Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 21 Jul 1932

Vol. 15 No. 25

Housing (Financial and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, 1932—Second Stage.

Question proposed. "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister for Education (Mr. Derrig)

In introducing this Housing Bill in its Second Stage in the Seanad it is necessary to review briefly the present housing position of the country and the circumstances which form the basis of the proposals contained in the Bill. In all we have about 600,000 inhabited dwellings, of which some 26,000 were provided during the last decade under various schemes of State-aid through the agency of local authorities, public utility societies and private persons. The 26,000 houses were provided as follows by the agencies referred to:— Local authorities, 9,100; public utility societies, 1,500; and private persons, 15,400. 13,700 of the houses are situate in urban areas and 12,300 in rural areas. It is estimated that more than 60,000 additional houses are required to meet present needs, including the replacement of existing insanitary dwellings. In connection with the provision of these 26,000 houses, State grants amounting to about 2½ million pounds were made, but no improvement was effected in the housing condition of persons living in slum areas or of the very poor classes in the agricultural community. Of the houses built by private persons, about 5,000 are situate in urban areas and 10,000 in rural areas.

The objects of the present Bill are to enable the clearance of slum areas and the provision of houses for the needy classes in urban areas through the agency of local authorities and public utility societies, the provision of houses for the lowest-paid workers in rural areas through the agency of rural local authorities, the encouragement of building by private persons and public utility societies in urban areas to a greater extent than heretofore, and the subsidisation of building by private persons and public utility societies in rural areas so as to enable, so far as possible, all classes of the rural community to provide themselves with comfortable homes.

The housing problem is mainly a financial problem. In the urban areas where in normal circumstances houses are rented rather than owned by the tenants, the prospective tenant is now unable to pay the economic rent at which houses can be provided by normal agencies of supply, and in rural areas where ownership is more general, building costs are too high to enable persons to provide houses for themselves. In the present Bill, grants and subsidies are proposed with the object of meeting the circumstances of the various cases, and special consideration is given to those classes not catered for by the housing activities of the last administration.

It is estimated that it will take almost ten years to provide the total housing needs and to bring about a position in which normal activity to provide for replacements will prevent the recurrence of the housing problem. It is the intention of the Government to proceed on the lines of the present Bill to deal with the slums and housing problems as economically as possible and yet as generously as is necessary to enable these problems to be solved by a continuous programme of house-building and slum demolition at the greatest rate of progress which it is possible to attain. The financial provisions of the present Bill are framed to cover the first three years of the programme, in which it is expected to secure the provision of over one-fourth of the total need, involving considerable slums clearance. Further financial proposals to deal with the balance of the programme will be framed in the light of the experience gained in the operation of the present Bill. The financial provisions of the present Bill in regard to local authorities' schemes are sufficiently generous to enable them to deal with the most needy cases at the outset, and in administration steps will be taken to secure that local authorities will exercise the greatest care in the fixing of rents and selection of tenants, and the tenants will be selected with strict regard to income of family, size of family, and nature of existing accommodation.

Provision is included in Section 22 of the Bill for shortening the existing procedure in connection with slum-clearance schemes and the compulsory acquisition of land by local authorities, and the financial provisions of the Bill are framed so as to enable these bodies to undertake at once comprehensive slum clearance schemes and to re-house the persons displaced without putting an undue charge on the rates. Under Section 6 of the Bill the State is authorised to pay up to two-thirds of the annual charges on loans borrowed by local authorities for this purpose and this contribution will enable a house costing £300, for which the economic weekly rent inclusive of rates would be about 10/-, to be let at a weekly rent of, say, 3/-, inclusive of rates, without a greater loss to the local authority than £5 per annum. In the larger areas, where costs will be higher, a £400 house, of which the economic inclusive weekly rent would be about 14/-, could be let at an inclusive weekly rent of, say, 5/-, with an annual loss to the local authority of about £6. This maximum contribution of two-thirds of the loan charges will be paid so long as the houses are let to the most needy applicants and the rents charged are not unnecessarily low in any cases. It is realised that there are persons, particularly living in slum areas, who will be unable to pay even these very low rents, and provision is made by Section 5 (i) (j) of the Bill for the payment of grants up to 60 per cent. of the cost for the acquisition and renovation of existing houses in which to house these people. The existing houses when renovated are to be managed by philanthropic societies or similar bodies of persons and the grants will enable the provision of good sanitary accommodation at inclusive rents averaging between 2/6 and 3/- weekly.

