Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Friday, 18 Jan 1924

Vol. 6 No. 6

QUESTION ON ADJOURNMENT. - HOUSING (BUILDING FACILITIES) BILL, 1924.—FIRST STAGE.

The PRESIDENT

I am moving for permission to introduce a Bill to facilitate the provision of dwelling houses, to deal with the question of providing suitable dwelling accommodation in various urban and rural districts throughout the country, to provide for a Government subsidy in connection with such provision, and for associating local authorities generally with this project. The general lines have been indicated on a former occasion, so I will just run through them rather briefly. It is proposed to provide a sum of £300,000 for this Bill. The Minister for Finance has agreed, after very careful consideration, to make that sum available. It is a very considerable sum having regard to the many claims and services which have to be provided for out of the revenue of the State. The general proposal is, with a view to alleviating unemployment in so far as that is possible, to provide houses for the working classes at prices which, it is hoped, they will be able to pay, and, generally, to give some help towards business. We have already indicated, on more than one occasion, that this problem is one which will require help from every section of the community. Help is required, if this particular Bill is to be made a success, from those who come under the term "employers" and those embraced in the term "employees." We would say that if there be a real effort made by the two bodies embraced in those two particular terms, there ought to be a very considerable improvement in the provision of houses in every part of the country. Unfortunately, there is scarcely a bigger problem affecting the whole country than this question of the provision of suitable accommodation for the working classes. It is, perhaps, the one particular service which has become most costly since the war. In the pre-war period, the question of the provision of houses at an economic price, was very nearly a line ball. The difference which ought to be made up, either by the Government or local authorities, between the cost of the house and the price that the person who gets it is able to pay, was very small, but since the war an enormous difference has occurred between the cost of the house and the price the person is able to pay for it. That, to some extent, is the object of this Bill— to seek to bridge that difference and to bring home to everybody concerned the necessity for arriving, sooner if possible, later certainly, at a point at which the bridge will not be necessary, and at which the provision of houses will be the same as any service or business. Then it will be done at a price which people can afford to pay. It is, as I said, proposed to associate local authorities with this great work. In the first place, a very big effort will have to be contributed by every local authority where these houses are built. In the first year, the houses will get a remission of 95 per cent. of the rates, that is to say, that the house, having been built, will only bear one-twentieth of the rates struck in that area for the first year. And in the second year 90 per cent. of a remission will be allowed, so that only one-tenth of the rates will require to be paid. That process will be continued until the twentieth year, when the house will have to bear the full rates and be in the same position as any other house not built under this Act.

It is also provided that local authorities are empowered to provide sites, and in certain cases to provide loans to the amount necessary. It is possible, after the Bill is passed, that a case may be made that builders have not got the capital necessary to go on with this work. I think it will be possible to arrange that local authorities can advance money, and that it can be paid on the architect's certificate. In that way capital should not be a hindrance if the money be not available, and so far as the private builders are concerned, the local authorities will be able to help them. It must be remembered that that is going a long distance, because from the returns which have been furnished to me by the Minister for Local Government, it would appear that a large sum is due by local authorities to banks on overdrafts. They have not got in the rates and, generally speaking, their financial position is far from satisfactory. A real and determined effort ought to be made to reduce the very heavy burdens which the rates are imposing, and have imposed, within the last couple of years on business generally throughout the country.

