Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 25 Jul 1934

Vol. 18 No. 33

Housing (Financial and Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment) Bill, 1934 (Certified Money Bill)—Second Stage.

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

Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. Boland) (for Minister for Local Government and Public Health)

The introduction of this Bill becomes necessary in order to continue the work being done by private persons and public utility societies under the Housing (Financial and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1932. Under that Act the latest date for the completion of houses is the 1st April, 1935, and it is proposed to extend this to the 1st April, 1937. It is also proposed under the Bill to provide an additional sum of £700,000 for the payment of grants. The amounts of grants will remain unaltered save in the case of houses provided by private persons and public utility societies in urban areas (other than houses provided for letting by public utility societies) where the amount of the grant will be reduced from £50 to £45 after the 1st April, 1936. It is perhaps unnecessary for me to stress the advantages to be derived from continuing to encourage private persons and public utility societies to engage in the provision of houses and it is gratifying to be able to report that already these agencies have shown a willingness to undertake the provision of a greater number of houses than it was expected in 1932 they could be counted upon to undertake.

Since the Act of 1932 was passed a record has been created in house production. In all 12,397 houses have been completed being 6,693 provided by local authorities and 5,714 provided by private persons and public utility societies. Of these houses 7,548 are in urban areas and 4,849 are in rural areas. The record I refer to as having been created since the passing of the Act of 1932 is the completion during the year ended 31st March, 1934, of 6,960 houses, the largest number of houses ever completed in one year in this country.

The present Bill deals mainly with the provision of houses by private persons and public utility societies under Section 5 of the Act of 1932. The section referred to provides grants of different amounts to persons and public utility societies for the provision of houses for different classes. Paragraph (b) of sub-section (1) of the section referred to enabled the payment of grants to persons and public utility societies erecting houses in urban areas. The grants amounted to £70 per house for houses completed up to the 1st June, 1933, £60 per house for houses completed up to the 1st April, 1934, and £50 per house for houses completed up to the 1st April, 1935. To date the following is the position under this paragraph:—Public utility societies: houses completed, 435; houses in progress, 330; total, 765; private persons: houses completed, 1,837; houses in progress, 1,585; total, 3,422. Total for public utility societies and private persons: houses completed, 2,272; houses in progress, 1,915; grand total, 4,187.

Paragraph (c) enables the payment of grants to small farmers for the erection of houses for their own occupation. The grant is £70 to a farmer whose valuation does not exceed £15 and £60 to a farmer whose valuation exceeds £15 but does not exceed £25. To date the following is the position:—Farmers not exceeding £15 valuation: houses completed, 251; houses in progress, 392; total, 643; farmers over £15 and not exceeding £25 valuation: houses completed, 62; houses in progress, 60; total, 122. Totals for small farmers: houses completed, 313; houses in progress, 452; grand total, 765.

Paragraph (d) deals with the payment of grants of £70 per house to agricultural labourers in rural areas providing houses for their own occupation. To date 139 houses have been completed and 180 are in progress— making a total of 319 houses. Paragraph (e) enables the payment of grants to persons other than small farmers and agricultural labourers in rural areas. The grant is £45 per house. The position to date is:— houses completed, 940; houses in progress, 510; total, 1,450.

Paragraph (f) enables the payment of grants to public utility societies for the erection of houses for small farmers in rural areas. The grants are £80 where the farmer's valuation does not exceed £15 and £70 where the valuation exceeds £15 but does not exceed £25. The following is the position to date:— For farmers not exceeding £15 valuation: houses completed, 713; houses in progress, 1,618; total, 2,331; for farmers between £15 and £25 valuation: houses completed, 138; houses in progress, 261; total, 399. Totals for both classes: houses completed, 851; houses in progress, 1,879; grand total, 2,730.

These figures are in addition to the figures for houses erected by farmers themselves under paragraph (c) before referred to and the totals under both paragraph (c) and paragraph (f) are as follows:—for farmers not exceeding £15 valuation: houses completed, 964; houses in progress, 2,010; total, 2,974; for farmers between £15 and £25 valuation: houses completed, 200; houses in progress, 321; total, 521. Totals for both classes: houses completed, 1,164; houses in progress, 2,331; grand total, 3,495.