Provision is also made in the Bill under Section 6 for the payment of annual contributions to urban local authorities in connection with housing schemes for the accommodation of persons not displaced from insanitary houses but at present living in overcrowded or otherwise unsuitable houses and unable to pay anything approaching an economic rent. For this purpose the annual contribution may be up to one-third of the annual loan charges and will enable, in the smaller areas, a house costing £350, of which the economic inclusive weekly rent would be about 11/6, to be let at an inclusive rent of say 7/6, with a loss of about £3 per annum to the local authority and, in the larger areas, a house costing £450, of which the economic inclusive weekly rent would be about 16/-, to be let at an inclusive weekly rent of about 10/-, with a loss of about £5 10/- per annum to the local authority.

In order to encourage the formation of public utility societies to act as a subsidiary of the local authority in the provision of houses in urban areas for letting to the latter classes, provision is made in Sections 5 (1) and 8 of the Bill to empower local authorities to join with the State in making a combined grant of one-third of the cost of houses subject to a maximum combined grant of £150 per house to be borne £100 by the State and £50 by the local authority on the condition that houses so provided will be let on monthly or lesser tenancies, and that the floor area of the house will not exceed 750 sq. ft., the area of the average ordinary working-class house. It will be greatly to the advantage of local authorities to encourage the formation of these public utility societies so as to relieve themselves to some extent of the burden of housing and to leave themselves free to concentrate on slum clearance.

Provision is also made in Section 6 of the Bill to enable rural local authorities operating under the Labourers Acts to provide cottages and plots for agricultural labourers. Under this provision the State would pay up to 60 per cent. of the annual charges on the loans borrowed by the local authorities for the purpose and this contribution would enable the letting of labourers' cottages at inclusive rents averaging 2/- weekly without imposing undue charges on the local rates and, so that the charge to the rates may be more evenly divided over the general body of ratepayers, it is proposed in Section 21 of the Bill to make the county health district the area of charge instead of, as at present, the rural district area. Section 19 of the Bill shortens considerably the existing procedure under the Labourers Acts in connection with the acquisition of sites and the provision of cottages and, under the section in question, rural local authorities will now be able to proceed with schemes with the same expedition as is possible in urban areas.

Power is given in the Bill under Section 6 (4) to fix the maximum costs of houses for the purpose of the payment of subsidy, and subsidy will not be paid on any amounts in excess of the prescribed costs. This provision is necessary in view of the rate of progress which it is expected will be reached and the tendency to increase prices which may result from such rate of progress.

With the foregoing financial provisions for urban and rural local authorities it will now be possible, for the first time since the war, for these bodies to provide houses for persons living in slums and for really needy classes at the rents which these persons can afford to pay, and the solution of the problem so far as these persons are concerned will now be only a question of the shortest time it will take to provide the houses. Under sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 6 of the Bill it is provided that these subsidies will be available in respect of all houses commenced after 1st April, 1931 for which grants have not been made under previous Acts and this provision will cover all outstanding schemes of local authorities.

I will turn now to the financial provisions of the Bill so far as private persons and public utility societies, other than those building for letting in urban areas, are concerned. As previously stated, some 15,000 houses were provided in the past ten years by private persons and of these 5,000 were in urban areas and 10,000 in rural areas. It is obvious, therefore, that greater financial assistance is necessary to encourage more rapid progress in the urban areas and provision to this end is made in the Bill.

Under Section 5 (1) (b) power is given for the payment to persons and public utility societies erecting houses in urban areas of grants not exceeding £70 for houses completed before the 1st of June next; £60 for houses completed by the 1st April, 1934, and £50 for houses completed in the next succeeding year. The object of grading the grants in this way is to secure the greatest possible expedition in the provision of the houses.

With the aid of these grants a person having little capital will be in a position, with a loan under the Small Dwellings Acquisition Acts, to provide a house for himself. A house costing, say, £500 could be built on a leased site and the loan charges and other outgoings would not exceed more than about £1 per week at the highest point. These grants will also be available to speculative builders and public utility societies for the provision of houses which, when provided, could be rented or, if desired, purchased by intending residents with the aid of loans under the Small Dwellings Acquisition Acts.