The number of houses which, it is hoped, may be constructed through this Bill will be something in the neighbourhood of three thousand, and it is proposed to make available from the sum of £300,000 varying sums according to the size of the house and according to the provision of sewers and water mains. There will be set out in the schedule the various subsidies in each case, and they vary from £50 for a three-roomed house to £100 for a five-roomed house. It is also provided that a fixed sum will be put on the price that the house must be sold for. In other words, it is really intended by the operation of this Bill that the houses will be sold to the persons for whom they are intended. A case is occasionally made—I do not know whether there is a great deal of exaggeration in it—that the houses provided by local authorities for the working classes are not let to or sold to the working classes, and during my own experience with one local authority I should say that in the main there was very little truth in it. They were, in the vast majority of cases, let to the people for whom they were intended, and in a great number of cases very much higher prices could have been got in the open market if the houses had been sold in a free market. During the period in which I had some experience with the Housing Committee of the Dublin Corporation, the policy was to let houses to the families which had the largest number in them. There was a list made out, and a very large family was practically certain of getting one of those houses. This problem of housing is, as I have said, one of the most complicated we have to face, and one for which there is no real solution. I mean that there are many methods of solving it or of approaching its solution, but to say that in a few sentences it is possible to say "this is the way in which it can be done" will be admitted by any persons who have had anything to do with it to be impossible. If we take the position at the present time, where some people say that there is little use in putting up a proposal of this sort, because the working classes cannot afford to pay three hundred or four hundred or four hundred and fifty pounds for a house, a popular public speaker could make a great play upon that, but the fact is that if one only deals with the class unable to pay the sum of £300 or £400 or £450, and that houses are provided for that class, a very serious burden falls on the shoulders of the ratepayers and taxpayers of this country, which they are not at the moment ready to bear. I would suggest that in these lean years there are numbers of people comprising the term "working class" capable of paying these particular sums, who do not require such assistance to the same extent as some of their less fortunate brethren. You must come in now and provide for them when the prices are high, getting out of them the maximum they can afford to pay, getting out of the State the maximum it can afford to pay and out of the local authorities the maximum they can afford to pay, and having provided for all, getting more towards an economic position in the construction of those houses. The burden on the State, on the local authorities, and on the persons who are not able to pay this big price will be relatively less according as the market becomes normal and conditions improve. It is unnecessary to say anything more, except that, in considering this and other questions which are particularly complex, there has always been a danger of taking one order in the community, stretching their point of view, and criticising any other and vice versa. This problem will not be solved if we confine ourselves to what might be called a sectional discussion of it. It is too big, too complex, too varied, and will require the help of every order in the community and every citizen to make it possible to solve it.

During something like 50 years, I think, the total number of houses provided in urban districts throughout the country numbered only 10,000. Since the Treaty was passed, something like 2,000 or 3,000 houses have been provided. That is a very considerable contribution during the period, at a time when prices were absolutely prohibitive. The State is unable to contribute the amount which it was thought wise after the Treaty to make available for this particular service. It will, I think, be admitted on all sides that it was a prohibitive and impossible amount.

We are now approaching the subject from another angle. We are endeavouring to get private enterprise to give some assistance towards the solving of the problem. Local authorities, from their very nature, must bear expenses and charges which house-building cannot bear and which, as far as the people are concerned, simply postpones the day when a man can have his own house, and get it at a rent that he can possibly meet out of his wages. From an examination of the problem as far as the City of Dublin is concerned it was my impression, when rents were in the neighbourhood of 6/- or 7/- per week, that while owned by private individuals these houses might have been let at 1/6, or possibly 2/- per week lower rent. The main consideration in this problem is the vast number of people who have to be provided with houses. It is a very great work. Very great discontent arises from the fact that people are housed in unsanitary areas, and there is very little attractiveness in the home where conditions are so dismal and so forbidding. The State, in making this large sum of money available for this service, believes that there will be a return in better citizenship and in appreciation by the people who will get these houses that the State is not unmindful of its obligations towards its citizens. I formally move the First Reading of the Bill.

MINISTER for FINANCE (Mr. Blythe)

I beg to second.

Mr. JOHNSON

I am sure the Dáil will welcome the evidence which the introduction of this Bill gives that the Government is taking serious notice of the need for making provision for houses. I think the Dáil, too, will acknowledge the difficulties in the treatment of the question, the varied views, the varied principles at work, in arriving at some satisfactory conclusion as to, at least, one of the methods whereby the problem may be solved. The President has suggested that there are innumerable proposals, and that it may not be possible to solve it on one line alone. I think the difficulty will be apparent to anybody who has heard what the President has said, in view of the contradictions that are contained in his statement—the apparent desire to ride two horses going in different directions at the same time, namely, the attempt generally to drive down wages and, at the same time, arrive at a conclusion which means that houses can be built and let at economic rents.

I think that the President, and the Dáil, if they study this matter closely, will arrive at the conclusion that most students have arrived at, that the housing of the people is one of the services which will not henceforth be economic, in the usually accepted sense, unless in the remote possibility that wages will always be considered irrespective of rentals, and that whatever the ruling rent in a district may be, it will be added to the normal rate of wages. We cannot drive down wages and, at the same time, maintain or raise rents. However, this is only one aspect. The other apparent contradiction in the President's statement is where he put forward, I think, as an example of what should be followed, that large families should get the preference in the selection of tenants for such houses, or as purchasers of such houses, and, at the same time, suggested that there should be a bounty of the kind for houses of three rooms. A large family in a three-roomed house is not a prospect which we should contemplate with pleasure. I am not saying this because I want to throw cold water upon a scheme which has not yet been placed before us, but just to remind the Dáil of the difficulty in the way of treating this problem as though it were one that could be treated as an ordinary commercial proposition, which is the ideal that the President seems to have in mind. I welcome the evidence of the intention of the Government to deal seriously with this problem, and shall be glad to examine the Bill when it is printed.

