Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 19 Jun 1930

Vol. 13 No. 26

Public Business. - Increase of Rent and Mortgage Interest (Restrictions) Bill, 1930.—Committee Stage.

The Seanad went into Committee.

Cathaoirleach

I regret that I am obliged to rule out of order the amendments handed in for the Committee Stage, all of which are in the name of Senator Sir John Keane. The purpose of the Bill is to continue the increase of Rent Acts, 1923 to 1929, and these Acts are only amended for the purpose of continuing them. Hence any amendments which seek to alter principles of these Acts are outside the scope of the present Bill as read a second time.

The Bill passed through Committee without amendment.

The Bill ordered to be reported.

The Seanad went out of Committee.

I move:

That the standing orders be suspended for the purpose of enabling the remaining stages of the Increase of Rent and Mortgage Interest (Restrictions) Bill, 1930 to be taken to-day.

Question put and agreed to.
Question put—"That the Bill be considered on report"—put and agreed to.
Question proposed—"That the Bill be received for final consideration and do now pass."

As I have been precluded from dealing specifically with certain injustices that are contained in the Principal Act, I should like to deal with a very misleading statement by Senator O'Farrell. He rightly said that there was no control of houses built after 1919. In effect, that is an invitation to those who possess houses to profiteer. Of course, they will take full advantage of their position as there are no houses to let to-day, and the housing problem has been depending in the past and will always in the future be depending on the number of houses offering to let, because the ordinary struggling person on a salary cannot afford to buy, or procure the capital to buy a house. All these new houses are offered for sale. Until you can get again displayed the old signboard "House To Let" the housing problem will remain in its present unsatisfactory position, and can only be settled by a lavish expenditure of State resources. That is why decontrol is wanted. You will then increase very largely the number of available houses you will have, and possibly by offering the houses to let there will be inducements owing to the increasing supply of old houses to build new houses also as the speculator did in the past, whereas no houses are available for letting now.

I do not know if Senators appreciate the force of Senator Sir John Keane's argument. I certainly do not, as there is nothing in the present law that prevents a builder to-day putting up a notice, "House to Let," in the house he builds. How will the removal of the Rents Restrictions Act prior to 1919 facilitate him in that respect? The suggestion seems to be that if you remove the Rent Restrictions Act you can make the existing houses available, presumably by evicting the tenants.

No sane person would let a house as long as that Act remains on the Statute.

That Act does not refer to houses that are to be built, or that have been built for some years past. I cannot see the force of the argument. I know that houses are being let by speculative builders in increasing numbers. I live in a district where houses are being built and let at what would be termed an economic rent. They are undoubtedly exploiting the position there owing to there being no control, and they are getting the rents they are demanding. The surprise is that more speculators do not build, seeing that they can let their houses at any price, or sell them if they want to, but I am not admitting that the removal of the rent restrictions in regard to the existing housing is going to encourage speculative builders to build houses and let them to people at rents they can pay. As old houses become vacant, I understand they are free from restrictions as far as new tenants are concerned.

Cathaoirleach

I understand the Minister says yes.

If that is the position houses as they become vacant are advertised and let, and the restriction disappears, so that takes away the last vestige of the argument of the Senator.

I do not agree.

I think this Bill ought to be passed. It would be a great pity not to have a continuance of the existing law, although its existence has been rather precarious for several years, but we should not allow it to lapse so that de-control would come into operation at once. Judging from his speech and the amendments which he had down, I think Senator Sir John Keane takes a view that is untenable at the present time. There is a current of opinion in the country against allowing landlords, the owners of ground rents, and houses in towns, getting the full competitive value of these houses. If there is a flowing tide, and if there is any attempt to hold back that tide, the result, I think, will be destructive to the interests which Senator Sir John Keane purports to represent here. Houses in towns deteriorate in value as ordinary buildings, but the prices go up year by year in the case of such houses. That enhanced price can only be due to an increase in the site value. An attempt was made, even before the great war, to put a stop to the exploitation of these increases in site values. It is idle, at the present day, to attempt to stem the running tide, but what we do want is this: permanent legislation on the subject of houses in towns. Now the reason that you cannot get houses to let is this: that the law is unsettled, and that these Acts are being extended from year to year as temporary measures. Although you do not get houses to let you can get many houses to purchase. There are many houses for sale, and the real reason for that is that the landlord cannot perhaps afford to incur the risk of legislation which may be passed from year to year, the terms of which he does not know in advance. That is the reason, I submit, why there are no houses to let. That there are many houses to sell is an argument only for this, that we ought to have permanent legislation on a reasonable basis. There is a lot to be said for the point of view that Senator Sir John Keane put forward. There are some very poor people whose sole resource is the ground rent or the middleman's interest in housing. It is by no means an easy problem to deal with, but we had the assurance of the Minister yesterday that he will bring in a measure to deal fully and fairly with this question of houses in the towns, and that at a very early date.

Question—"That the Bill be received for final consideration and do now pass"—put and agreed to.
Top
Share