Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 4 Aug 1948

Vol. 35 No. 9

Local Government (Remission of Rates) Bill, 1948—Second Stage.

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

Minister for Local Government (Mr. Murphy)

This is a Bill of very limited scope and application. It applies to a relatively small number of persons. The Bill will enable certain persons who had erected dwelling houses before the 31st March last to benefit by the remission of rates for a certain number of years—two-thirds of the rates for a period of five years. The purpose of the Bill is to continue that concession for a period of one year. It does not apply to houses eligible for grants under the Housing Acts or to houses erected by local authorities. Therefore, the concession is applicable to a very limited number of people and is to be continued for a period of 12 months.

I take it that it will be readily understood by Senators that there are certain types of houses that have been from time to time in the course of erection which do not conform to the standards set down under the Housing Acts. I think it would not be fair if the position which has obtained hitherto in respect of the class of persons dealt with in this Bill were not continued for at least a period of one year.

Mr. Hawkins

We on this side welcome the Bill. It represents a continuation of the present position. If there is any fault that we have to find with it, it is that the time limit is rather short. I cannot understand why the Bill should extend only to the 31st March next in view of existing circumstances. Senators are well aware of all the formalities that have to be complied with at the present time in connection with building. There is, first of all, the essential document to secure —the licence to proceed with the building. Then there is the scarcity of materials and of labour that we hear so much about. In view of all that, one might well ask if it is worth while going to all the trouble and expense of passing a Bill at this time in order to grant a remission of rates to people who have begun a building or who will have completed one by the 31st March next. I think that the time limit might well be extended to 1952 or 1953.

As the Minister has pointed out, this Bill has no relation at all to houses which receive assistance under the various Housing Acts. Therefore, we must assume that it caters for the type of person that we heard so much about during the recent general election campaign—the person building a house of over 1,250 square feet. Some people might look on such buildings as being of the luxury type or as being non-essential. We, however, have always held that a person who builds a house for himself is not alone doing a national work but is adding to the rateable value of the area in which the house is erected. For the first few years the remission in rates on such houses is only a very small matter. It was referred to in the Finance Bill. We know that under the valuation of new buildings the amount of rates remitted is quickly recouped.

I happen to have a special knowledge of matters in relation to housing. There is a hold-up at the present time in the building of houses, quite apart from houses built under the Housing Acts, and particularly of the type of house dealt with under this Bill. We know that there is a reluctance on the part of the Department of Industry and Commerce to grant licences. There is a hold-up in connection with the allocation of materials. I feel that the number of people who will become entitled to this concession will be very limited, not through any fault of their own, but by reason of having to comply with red tape regulations.

Apart from that, a number of houses will be built in rural areas where the labour is of an unsatisfactory type, as it is engaged mostly in agriculture and only available for building in slack periods. It takes a year or more to complete a house in a rural area, as compared with the very much shorter time in urban areas. Therefore, the Minister should extend the time, and we are prepared to facilitate him in extending it to 1952 or 1953. Otherwise, the Bill will be brought forward again next year.

Mr. Honan

Most of us have noted with satisfaction that the Minister has raised the ceiling on money that may be advanced from £1,750 to £2,000. However, the conditions are somewhat changed, to the disadvantage of the builder. When the ceiling was £1,750, 90 per cent. of the amount could be advanced, whereas now when it is £2,000——

Mr. Duffy

Is the Senator not speaking on a different Bill?

Mr. Honan

It is the same class of house. There is a little discrepancy in the remission of rates. Where a grant is given, the remission of two-thirds is given for seven years, but where no grant is given, the remission is for five years only. If anything, the reverse should be the case—a builder who does not call on the public purse should not be penalised while those who do so call get the seven years' remission. There may be some explanation, but if these are the crude facts they require the Minister's attention.

Mr. Duffy

I have the greatest doubt about the wisdom of giving a remission of rates at all, as it is held out by the builder as an inducement to a potential customer to believe that the house is worth more than it normally is. It means giving an additional grant to the speculative builder. I have not examined the technicalities of this question and do not know how it operates, but that seems to be the likely tendency; and, if so, I dislike the proposal. It is generally understood that, in the case of luxury building—houses costing £3,000 or £4,000—there is already a big margin of profit and I do not think the taxpayer—or the ratepayer, in this case— should be asked to subscribe another moiety to the profits.

With reference to the manner in which the Bill is presented, I would urge on the Minister to insist that when the draftsman is giving him a Bill of this kind, which is entirely a work of reference, there should be an explanatory memorandum with it. We have urged that here and in the Dáil for some time and with some success. Most Departments now are inclined to prepare a memorandum explanatory of such Bills. That was done last week in connection with the Social Welfare Bill and it is very necessary in a Bill of this kind. There is only one important clause in it, but it would take any Senator the best part of the evening to find out what it means.

Mr. Murphy

I am not in a position to give the House any assurance of incorporating any amendment in this Bill extending the period of its operation. It has always been regarded as a Bill of a purely temporary character and, while it may not have been continued from year to year, its duration was always definitely and rather severely limited. Therefore, I have no accommodation to offer on that point.

The Bill will apply only to a very limited number of people. At the moment, building licences are issued only to local authorities and to private persons whose houses will comply with the requirements of the Housing Acts. There is a very good reason for that, and while it would not be advisable for me to enter into the merits of the arrangements here and now, I think that the good sense of the arrangement will commend itself generally to the people of this country.

If this Bill were not brought forward, it might have been suggested that there was a breach of faith with persons who had started to erect houses which are covered by this Bill, and who had started in expectation of this concession, which has been available over a number of years. We are bound to keep our side of what they might look upon as something in the nature of a contract.

What the future course of legislation of this kind will be it is not yet possible to say. If a similar Bill is to be brought forward next year, I will have examined the point made by Senator Honan. I will arrange to give effect to the suggestion of Senator Duffy, in order that this Bill, and Bills of the kind, for which I am responsible should bear on their face an explanation that is easily understood. There is no objection to that, and I will arrange, as far as possible, to have it done.

Because of the fact that this Bill is a continuation of an Act that was in force for a number of years, it might be regarded as one, the provisions of which would be generally understood. On the other hand, there are in this House, as in the other House, new members who, perhaps, may not be familiar with the terms of the measure.

Question put and agreed to.

An Cathaoirleach

When is it proposed to take the next stage?

Mr. Hayes

If the House is agreeable, perhaps it could be taken now.

Agreed to take remaining stages to-day.

Bill passed through Committee and reported without amendment.

Bill received for final consideration and passed.

Ordered: That the Bill be returned to the Dáil.