In rural areas the principle of a flat rate grant for private persons has been departed from so as to make special provision for those classes who have been unable to build houses with the grants hitherto made available. An examination of the position, so far as the activities of private persons in rural areas under former schemes are concerned, show that substantial progress was made with the aid of these grants—over 10,000 houses having been provided—but the grants were not sufficient to enable small farmers and agricultural labourers to provide their housing needs. It is proposed, therefore, to continue the grants for private persons in rural areas at the rate of £45 (Section 5 (1) (e) ) per house and to make special provision for small farmers and agricultural labourers. For the latter class, and for small farmers not exceeding £15 valuation, grants of £70 (Section 5 (1) (e), (i) and (d) ) per house will be paid, and for farmers whose valuation exceeds £15, but does not exceed £25, grants of £60 (Section 5 (1) (c) (ii) ) per house will be paid.

This scheme of differentiation applies, as stated, to rural areas. It would be applied also to urban areas if a sound basis of application could be found, but the circumstances in the two areas vary so widely that this has been found impossible. It is seen, however, that the really needy classes in both areas will receive equal treatment and, at the same time, the larger grants shown by the operation of previous schemes to be necessary to encourage building to a greater extent in urban areas are made available.

Provision is also included to enable the payment of grants to small farmers not exceeding £25 valuation and agricultural labourers for the reconstruction of houses in rural areas in their occupation and for this purpose a grant not exceeding £40 per house is made available in Section 5 (1) (h) of the Bill.

In order to encourage the formation of public utility societies in rural areas for the special purposes of encouraging, advising and assisting small farmers and agricultural labourers in the erection of houses, it is provided in Section 5 (1) (f) and (g) that the grants of £70 and £60 payable to such persons will be increased to £80 and £70 respectively for houses erected through the medium of such societies.

All these grants for private persons and public utility societies will apply to houses the erection or reconstruction of which was begun after the 12th May, 1932, but to meet the cases of houses begun before that date and houses commenced under the Housing Acts, 1929-1930 but not completed in time to qualify for grants under those Acts provision is made in Section 5 (1) (a) of the Bill for the payment of grants of £45 per house in respect of such houses in urban or rural areas provided they are completed on or before 31st December next.

Under Section 9 of the Bill provision is made for the remission of rates on houses erected by persons and public utility societies with the aid of grants. For the houses begun under the 1929-1930 Acts and not completed in time, but which will qualify for grants under the Bill, the 19 years' rates remission on the sliding scale provided under the Acts of 1929-1930 will be granted; for the remaining houses rates remission of two-thirds of the rates for seven years is provided. Houses built by local authorities and houses built for letting in urban areas by public utility societies under the special provisions of the Bill before referred to will not be granted rates remission in view of the contribution towards such houses which the local authority will make in other forms; that is, either by way of loss in letting on houses provided by themselves or by grant to a public utility society building houses for letting in urban areas. In the case of houses reconstructed by persons in rural areas, the Bill provides that the valuation in force before reconstruction will remain unaltered for seven years after the reconstruction work is completed.

The miscellaneous provisions of the Bill deal with matters incidental to the carrying out of the housing programme contemplated under the financial provisions. Section 15 empowers the Minister to purchase, manufacture or promote the manufacture of building materials, while Section 16 empowers the Minister for Industry and Commerce to limit the prices of building materials or appliances. These powers will be used to whatever extent may prove necessary to ensure that the housing programme is carried out with the greatest possible expedition and is not hampered in any way.

Section 17 of the Bill gives power to the Minister to act in case of default by local authorities in carrying out schemes under the Housing of the Working Classes Acts and the Labourers Acts, and while the Minister expects that with the generous financial terms of the Bill local authorities will show a consciousness of the seriousness of the housing problem, steps will be taken under this section in any case where dilatoriness is displayed.

Under Section 20 of the Bill, local authorities acting under the Labourers Acts in rural areas are to be empowered to acquire land for the purpose of leasing or selling sites to persons or public utility societies for the erection of houses for agricultural labourers. Similar powers already exist for local authorities in urban areas.

One of the first steps to be taken by the Government in connection with the contemplated housing programme will be the establishment of a Housing Board to advise and assist the Minister in the exercise of his powers in relation to housing. Full advantage will be taken of this housing programme to develop native industries in building materials and appliances and it will be a condition attaching to the payment of State grants and contributions that materials and appliances of Saorstát manufacture will be used as far as possible. Lists of suitable materials and appliances shall be published from time to time.

