in the census returns, and I think it is a fault which probably damages this Schedule from the point of view of doing justice to people who are entitled to justice. I think that the Minister should very seriously consider the proposal which was put forward by Senator O'Doherty. I think you would have there a basis upon which he could be sure that the persons intended to get this small instalment of justice should get it.

Section 11 says: "So far as may be practicable having regard to the number and local distribution of the cases in which it appears to the Minister to be proper to make grants under this Act and to the foregoing provisions of this section at least three-fifths of the money available under this Act shall be applied in making grants to occupiers of dwelling houses situate in district electoral divisions in the Gaeltacht in which the valuation under the Valuation Acts of all hereditaments (other than hereditaments valued at more than twenty pounds) in the district electoral division when divided by the population of the district electoral division according to the census of 1926 yields a sum not exceeding twenty-one shillings." There you have the true Gaeltacht and, moreover, you have it, if I may say so, with a series of ringed fences. You have there the homogeneous area, and instead of applying three-fifths of this money to these particular areas which, prima facie, under the provisions of the Bill you will do, you should apply the five-fifths—the whole of it—and Senator Johnson would then not have an opportunity of putting your Schedule through a raking criticism.

It is a very curious fact that if you take the population and the valuation you will find that the Irish speakers occupy those areas where the valuation per head is lowest. Naturally so, because you are dealing not with paupers and I hope we will not deal with this question of the Gaeltacht as if we were superior beings legislating for the lower stratum; we are legislating now for a pure and a prolific race; we are giving them the first instalment of what is due to them, and I was very happy to understand, from the speeches that have been made by the Minister and others, that we are at last getting a glimpse of how to deal with this situation. We are not to come like a Lady Bountiful, or a Father Christmas at Christmas time, giving gifts to poverty-stricken people; we are going to give a little instalment of justice to a people to whom justice is due, and who are, in my judgment, the purest race in this country and a superior race. That is the frame of mind in which I would like the question of the Gaeltacht to be approached. I noticed that in the speech of the Minister it was approached in that way. You will succeed if you do approach it with sentiments like those; you will absolutely fail if you deal with it in any other way or from any other point of view.

It is a good thing to provide good houses for the people of the Gaeltacht, but the main thing in the Gaeltacht is to enable the people to get employment, and the Minister has emphasised that one of his objects in these grants he is making is to enable the people to get employment in building their own houses. I was glad to hear from the Labour benches that no objection is to be made by reason of the fact that the people who will build these houses will not belong to trade unions and will not be skilled tradesmen. It is a good thing that they should get employment. That is what is desired. I hope the Minister and those who are helping him in this will regard the employment which is now being given as merely the beginning of a system by which the people in the Gaeltacht will get full employment in industry in their own areas.

The Gaeltacht people are poor because they have been a prolific race. Their land is exhausted because they had to live and work and provide food for their children out of it. That is your problem in the Gaeltacht—exhausted land, the want of employment in the main way in which employment can be given there, that is, in the cultivation of the land. I differ for once from Senator Farren when he referred to this poverty-stricken area, desolate land and bleak and barren mountains. I come from the area, and I can assure the Seanad that the land in the Gaeltacht is by no means inferior, but is, in fact, the most improvable land in Ireland. That is the way to approach the question. Give a chance to these people, who have been wronged for centuries, to make good in the new conditions in this country. That is all, I think, that the people of the Gaeltacht ask from you, and I think that they will resent any suggestion or imputation that it is given as charity or given to an inferior people. There were many things in Senator Farren's speech with which I thoroughly agree. The building materials for houses ought to be provided locally. When the last housing scheme came before the Seanad we suggested that a comprehensive scheme of house-building should be introduced which would include a commission to be established with a view to providing all materials locally for the building of houses. It is a terrible thing that half a million pounds should have been paid last year for cement in the construction of houses which, according to some reports, are not quite perfect.

I am glad that the houses in the Gaeltacht are going to be built of stone and mortar, and I hope that they will be slated with Irish slates, such as the Killaloe slate, but I have no brief for any particular kind. I hope that the window frames will be made in Ireland, and that the grates and other things will be cast in Ireland. It is, of course, good from the point of view of public health that these houses should be improved. I think it is a very good suggestion of the Minister's to encourage the tearing down of some of the old houses. That is a valuable provision in the Bill and is only the beginning of what ought to be done. Whitewashed walls and painted sashes are not enough. The people of the Gaeltacht must be enabled to live, thrive and multiply in their own land. It is not a matter of charity. It is not a gift from a superior people. It is simple justice. Approach the matter in that way and you will be successful, but if it is approached in any other way you are doomed to failure.

The Cathaoirleach

resumed the Chair.

Mr. Farren

I think that Senator Comyn is labouring under a misapprehension. I did not talk about barren tracts of land. I seldom speak on matters about which I do not know. I know nothing about land, and I did not refer to barren tracts.