Paragraph (g) enables the payment of grants to public utility societies for the erection of houses in rural areas for agricultural labourers. The grant is £80 per house and to date 204 houses have been completed and 460 are in progress making a total of 664 houses which, when added to the figures of progress under paragraph (d) relating to grants paid to agricultural labourers for houses built by these persons on their own, brings the grand totals under both paragraphs to:—houses completed, 343; houses in progress, 640; total, 983.

Paragraph (h) enables the payment of grants not exceeding £40 per house to small farmers and agricultural labourers for the reconstruction of houses in their own occupation. The progress position to date is:—reconstruction by small farmers: houses completed, 666; houses in progress, 4,208; total, 4,874. Reconstruction by agricultural labourers: houses completed, 94; houses in progress, 465; total, 559. Totals for reconstruction: houses completed, 760; houses in progress, 4,673; grand total, 5,433.

Paragraph (i) enables the payment of grants to public utility societies for the erection of houses for letting in urban areas. Very little progress has been made under this paragraph but certain proposals are under consideration and it is proposed to continue the grants. To date 20 houses have been completed and 20 are in progress under this paragraph. Paragraph (j) provides for the payment of grants to local authorities and philanthropic societies for the renovation of tenements. Progress under this paragraph has been greatly delayed by the difficulties experienced by local authorities in securing suitable premises at reasonable costs. Recently one premises suitable for conversion into about eight flats has been acquired by agreement and compulsory purchase has been resorted to in a second case which was initiated as an experimental case. Now that actual work has been begun under the paragraph it is hoped to secure good results and it is proposed, therefore, to continue the grants.

Much progress has been made in connection with the housing programme in the development of building materials industries and in the short time which has elapsed since the passing of the Act of 1932 the percentage of Saorstát materials used in the provision of the average house has been increased from about 30 per cent. to 45 per cent. As the House is aware, an inquiry is at present in progress into the costs of building materials and appliances.

Mr. Johnson

I would like to supplement what the Minister said in one or two respects, and perhaps, although the Bill deals entirely with grants made to private persons and public utility societies for the erection of houses, it would not be going far outside the range of the measure if one were to touch upon the houses that are being provided by local authorities. It is just two years ago since Mr. Derrig, on behalf of the Minister for Local Government, introduced the Bill which is now the Act of 1932. He explained that the purposes of the Bill were firstly to enable a clearance to be made of the slum areas in towns and the re-housing of the persons displaced and secondly the provision of houses for the lowest paid workers in the rural areas. Further, it aimed at the encouragement in urban areas and rural areas of the building of houses by private persons and public utility societies. He said at that time that the problem facing the Government was the provision of about 60,000 houses to meet present needs, which were to include the replacement of demolished insanitary dwellings and the rehousing of the people displaced from those dwellings. The estimate was made that the 60,000 houses then envisaged had to be provided within ten years and it was hoped that a quarter of the total would be provided in the first three years. That would allow time for development of sites and the building movement to get up speed so that at the end of the third year the local authorities and the building contractors would be able to go ahead at the pace then reached for the remainder of the period. A fourth of the requirement was to be provided in the first three years according to plan, and it is interesting, as a supplement to what the Minister has supplied in the way of figures, to know that taking the houses completed by the 30th June last and the houses "in progress" in rural and urban areas at that date, the three year programme will have been exceeded by about 5,000 houses, even supposing no new houses are begun between now and the end of next July. The three year programme provided for about 18,000 houses, of which nearly 11,000 were to be in urban areas and 7,000 in rural areas. At the end of June there were on account of the 11,000 urban houses, actually 14,000 either completed or on the way to completion, and in respect of the 7,000 rural houses aimed at there were 9,600 either completed or in progress. Those figures are encouraging, and it is I think of importance as indicating what is possible in the way of house building. But I am going to admit that it is not so favourable in the matter of remedying the slum evil as would appear on the surface. The reason for that reservation is that the number of houses built in the towns and suitable for re-housing the slum dwellers is not yet up to the mark that would be required in order to have the slum problem solved within the ten years. But if we assume, as we have the right to assume, that the local authorities will move even faster than they have done within the last year, I think it is probable that the urban problem will be solved at an earlier date than the end of ten years from 1932. The figure of 60,000 houses quoted by the Minister two years ago was based upon a survey made in 1929 of the urban areas. The result of that survey was printed in the report of the Department of Local Government for 1929-1930 and it will be seen in that report where the need is greatest and where it is least. It will be observed of course that the reports for some of the towns showed some exaggeration. In other of the towns there was a great minimising, I think, of the true position.