It is unfortunate that the urgency of the slum and housing problems has made it necessary to launch this housing programme without awaiting the passage of Town Planning legislation, but it is hoped to follow the present measure with a Town Planning Bill as soon as possible. In the meantime, much must be left to the good sense and judgment of those building the houses and it is hoped that in the preparation of plans the fullest possible regard will be had to the desirability of providing open spaces and play-grounds and of securing that nothing inconsistent with the general principles of Town Planning will be done.

Sir Edward Coey Bigger

This Bill, which is designed to amend the Housing of the Working Classes Acts from 1890 to 1931, goes farther than any of the previous Bills. Yet it does not go far enough in one or two directions. It does not go far enough to relieve the very poor living in the slums. I doubt if the provisions of the Bill will reach certain classes occupying cellar dwellings. Sometimes these dwellings are occupied by large families. The Bill will, undoubtedly, provide for the better-off people in the slums. It will move them up a bit, and they may be able to occupy two rooms where formerly they occupied only one. I should like if the Minister could see his way to appoint a special committee to select the most deserving cases for accommodation at the smallest possible rent. In some cases, we have a family of from five to seven living in one room, one of the children suffering from tuberculosis. We are only breeding disease by allowing that child to live in that room with the rest of the family. Sometimes the child may go to Crooksling for treatment for a few months, but when it comes back it occupies the same room. In other cases we have adult families occupying single rooms. I should like to see these classes getting the preference when houses are available. This might be done by a committee or by voluntary organisations, or by a special commission. It is a matter for the Department. I draw attention to it to see if anything can be done on those lines.

Mr. Farren

One thing that appeals to me, particularly, in connection with this Bill is that it proposes to do what Senator Sir Coey Bigger says it does not propose to do. I have had a somewhat intimate acquaintance with this housing problem and I dealt with the various Bills which came before the Oireachtas since I became a member of the Seanad. This is the first time that a courageous attempt has been made to deal with the real problem of housing. The financial provisions of the Bill are reasonable enough. I feel sure that the people concerned will take advantage of this Bill to make a real attempt to grapple with the slum problem. The greatest blot on our civilisation has been the conditions under which people in the rural areas and in the towns and cities were compelled to live and bring up their families. In its financial provisions the Bill is more generous than any of the previous Bills. It deals with several aspects of the problem that were not covered by previous Bills. It is well thought out and will, I think, make the first inroad on this tremendous problem. The Minister said that this Bill was intended to cover a period of three years, and that he hoped that under the provisions of this measure one-fourth of the problem would be dealt with. He said that it was a problem which would take ten years to solve. If we can deal with one-fourth of the problem in the next three years we will be on the road to its ultimate solution. Notwithstanding all the houses erected in this country —about 26,000 in the past ten years— the problem was not dealt with at all. Those houses merely repaired a wastage and met the requirement for new houses. They did not deal with the problem we had in 1914—a number of people condemned to live in these insanitary and overcrowded dwellings in the towns and cities, and in the rural areas. With the slum clearance Act of last year and with this Bill, I think we will get away from the vexatious delays we were always up against when we attempted to deal with slum clearance and the erection of working-class dwellings. Those of us who are members of Dublin Corporation and, particularly, those who sat on the Housing Committee, know what heartbreaking difficulties we had to contend with with regard to slum clearances. In the first place we had to have the area scheduled as insanitary. Then an inquiry had to be held, and the business went on for years before we could clear the slums and lay the foundations for new dwellings. The previous Act and this Bill will provide greater facilities for dealing with the question of slum clearances, and that will help us on the road to the solution of the general problem.

One section of the Bill makes special appeal to me. That is the section which gives power to the local authority to acquire what is known as tenement houses. The Bill, provides, I think, that 40 per cent.—

Mr. Derrig

60 per cent.

Mr. Farren

—that 60 per cent. of the cost of acquisition of these tenements will be paid to the local authority. In addition to that, 60 per cent. of the cost of remodelling these houses or making them fit for habitation will be granted to the Corporation with a limit of £75 per dwelling in the tenement. I think that that is a very useful provision. Those of us acquainted with conditions in Dublin know that there are certain thoroughfares in which houses could be readily converted into decent, self-contained flats. Personally, I should like to see everybody with his own little house.