Mr. Lynch

Senator Farren expressed the hope that as far as possible Irish materials would be utilised in building houses for which these grants and loans are to be given. In the first place, it is not we who are going to build the houses, but the people of the Gaeltacht, and each person will suit himself. So far as we are concerned, where the system of joint purchasing comes in—and it will come in fairly largely, as we will be dealing with areas more or less in pockets, and where we believe it suits, we will strongly urge that Irish materials should be used. I would be as strong as the Senator, or any other Senator in giving effect to that wish. Senator O'Doherty was anxious that the Bill should be restricted in its entirety to the areas covered by the provisions of Section 11 (4), that is, the areas for which three-fifths of the money is to be allocated. There is nothing to prevent five-fifths of the money being allocated to these particular electoral areas, but at the same time, I do not wish to tie myself to that, inasmuch as you will have, in the semi-Irish-speaking districts—that is, with over 25 per cent. Irish speakers—small pockets of Irish-speaking people who are extremely badly housed and badly off. If you put such areas into that straight-jacket such as the Senator suggests, you could not well extend the Bill to particularly deserving cases living in the circumstances which I have mentioned.

The Senator is rather afraid that under the provisions of the Bill the Minister has power to add to the Schedule. I do not know whether he seriously suggests that a sort of inter-party commission should consider the Schedule because I cannot imagine anything more fantastic. Section 2 (2) says that "the Minister may by order, whenever he considers it expedient so to do on account of local variations in the numbers or distribution of Irish-speaking persons, amend the Schedule ..." The Minister must have some very good basis or information on which he can stand before he attempts to vary the Schedule. He cannot attempt to remove a place from the Schedule, at any rate, pending the census. I do not know on what information I could add a place to the Schedule. If I got representations in regard to a particular area, how could I examine them and satisfy myself that I could stand before the Oireachtas and justify an addition to the Schedule? I do not know on what type of information I could do such a thing. At any rate, I think, that it is far safer to leave the question of adding to the Schedule to the Minister and make him, as the responsible Minister, stand over it and show to the Oireachtas afterwards on what grounds he added to it. The Senator was also concerned with a time limit for the expenditure of the money. I am as desirous as the Senator of expending the money in the shortest time possible so long as I am satisfied that it is being well spent. In my opinion, to put on a time limit of that kind would be an invitation to spend the money anyhow before a particular date. That is an unsound proposition in the expenditure of money. The money will be spent as quickly as possible with our eye on the best results.

Mr. Johnson

And with the sanction of the Minister for Finance.

Mr. Lynch

The Minister for Finance is going to provide £250,000 and he will not be concerned whether it is going to be spent in 1930, 1931 or 1932. The money is available and he will not be very materially interested once it is voted.

Mr. Johnson

Will it be voted all in one year?

Mr. Lynch

I have to make my estimate of what we hope reasonably to spend. If I thought that I could spend the entire amount in one year I would have no hesitation in doing so but I do not believe for one moment that I could. Senator Johnson was concerned with the number of places in the Schedule and the hopes that might be raised. Yet he stressed the fact that I had made it very plain in the speeches I had made that not more than 100 electoral divisions will benefit under the Bill.

Mr. Johnson

The responsibility for the Act will be ours.

Mr. Lynch

I would like to know what the Senator's alternative would be. You must outline some places to which the Bill will apply. Surely you must get something for which you would have some statutory authority. The enumeration of 1925 may have been all that Senator Johnson suggests but in fact these are not statutory figures. I accept the recommendations of the Gaeltacht Commission as the Government accepted them in the White Paper but I question the accuracy of many of those figures. The strange thing about them is that in many places, to which Senator Johnson referred, the figures of the 1911 census and the 1926 census, are fairly near each other but the enumeration of 1925 is far away from either of them.

Mr. Johnson

In making the Schedule did you take the 1911 figures into account at all?

Mr. Lynch

No, I am basing it on 1926 census. As a matter of fact the figures of the 1911 census and the 1926 census were fairly near each other, taking into account the normal reduction in Irish speakers that one might expect over a period, but the 1925 enumeration was very wide of the mark of the 1911 or the 1926 figures in most cases. I do not say that the census gave us a true return of the number of Irish-speaking persons in an area. In fact I am perfectly satisfied that it does not. As Senator Johnson pointed out, an enthusiastic Gaelic Leaguer in any particular area during the time the census returns are being filled, will cause a big number to fill their census forms as Irish speakers when in fact they are not Irish speakers. I am perfectly certain if the people in many areas knew that such a Bill as this was coming along, you would have a much bigger percentage of Irish speakers returned in 1926. Somebody said that in filling one's income tax return, one does not usually have the Bible by one's elbow. I think there would be very few who in filling the census returns, consider seriously the question whether or not they are telling the exact truth.