The result appears to me in this light: That there will require to be built in the urban areas not less than 5,000 houses per year for the next eight or nine years if we are to overcome the evils of slumdom and overcrowding, and that figure does not take into account the new population that is demanding houses and will only make a very moderate provision for the number of houses that are at present existing which are deteriorating and becoming uninhabitable.

The urban problem is the one that is most crying and that stands out most strongly in the minds, particularly, of urban dwellers; but, it seems to me, and I think most people who have examined the subject will agree, that little if any less urgent is the problem of the small town which has not a municipal authority; that is to say, the non-urbanised towns which are under the jurisdiction of boards of health. I think that it is not unjust to say that, in many cases, the boards of health up to now have failed to recognise their responsibilities in respect to the re-housing of the badly housed people in those small towns and villages. At the present time, preparation is being made for a survey of the housing needs of those small towns, and it is hoped and believed that the boards of health will, in all cases from now onwards, do their utmost to meet their responsibilities in respect to these little slums throughout the country.

In respect to agricultural labourers' cottages, I think, the boards of health, speaking as a whole, are to be congratulated on the way they have taken up that task, after some delay, and perhaps one may say an unnecessary delay, because they had to begin entirely afresh after the passing of the 1932 Act. The old procedure was altered to some degree. Nothing had been done in the way of building labourers' cottages for a number of years, so that the boards had to begin afresh with that task, and within the last year they have risen to it very well indeed; so much so that all the expectations at the time the Bill was going through the Oireachtas will be exceeded easily within the first three years and, if the progress is continued, before the end of the ten year period rural housing will no longer be a problem.

There is a point that has to be borne in mind when examining the position in the light of the survey of 1929 and that is the constant deterioration of existing houses. What one would hope for is a still greater demand for new houses owing to an improvement in the standards of requirements. People have been satisfied with a standard of sanitation and comfort in view of their surroundings who will not be satisfied when they see new houses being built of an improved standard; and the effect of that upward vision will mean undoubtedly an increasing demand for better houses and more of them. Judging by some observations in the other House one ought to beware of simply dealing with averages. It is somewhat fallacious to take an average of eight years prior to 1932, and then take an average of two years since 1932 and say that the progress in two years was not greater than the progress in the previous eight years based upon an average of the two years. One would have to remember that there was a very great slump in building programmes and projects between the passing of the 1931 Act and the passing of the 1932 Act. It was prophesied in this House and in the other House that the effects of the 1931 Bill would undoubtedly mean a slowing down of progress in the building of houses and the facts turned out to be as prophesied. At the time of the passing of the 1932 Act there were in actual process of building throughout the whole of the country, urban and rural, only about 1,600 houses, while at the present time there are in process of building, urban and rural, somewhere about 12,000. When one takes into account the fact that in very few cases were houses begun after the passing of the 1932 Act completed before the end of the financial year 1931-32 to which date the reports were made up, one will see that one ought not to lay much stress upon the average of two years. We must bear in mind also that there are two aspects of the problem, either urban or rural, which are very much intermixed but ought to be in some way disentangled in one's thoughts. The Census returns of 1926 and the figures that were published along with the Census returns regarding overcrowding, based upon the two persons per room standard, show that the overcrowding problem is a very serious one both in town and country. But though overcrowding is frequently involved with the problem of insanitation, the immediate and the most urgent phase of the problem in the mind of the Minister is that of rehousing persons who are at present in insanitary dwellings, and it is being pressed that local authorities, particularly, must take into account the insanitary dwelling as well as and in priority to the question of overcrowding. The two things will run together but priority is being given at the present time to the rehousing of those who are in insanitary dwellings and the destruction and demolition of those dwellings as soon as provision is made for rehousing. Immediately that first problem is on the way to solution, then attention will be directed to the question of overcrowding wherever it may be. One will then find questions arising as to the standards that ought to be adopted—definitions of overcrowding, the standards suitable for urban areas and the standards suitable for rural areas. The whole problem will, I have no doubt, give rise to a great deal of controversy as to how best it ought to be dealt with when we come very near the critical point. Some observations that were made in the Dáil, too, remind me of the importance of bearing in mind that the Legislature so far has left with the local authorities the responsibility of providing houses for the working classes and rehousing people who are in insanitary dwellings. It is not the direct responsibility, in the first case, of the Central Government. It is the responsibility of the local authority, urban or rural, as the case may be, and it is unwise and misleading to follow the line of criticism which assumes that the responsibility for actually putting into effect the work of rehousing lies with the Central Government. Up to date at any rate it lies with the local authority and that fact must be borne in mind when examining the question of speeding up the building programme and the allegations of delay in one quarter of the country or another. I think however the figures the Minister gave and those which I have given furnish reason for saying with a certain amount of confidence that the problem is being dealt with earnestly and with some hope of solution within a reasonable time.