Under the conditions prevailing in large cities you cannot always provide sufficient space to enable you to erect houses for every individual family. There are certain well known thoroughfares in Dublin in which there are substantially built houses and with the expenditure of money, properly laid out on a systematic plan, I think that quite a number of these old mansions could be converted into self-contained flats. The provision in this Bill induces the local authority to do that. When they have expended money in acquiring these old houses and putting them into a proper, habitable condition, the provision is that they shall be handed over to a philanthropic society for their care and management. There is a lot to be said for and against that proposition. Personally I am inclined to favour the proposal in the Bill. I must confess from my experience and thanks to the teaching of civics in our schools that the cost of maintenance of Corporation dwellings of the block type is prohibitive and is out of all proportion to what it should be. I think that philanthropic organisations such as I have in mind who know the habits and the customs of the people—I am now dealing with the poorer class of people whom it is proposed to house in these dwellings at rents not exceeding 3/- per week—who are constantly in touch with these people, charitable organisations like the St. Vincent de Paul Society, would be in a position to select suitable tenants. I think on the whole that that is a good arrangement and for that reason I am prepared to support it.

There are other provisions in this Bill which encourage the local authority to deal with the erection of houses for the poorer class of people. The provisions in the Bill with regard to financial assistance for public utility societies and private speculators are of a generous nature and should encourage them to build the type of house required by a person who can afford to pay something like a reasonable rent. That will leave the local authorities free to build houses for those who cannot afford to pay an economic rent. I have always said that when you talk about the question of economic rents you are subsidising low wages and you do not pay a man sufficient wages to pay an economic rent for a house. The problem is however there. We have a tremendous number of people, decent people, who have not the accommodation that they are entitled to have as Christians and as human beings. The endeavour in this Bill is to get the local authority to deal with that particular section and to devote most of their time to providing the accommodation that is necessary for those people. I think the local authorities will rise to the occasion and will do the best they can in the matter. I am also glad to see that the Minister takes power in the Bill, where the local authority fails to carry out its duty to these people, to step in, get the work done for them and make them pay the cost. I think he is perfectly right in that because this is a question that lies at the root of all our social evils. We must tackle it in no uncertain way and wipe out for all time the blot that is on this country owing to the inhuman conditions under which we compel people to live.

The Minister referred to Section 9 of the Bill with regard to the remission of rates. A lot can be said for and against that proposal. When the idea was first introduced here I opposed it because I did not see why a poor fellow like me should have to pay full rates while big companies who were coming in here to make profit were relieved of a considerable amount of rates. When I made an effort in one of the Bills that was going through the House to get a remission of rates for poor people who were compelled to pay 15/- or 16/- a week rent to the local authorities of course my request was refused. Under this Bill the local authority has no option except to grant a remission of rates in certain circumstances which the Minister explained. On a house started prior to May there will be remission of rates for 19 years. That is, for the first year it will have only to pay 5 per cent. of the rates and then there will be an addition of 5 per cent. for every subsequent year until in the 20th year the full rate will have to be paid. In the other case there is a certain remission of two-thirds of the total demand for the first seven years.

Section 15 of the Bill is not a new section although it is enlarged somewhat in this Bill. I think in the Act of 1924 we had a similar provision with regard to giving the Minister power to purchase and manufacture materials. It is necessary that this provision should be inserted in the Bill. If we are going to deal with the housing question in the comprehensive manner in which we hope it will be dealt with it is necessary that we should not be taken unawares. If it is necessary that the Minister should have power to purchase, manufacture or sell building material in order to carry out the job, I am glad to see that he has taken power under the Bill to do so. Under the previous Bill the powers were never exercised. Although they were granted, they were repealed again shortly afterwards. I hope they will not be repealed on this occasion and that the Minister will if necessary take full advantage of them. If he does take advantage of them they will help to reduce the cost of building. In Section 16 the Minister takes power to control the price of building requisites, but if he puts his powers under Section 15 into operation there will be no necessity to exercise his powers under Section 16.

I congratulate the Minister on the manner in which the Government is attempting to deal at the first attempt with this big problem. I have been listening during the last week to the mournful talk about bankruptcy, the loss to the cattle trade and everything else. The discussion that has just taken place is the one bright spot.

Mr. Comyn

What about the Old Age Pensions Bill?