Mr. JOHN GOOD

One was glad to hear from the President that it is the intention to deal with this difficult question in the near future. I think we all agree that the lines he has forecasted are those that should be tried in dealing with the problem. Deputy Johnson has pointed out some of the difficulties that lie in the path of those anxious to deal with a problem of this character, but while he objects on the one hand to a reduction of wages or to a desire to get a reduction of wages, in dealing with this problem he has not expressed any opinion at all on the question of wages as they stand at the moment in the building industry. I have already expressed views on more than one occasion in the Dáil on this important matter.

Mr. JOHNSON

So have I.

Mr. GOOD

And I think it is generally accepted that the wages in the building industry at the moment in Dublin and in Ireland generally are at a very much higher figure than they should be. I have also gone so far as to say that as this possibly stands as one of the difficulties in the way of housing that, as far as I was concerned, any interest I could use in connection with the industry would be used towards effecting a reduction in a reasonable way. I asked Deputy Johnson, as he has a considerable influence with those engaged in the industry, that he would use that influence in the same direction. I am sure that a combination of that character would do very useful work in connection with the reduction of the costs and rents of houses.

Apart from that problem, he referred to another interesting aspect. It is one that I think should have some attention—the question of the size of the houses. Possibly there is something to be said for his argument that it might be desirable to build larger houses than those with three rooms, but seeing that the problem at the moment is, to some extent, uneconomic, and that rents, even as a result of dealing with housing, are possibly higher than we would like to see them, yet, in view of these facts, it is necessary, in order to keep the figures within reasonable bounds, that the size of a house should be reduced as far as possible. I think if the Government would, as far as it possibly can, confine itself to the building of smaller houses until conditions would be improved, they would thereby help the larger number. While it is undesirable to house large families in three-roomed houses, I think Deputy Johnson and all the other members of the Dáil will agree that it is infinitely more desirable to put such families in three-roomed modern comfortable houses than to see them housed as they are now in too many cases in single rooms in tenements. I would urge that that should be very largely the policy of the Government, to build the largest number of three-roomed houses possible.

Another argument that might be adduced, and I do not want to deal with this subject at any length now, is in connection with the building of the smaller-sized houses. As one who has had something to do and who has had some experience of housing under a local authority, we find that even where agreements have been made with tenants that there is to be no subletting in a very large number of the larger houses—with more than three rooms—there is subletting. In fact, subletting has gone so far as to become profiteering. Tenants who get these houses confine themselves and their families to one or two of the five rooms and set the other rooms at exorbitant rents, and practically live on the income they receive in that way. That is a matter that ought to be borne in mind in connection with housing. A deputation that attended from the tenants under a local authority that I happen to be connected with urged very strongly on that local authority that they should confine their efforts to the building of three-roomed houses. As a result of that I attended with a deputation before the Ministry some months ago, and I urged instead of limiting the smaller type of house that they should do all in their power to encourage the building of that type of house, rather than the larger one. I hope those particular aspects of the problem will have the attention of the Ministry. In connection with the necessary reduction of wages, if Deputy Johnson is still willing to do what he can towards effecting that necessary reduction, as far as I am concerned I will do anything I can to assist in that direction.

Mr. JOHNSON

As a matter of personal explanation, may I say in reply to Deputy Good, that he asked me the question before and I gave him a distinct answer which repeated what I had formerly offered in the Dáil, to use every possible influence with every workman in the country to facilitate the production of houses, and every other commodity, to the utmost extent, I the Government and the employers would come down with a proposition that they were willing to use their offices, their ability, and their organising capacity, on the basis of payment for services.

Mr. J. CONLAN

I would like to impress upon the President the urgent necessity for inserting a provision in the Bill that contractors would be bound to use Irish materials as far as would be possible. In the Athy district of my constituency several brick works were in operation up to a comparatively short time ago, and indeed I believe one of them is still in operation. These works turned out the very best class of brick, in fact most of the old squares in Dublin were built of Athy brick, and that will go to show their durability. There is the precedent of a Government taking action in this direction in the fact that the British Government, while building the Curragh Camp, took over land in the vicinity, and started the making of bricks there, and there was not a single brick used in the construction of the Curragh Camp but was manufactured in the district. That was due, in a great measure, to the action of the then Irish Party in Westminster, who urged upon the Government that, in fairness, they should give the local industries a chance in that way. I would like to bring this matter under the attention of the President in order that provision may be made to give these local industries a chance of reviving.