At any rate I think the 1926 returns are about the only thing on which we could reasonably base the Schedule of the Bill. The overriding clauses in the Bill point out its limitations to everybody. Section 11 (4) specified that three-fifths of the expenditure will be devoted to certain areas where the valuations, excluding valuations over £20 when divided by the population of the district electoral division, according to the census of 1926, gives a sum not exceeding 21/-. Three-fifths will be spent in these areas. Then there is the overriding provision as to Irish-speaking households. That inevitably restricts the Bill, and any thinking person will feel, even though putting in a Schedule of this kind, you may run up 600 odd electoral areas; in fact, the housing grants and loans will not be effective as far as fifth-sixths of them are concerned. I would not exclude any one of them for the reason I said, that you may find a small pocked of Irish speakers in the Breac-Ghaeltacht where the rest of the population might be well off and the conditions of these Irish speakers might be extremely bad from the point of view of housing. The Senator mentioned the Electoral Division of Cloonkeen. I understand the map is a little bit out of date and that Clonkeen, which was formerly in the Glenamaddy rural district, is now in the Tuam rural district.

It is now Cloonkeen, Tuam and it used to be Cloonkeen, Glenamaddy. The one one the Schedule is the correct one. The Senator has found a slip in the Schedule in connection with Aughrim. I had not known that there were two areas called Aughrim in the Co. Galway. It is, unfortunately, a mistake in the Schedule. The Aughrim in the Schedule refers to Galway rural. In the 1926 census, Aughrim, Galway rural, returned 37.3 of an Irish-speaking population. He mentioned Glenroe. I find the figure for that area for 1911 is 52.4, whereas the enumeration of 1925 shows it to be 97.2, and the census of 1926 23.7. The figure of 23.7 seems extraordinary as showing the change that took place from 1911, but still I should say it is more accurate than the figure of 97.2 in 1925.

Mr. Comyn

Would the Minister say where is Glenroe?

Mr. Lynch

I know it is in Co. Clare. It is an electoral area there, and if the Deputy was a candidate for that area, he would have to get the register for it.

Mr. Comyn

It is in the Corofin area.

Mr. Johnson

Is a correction not necessary because the people in the second district ought to know that they are excluded?

Mr. Lynch

I am afraid I will have to get amendments inserted on the Committee Stage in the Schedule.

Mr. Johnson

This is an amendment that should come from the Minister.

Cathaoirleach

If you suggest the substance of the amendment he will embody it.

Mr. Lynch

Senator Mrs. Wyse Power wanted to know about the loans. There is no restriction on granting loans except that they are limited to the amount of the grant. No loan can be given of more than the grant for a particular dwelling or improvement. The regulations to be made by the Minister for Finance will deal merely with the rate of interest and the period of repayment. The period of repayment generally will be thirty-five years. Senator Comyn to a great extent went over many of the points which Deputy O'Doherty raised. As to the restriction of the area in which three fifths of the money is to be expended, I think they have made a reasonable case why I should not tie myself to that. Again, may I say that there are parts of the Breac-Ghaeltacht where you have Irish-speaking households—a little Irish speaking community—where the conditions are as bad as any inside the Fíor-Ghaeltacht, where, however, they could not come within this, because the valuations, divided by the population, might be over twenty-one shillings and the money might not be applied. Therefore, I would not like to confine all the money to those areas, because of certain pockets outside.

I would not like Senator Comyn to take it that it must be entirely stone and mortar that will be used in building. I hope so, but there may be localities where the getting of the stone will be far more expensive than concrete where stone will not be available. Therefore, there will have to be some cement buildings, and the man can give practically as much labour by carting and mixing and doing the ordinary work that a labourer does in helping a builder. I would not like to tie myself down. Generally speaking, I should say that, in most of the Gaeltacht, I know there will be sufficient stone available to make it unnecessary to use concrete for the buildings, but I would not like to tie myself down and say that it will be entirely stone and mortar that will be used and not concrete. I think I have answered most of the points made. Any other points that arose can be dealt with in Committee.

Mr. Barrington

Is it intended to confine the grants which will be made to Irish-speaking people, even though the necessities of the people who do not speak Irish are greater than those who do?

Mr. Lynch

As I pointed out in the beginning, the Bill deals with the Gaeltacht. It is a Bill to deal with the Irish-speaking area and does not apply to places like Dublin, Limerick, Tipperary, etc.

Mr. Barrington

But there are many people in the Gaeltacht who speak English.

Mr. Lynch

There are. There are many people who are bi-lingual. There are many people inside the Gaeltacht area who know no Irish. There may be people even in the Fíor-Ghaeltacht who do not know any Irish. While a preference should be given in these areas to Irish-speaking households, according to the Bill. I certainly would say that once you had a man in a given area in the Fíor-Ghaeltacht, whether he was an Irish speaker or not, you could not possibly exclude him from the provisions of the Bill. Everyone around him would benefit, and to cut him off in all his poverty because he did not happen to speak Irish would be carrying the thing rather too far.

Question put and agreed to.

Committee Stage to be taken on Tuesday, 17th December.