Mr. Farren

And the Old Age Pensions Bill as well.

Sir John Keane

Something for nothing.

Mr. Farren

It is not something for nothing. The people who provided all the money for the people who live in the fine houses have had no place to live in themselves. They built the mansions for the big people and they lived like rats in dirty hovels themselves. You talk about something for nothing. Every human being is entitled to live in a manner in which the God Who created him intended he should live—live like a Christian and human being. This Bill provides a way in which the decent man and decent woman can live in healthy conditions, in decency, and can bring up their children in decency. It will enable them to get away from the dens that bred the vice and everything else which were responsible for all the social evils we have in this country.

Mr. Comyn

I think the Minister has produced a courageous and comprehensive plan for dealing with this problem. In the last two or three years we had palliatives on the housing problem which were very irritating to us. I join with Senator Farren in congratulating the Minister upon the scope of this Bill and the wisdom of its various clauses. There is one matter which I would like specially to refer to, and that is the power taken in this housing scheme to encourage and to support those industries which are subsidiary to housing, that is, industries connected with building materials. That was a blot in other measures in the last three or four years. It is, I think, a most statesmanlike provision in this measure.

In order to emphasise what I say I might tell the House a story from the time of Daniel O'Connell. He had a colleague named Corney O'Brien. Corney O'Brien had an estate in the County Clare and he insisted that his tenants should have their houses well thatched or slated, and whitewashed. On one occasion he brought Daniel O'Connell down to Clare to see his houses. But Dan with his usual acumen observed that the people did not look so prosperous, and that there was no industry in the locality. When Corney asked: "What do you think of the houses, Dan?" O'Connell replied: "Whitewashed walls and painted sashes; empty bellies and naked backs." The point was: get employment for the people who live in these houses, and the Minister is entitled, as far as he can, to promote industries which are subsidiary to the building of houses, and that is the excellence of this Bill.

Only one other point. I see there is a grant to be made in respect of each of these houses. I have read the Bill for the purpose of endeavouring to ascertain whether any portion of that grant can be paid while the house is being built, or must the house be built before the grant can be made. That is a matter on which I should like to get information. I know, of course, if a society started to build a number of houses when they have completed one, they could get the grant. But supposing a private individual started to build a house, can he get portion of the grant before the house is completed? If he can then I say the Bill is perfect and the Minister is to be congratulated upon it.

Mr. Guinness

Has any estimate been framed as to what the Bill will cost? And if so how is it suggested the money should be raised?

Mr. Staines

As an ex-member of the Dublin local authority I agree with practically everything Senator Farren has stated. Everybody knows that the housing conditions in Dublin are deplorable. Very few people know, as I do, that in most towns in the country the conditions are also deplorable. I have visited tenement houses in the town of Kildare nestling amidst broad acres. You can see the fields from the windows, but what do you find within? The house consists of a hall and two rooms downstairs on each side of the hall; two rooms upstairs, one on each side of the lobby. There is a family in each room. In one room four children were in bed at one end of the bed, and three at the other end. The father and mother were having a cup of tea. I do not know where they slept. There was only one bed in the room. I was canvassing at the time and I visited the slum houses and learned a lot. It is terrible for anyone to object to either borrowing the money or raising the money by taxation to put an end if we can to this absolutely un-Christian state of things. It cannot continue.

Everybody appears to know how bad conditions are in Dublin. I do not agree with Senator Farren that it was only wastage of houses that had been replaced in recent years. I have seen improvements in Dublin in the last twenty-five years. I have seen schemes carried out, such as the Iveagh buildings, the artisans' dwellings, the Mount Brown, Artane, Fairbrothers' Fields, Whitehall, Killester and Cabra. There is as big a population housed under any of these schemes as there would be found in large towns in Ireland. The problem, of course, is a big one. People come up to Dublin from the country looking for employment. It is nearly impossible to do away with the slums except by a big scheme. This is the big scheme but does not deal with the whole problem. It is like the land problem. There have been Land Acts before I was born, and there was one last year. It is the same with Housing Acts. They will be passing Land Acts and Housing Acts when we are dead. No scheme, no matter how big, will solve the housing problem in a few years. It is too big to solve in a few years. Generally I agree this Bill makes a decent effort to solve the problem. There are one or two small points that I would like to bring up when the Bill comes to Committee, for instance the difference between rural and urban areas about which I intend to move an amendment at the proper stage and I hope the Minister will accept it. Considering all the bouquets which were thrown, very justly I must say, at the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Local Government it is no harm for me to say that I am very glad to see the Minister for Education here in charge of this Bill.