Mr. P. HUGHES

I do not know if this is the proper time to discuss matters that may, or may not, be in the Bill, as we have not seen it yet, but there is one aspect of the case put forward, I think by Deputy Good, with which I cannot agree. I chance to have some little knowledge of house-building in urban areas, and, for my part, I would not favour the building of a large number of three-roomed houses. I think that the smallest house that should be built for a family should be a four-roomed house. Perhaps you might have a moderate number, I should say a very small number, if any, of three-roomed houses to accommodate people with families. I know it is true, despite the terms put into the letting agreements of these houses, that people have let a room, or perhaps two rooms in houses. But what are the facts? The reason for that is the shortage of houses and people were obliged, in order to get shelter for themselves, to pay exorbitant prices. If there were a number of houses which people could go into, they would not have to pay these rents, and it would not be profitable for people to let these rooms, and would keep them for themselves. I believe that if houses are built under the Government scheme a condition should be made that people should not be allowed to sub-let, as they have done during the past few years in the abnormal conditions that prevailed. As far as the statement about Irish manufactures is concerned, I believe that the Government would be wise in seeing that as far as possible all materials put into any house for which they give a subsidy should be of Irish manufacture, thereby relieving unemployment in the Saorstát.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

There is only one question I would like to ask the President with regard to the Bill at this stage, and it refers to the third section of the Motion before the House. It is with regard to the phrase, "to ensure a supply of building material at reasonable prices." I do not know whether the President might not consider, seeing that he has gone somewhat fully into the provisions of the Bill in other respects, indicating what would be the general provisions of the Bill in that very important respect.

The PRESIDENT

I do not know whether I said that in dealing with the housing problem there is scarcely any theory that any person will put forward that cannot be disproved. In other words, one's experience in connection with housing is varied. What Deputy Good said is quite correct; what Deputy Hughes said is perfectly correct, but the two things are absolutely different. The truth is that one thing happens in one part of the country and the other in another part. One may happen under one housing scheme, and an entirely different thing may happen under another, and that is why I mentioned that the problem was very complex, and it is a problem which lends itself to oratory on public platforms where one may claim that every man must have a six-roomed house, a bathroom, and the appurtenances which make for easy living and comfort. I recollect some time ago, when we were dealing with this problem in Local Government, and I was the Minister for Local Government, some local authorities denounced us in all the moods and tenses as a reactionary Government, because we would not allow them to put in bathrooms. I suggest that people who get houses may put in bathrooms if they like, but I am against giving bathrooms for one-hundredth of the community, while the other ninety-nine hundredths are without housing accommodation. Housing reformers will tell you that whatever you do, do it perfectly, but a very strange thing is that they have been talking for 20 or 30 years and they have not given us any example of the perfect thing yet.

One can only deal with this subject gradually and, I should say, constructively, benefiting by any mistakes made, trying to improve on them, and gradually reducing, year by year, the number of persons who require houses by the provision of other houses. I do know that what Deputy Good has said is perfectly correct. I have known and heard of cases where four-roomed houses were provided, and were sub-let to people who were paying more than the rent. I know of other cases. I have seen applications from persons having very small incomes during the peak wages period. I saw one case in which I think a family with £3 a week coming in to them offered to put down the whole of the money to buy a house, and I saw a return of a family having £17 5s. 0d. coming in and offering £2 for the key, and then expecting to get the house for one-third the cost price. I am sure nobody would stand for that. I do not know that Deputy Johnson meant to do me an injustice when he said I made two rather mixed statements. I thought I had made it perfectly clear that I had admitted the force of one, and could not deny the force of the other. In other words, that large families ought to be provided with houses. If you concentrate on that you will do nothing, and the number of these that you will be able to build would be so small and costly that very little work would be done. What is being aimed at in this Bill is, in the first place, an endeavour to provide employment, and, in the second place, to get houses at the least cost to the State, the Local Authority, and the individual getting the house. If people with large families can possibly take or buy a house, they should and will get the preference, and every possible facility would be afforded them to get houses. But that method of dealing with it by which one goes in for providing economic housing accommodation is not possible when prices are highest, as far as my examination of the problem goes, and I have not been able to find anyone who can show how that particular method could be made successful. The Deputy said that I was attempting to ride two horses, and that there was an attempt to drive down wages, and arrive at a conclusion that houses could be built at an economic price. What is the fact?

On this question of wages and housing very great stress has been laid by practically everyone, but that, to my mind, is not really the question at all, but the value received.

Mr. JOHNSON

Hear, hear. Organisation.

The PRESIDENT

There is no use in saying that we insist on a man getting £3 or £5 a week for doing no work. Organisation is not confined to the one side.

Mr. JOHNSON

Hear, hear. We are trying to improve ours.