It is going to cost a lot of money and the local authorities will have to bear a share of the cost which some of them seem to be afraid of bearing at the present time, however light it may have been made for them by the generosity of the Dáil. Taking a broad view I believe that before next year has passed much more than the original expectations will have been achieved and we shall be well on the way of breaking the back of the problem within the next two or three years.

Mr. Jameson

The first part of this Bill is quite easy to understand. It is quite easy to understand Section 2, the section dealing with the extension of time. But when you come to Section 3, I think I may say that some of the remarks of Senator Johnson leave a good deal unexplained. This Bill is dealing with grants for the building of houses and these grants amount to £1,400,000. But that is only a small part of the cost of the houses. The house for which a grant of £50 is given costs a great deal more than £50 so that to carry out this scheme means a great deal of money. Many millions of capital must be spent on the building of these houses in addition to the £1,400,000.

Senator Johnson has talked about local authorities coming in to carry on this work and the burden that is being placed upon them. As far as one knows at the present moment the local authorities in the Free State are not burdened with money and I should think that most of them, or a great many of them anyhow, are at the limits of their borrowing powers. I wonder if the Minister could tell us whether the Government is going to aid the local authorities to find from other sources the money which will have to be found if this £1,400,000 in grants is going to be spent? One can understand the building of houses by farmers. Probably the farmer is able to get the money and complete the building for which he is getting the grant. But when you come to the local authorities and other urban areas, too, one would like to know where they are going to get several times more than this grant of £1,400,000 that will be required to carry out this scheme. I may be ignorant about it but probably it is because there is nothing in the Bill to tell us. I should think that the Government must be supplying the local authorities with money from some other sources. If that is so I would be very glad if the Minister would tell us what aid, if any, the Government is giving the local authorities to enable this scheme to be carried out?

Sir John Keane

The Minister referred to grants in respect of holdings up to £15 valuation and grants to people the valuations of whose holdings are between £15 and £25. Do those whose valuations are over £25 get any grant?

Mr. Boland

Persons whose valuations exceed £25 get a grant of £45.

Sir John Keane

With a valuation over £45, what is the grant? Do they get anything?

Mr. Boland

Yes, £45; persons with a valuation over £25 get a grant of £45.

Cathaoirleach

Does any other Senator wish to speak on the Bill? Very well, the Minister to conclude.

Mr. Boland

I have only to answer the question asked by Senator Jameson. The Government will provide loans out of the Local Loans Fund for labourers' cottages. These are the cottages built by the rural local authorities. Towards the cost of these, 60 per cent. of the loan charges are paid by the Government to the boards of health.

Mr. Jameson

That only applies to the labourers' houses or cottages?

Mr. Boland

Yes.

Mr. Jameson

They get 60 per cent. of the cost of what?

Mr. Boland

Of the loan charges.

Mr. Johnson

The Senator will realise that this Bill does not deal with the grants for the local authorities at all. This Bill deals with grants to private persons and public utility societies who are building houses. It does not deal with the local authorities. The capital required over and above these grants is not supplied either by the local authorities or the Government, but in many cases loans are made from the Local Loans Fund through the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Acts. So far as the boards of health are concerned, as the Minister stated, there is provision made already for bearing 60 per cent. of the capital charges in respect of labourers' cottages. Taking one county with another it is believed that the bulk of the requirements can be met by a rate of about 2d. or 3d. in the £, that is the requirements in respect of labourers' cottages. In respect of the urban districts and towns the Government provides 66? per cent. of the loan charges where there has been displacement and rehousing of slum dwellers and one-third of the capital charges in other classes of housing by local authorities.

Mr. Jameson

If I am in order in speaking a second time——

Cathaoirleach

Yes.

Mr. Jameson

Where will the Government get the money? I suppose the Government borrow money on long loans to meet this. Is this money provided out of the £4,000,000 for local loans in the Budget? Is this one of the things for which this money has been borrowed or issued?

Mr. Johnson

Yes.

Mr. Boland

That is correct.

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