Mr. Jameson

At this stage it is only general remarks that we make about a measure under discussion. Later on in Committee Stage, the Minister will know what amendments we wish to effect. There is a question here about the Minister purchasing a whole lot of materials. I have no doubt that there is some good reason for that. But in the ordinary condition of affairs I should think it was not for the Minister to become responsible for the purchase of large masses of material. That, I fancy, would be outside the ordinary course of the Minister's duty. Unless there is some special reason for his doing so here, as there may be, I would not be in favour of it. In connection with materials and construction, and everything of that kind, I should be inclined to think the Minister would like to keep out of the purchasing operations. The State has to provide a very large sum of money here and it, therefore, becomes the duty of the State to see that the money is well spent. I wonder if the Bill has made provision for the proper inspection and passing of plans? I think there is provision in connection with construction but more particularly with construction from home materials. There should be general provisions that the houses should be constructed from good materials and they should be guaranteed to be of good specification, and the officials of the State should have control of inspection of the building of these houses. Perhaps the Minister would tell us whether these powers exist already. It is vitally important to the people who have to provide the money to take care that plans, materials and final construction are all absolutely right.

In another city in Ireland there was a terrible scandal, some time ago, about the materials used in a lot of building that had been done. Inspection may be provided for in this Bill, but I cannot find it, by State officers and architects in order to see that the work is done correctly. I may say emphatically, as we are discussing this question, and as Senator Farren mentioned how neglectful we were in not having built for the poor, that a book has just been published by my friend Lord Midleton dealing with the Irish question. In it he states that one of the greatest blunders the British made while in Ireland was not to attend to the slum problem in the cities. He says that that was a disgrace to the British, and a disgrace to the Chief Secretaries, and others who came to Ireland, and lived in our midst but gave no attention whatever to a question which was one of the most vital for the happiness of Ireland.

Mr. Derrig

With regard to the point raised by Senator Bigger, I do not think there is very much in it and at any rate, it was pretty fully dealt with by Senator Farren, than whom few persons have a better knowledge of housing, and of what is required to meet the slum problem and the problem of congestion. The Bill definitely provides for the renovation of tenements. I would remind Senator Bigger that when tenements are renovated they will be passed over to the control of philanthropic societies, and it is expected that accommodation for single families will be provided in these buildings, towards the renovation of which the State will contribute sixty per cent. of the cost. It is expected that the rents will run as low as 2s. 6d. or possibly lower if it is found in the course of time that the process of renovation can be cheapened. I think that was the point raised by Senator Bigger. I think it was not quite fair to the Bill. Obviously the Bill is one to deal with the slum problem on generous financial lines which were never attempted before. It introduces an entirely new principle of the State coming to the rescue of the local ratepayers, so that their burdens would not be too heavy and in order that they can accomplish this essential work. Of course, if we do not regard the work as essential there is an immediate difference of opinion.

I must say that I thought all sections in the Seanad, until I heard this discussion, were strongly in favour of an advanced housing programme. For example, the Irish Times has been very prominent in calling for this advanced housing programme, and it is rather strange to find a section in the Seanad not prepared to welcome it. The Senator may have been under a misapprehension. There is a definite proposal in the Bill to which I referred, by which not alone two-thirds of the loan charges are given in the case of slum clearance schemes, but sixty per cent. for the renovation and acquisition of other insanitary or congested dwellings which are to be let at very low rents. I can only conclude that the Senator must not have been listening to the details of the Bill or has not read it. Senator Farren realises the magnitude of the problem, and he says that this proposal will at least go a long way to help to solve it. He mentioned that old mansions might be converted. That is one of the things that we are attempting to deal with. It is recognised that there are a great many buildings in this country—quite different to those in insanitary slum industrial areas in Great Britain— which are tolerably good buildings and which might last twenty-five or thirty years if renovated. It is suggested that where there is overcrowding, if a large number of families were taken away, and if the buildings or the rooms were renovated it will be possible to accommodate a number of people in that way. At the present time kitchens are overcrowded and in some cases five or six families are living in underground basements. It is obvious that we must take every possible means to deal with that problem. In this Bill we are concentrating on slum clearances and the renovation of dwellings. We are assuming that local authorities, public utility societies, and private persons are getting sufficient inducement otherwise to deal with other portions of the housing problem. We are chiefly concerned with the problem of insanitary areas in Dublin.