The PRESIDENT

Precisely, but the real point in this question of the provision of houses is not wages so much as the other question, that of output. There is an opportunity at any rate as far as this Bill is concerned afforded the orders I have mentioned of showing the best that is in them, for this particular service. It is not a business proposition in the ordinary sense. There is too much of the better side of humanity called on to settle this question than in an ordinary business transaction. There is a real crying need on the part of the majority of the working classes for these houses. I believe that is admitted both on the employer's and the employee's side, and I am satisfied that while the employees have a good deal to say for their side of the case, that the real, serious effort should come from them, because they are to get the maximum benefit out of the success of a scheme of this sort.

Mr. JOHNSON

May I explain that when I was referring to wages I was not referring merely to wages in the building trade, but to the attempt to drive down wages in general.

The PRESIDENT

The only attitude I have taken up on the general question of wages is that there ought to be value for value received, and that there is no use in trying to keep a standard which does not give value to anybody, and which, in the long run, costs the people affected very much more than if we were to arrive at a time when we were getting value for whatever sum was paid, no matter what it was. I calculate that something like 12,000,000 bricks would be required to construct the houses which we have in contemplation under this Bill. I think that would, to some extent, meet one point of the case made by Deputy Conlan, and I think would help to some extent to reduce the over-stock that there is in one of the building concerns in Dublin. There is also, of course, the ordinary reconstruction which it is hoped will begin with the spring of this year, that is, the reconstruction of the houses that have been destroyed. It is proposed, in the Bill, to take power to purchase or manufacture building materials. I do not expect that there would be any activity with regard to the manufacture, but there may be with regard to the other. There is, I understand—I have only heard it in the last couple of weeks— considerable activity in the slate quarries in the Saorstát, and I should say in that, and in the provision of bricks or other building material in the country, efforts will be made to ensure that Irish manufactured materials will get a fair show under the operations of the Bill.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

May I ask the President to explain, when he said "powers will be taken to purchase," whether it will be by the Local Government Department or the Local Authorities or by whom?

The PRESIDENT

I do not remember the details of that, but I will be able to answer the Deputy on the Second Reading.

Mr. HEWAT

I think we are all very gratified to find that the time has come when the Government is prepared to move in this very important question of providing houses. There is one aspect of the case that I would like to put before the Dáil. It is that in connection with the administration and development of this it would be very desirable if the Government would pay due attention to the need for enlisting the sympathy of companies, and of the commercial community generally, in this very urgent matter. I know myself that the business concerns have recognised their responsibilities in this matter, which they have not been able to fulfil owing to the uneconomic conditions in which they were called upon to contribute in connection with this housing question. Recently the Minister for Finance came before the country requiring a loan of money, and very sensibly, I think, one of the first things he did was to enlist the enthusiastic support of the business community as a whole. I suggest to the President and the Executive that the precedent established by the Minister for Finance might be very profitably employed in connection with the housing question, now that we have arrived at a point when the Government recognises the necessity of contributing. May we hope that Labour has arrived at the point when they also——

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

It would be better for the Deputy not to raise controversial matters at this moment. The President should, properly speaking, have wound up the debate, but I did not like to prevent the Deputy from saying a few words.

Mr. HEWAT

I shall bow to your ruling, and will not continue, because anything further I might have to say would be ruled out under that ruling.

The PRESIDENT

If I might intervene, I would suggest that a little latitude might be allowed on this subject. It is one of much complexity, involving in its treatment the kind of thing that the Deputy has in his mind without arousing any bitterness. I think Deputies opposite would not take any objection to having the subject discussed in the manner in which the Deputy was discussing it.

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

I take it that Deputy Johnson would want to reply.

Mr. HEWAT

Really what I was trying to develop was not an argumentative side of the question at all; I was really putting forward the need for the co-operation of all parties in connection with this matter as one of great importance, and as being a matter of great urgent public national importance. That was all I wanted to say. I did not want to commit Deputy Johnson to reply in an argumentative sense, and I was only asking for the co-operation of all parties, which I think is apparent, as a necessity. That was really what I was urging the Dáil to take into consideration in the initial stages of this Bill.

Question: "That leave be given to bring in the Bill"—put and agreed to.

The PRESIDENT

With regard to the Second Reading, I expect the Bill will be circulated by Tuesday, and I propose to put it down for its second stage on Thursday. If that is not sufficient time we can extend it to Friday, but in the hope that it will be ready for circulation on Tuesday, I will ask leave to take the second stage on Thursday.

Mr. JOHNSON

I would ask that the regular procedure be followed and that whatever notice is required should be given.

The PRESIDENT

Four days, as far as I know, is what is required, and I am giving five.

Ordered that the second stage be taken on Thursday, the 24th January.