The remission of rates is undoubtedly one of the greatest inducements to speculative builders, and while there may be a difference of opinion on that matter, the principle has already been accepted by previous legislation. I think in recent legislation—not the last Act—we were giving a remission of rates for a period of twenty years. We have now struck what I think is considered a fair compromise. We are giving a two-thirds remission of rates for over seven years. We are entitled to take every possible step to get this programme going and to get every possible agency to bear on it. There is no doubt that the remission of rates has been very attractive. Senator Comyn referred to local industries. We are endeavouring to encourage their development in order as far as possible to supply our requirements. No doubt that will be possible while people are building houses to get the money by instalments. Senator Jameson urged the advisability of having State supervision of the work. Up to the present that has been the procedure and it will be followed, even though we shall endeavour to facilitate people by giving instalments as they build. These payments will be always subject to the production of a certificate by a competent inspector of the Department. That has always been the case. No money will be paid until we are satisfied that the work, or whatever portion of it has been done, is satisfactory.

Senator Staines referred to the size of the problem and was rather pessimistic as to whether we are going to make any real headway in dealing with it. I think we are going to make a very substantial beginning. What we want is the co-operation of all sections of the community. We are particularly interested in having philanthropic societies and public utility societies getting to work as we realise that housing is exceedingly costly. Knowing that the situation in Dublin is worse than in most of the cities in Europe, it must be dealt with, as, if it is not, the people will not simply stand by any longer. Nothing but the consideration that the matter is very urgent makes us impose this cost on the State. If there is a live public opinion, and if private individuals, as well as public utility societies and local authorities particularly, take a keen interest in the question and see that housing is dealt with as economically and as efficiently as it would be dealt with if they were dealing with it in a private business way, undoubtedly the result will repay them.

Senators who referred to the cost should bear in mind that they have already passed legislation since the Free State came into being granting over two and a half million pounds which is a very substantial sum and still the slum problem has been left comparatively untouched. It has been stated that there are more people now living in insanitary dwellings and in single room tenements than before 1922. What return has the State got for the two and a half million pounds? Over 26,000 houses have been erected. If we get a substantial improvement in the position of the slums and a substantial scheme of clearances going—and I think the Corporation of Dublin are co-operating and doing their utmost within their resources to deal with the matter —we will be getting out of the money, even though the cost will be more than the two and a half million pounds, relatively more value than we got out of past legislation.

It is not my business to say how the money will be raised, but for the information of Senator Guinness I may say that it is expected that a sum of £700,000 will be needed in order to pay the grant during the three years which it is expected this Bill will run. In order to accomplish the work we say that other sums of £4,300,000 will be necessary by way of loans. These loans will be given to the local authorities repayable in 35 years at an annuity of £6 13s. 4d. per annum. It is, as Senators know, largely a question of giving the local authorities loans on terms that will not be too heavy upon the rates and that will at the same time enable the local authorities to bring about the building of houses which can be let at rents that working-class people can be expected to pay. I do not think that there is any other matter arising out of what the Senators have mentioned. I thank the House for having, generally speaking, received the measure with approbation.

Mr. Wilson

Might I ask the Minister one question?

Cathaoirleach

The Senator can, in Committee, put any question he likes.

Mr. Wilson

I think the Minister is under a misapprehension if he thinks I am opposed to this measure.

Mr. Derrig

I did not mean Senator Wilson; it was Senator Sir Coey Bigger.

Cathaoirleach

But Senator Sir Coey Bigger is very much in favour of the measure.

Mr. O'Neill

I am not going to make a speech, but I just want to say one word in reference to Senator Sir Coey Bigger. I know that the Senator is a philanthropist in the matter of housing for the past 30 years, and I would not like that the Minister would get it into his mind in any way that Senator Sir Coey Bigger is opposed to the Bill.

Cathaoirleach

I am glad Senator O'Neill has said that. He is stating the position correctly.

Mr. Derrig

Then it was a misunderstanding on my part.

Cathaoirleach

It was.

Question—"That the Bill be now read a Second Time"—put and agreed to.

Committee Stage fixed for Wednesday, 27th July.