I am accepting all the amendments from the Seanad. I suppose we will take them one by one. The first amendment is a purely drafting amendment. It reads: "The words ‘when used without qualification' deleted in lines 30 and 31 of Section 2." It is in connection with the amendment that has been made in the Seanad of the definition of public utility societies. Originally there were two definitions in Part I of the Bill as to public utility societies. There was a desire that it should be made as wide as possible and accordingly the change was necessary. The one definition goes out and as a corollary the words "when used without qualification" go out also in respect of the other.
Housing (Financial and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, 1932—From the Seanad.
The Dáil went into Committee.
Might I ask for some further information from the Minister with regard to his statement that this makes the description of "public utility society" as wide as possible? Reference has already been made here to the position of public utility societies in rural districts. I would ask the Minister do these amendments now of the description of "public utility society" make it more or less easy, and, if less easy, in what way, for the fraud to be continued that has been attempted and has been in operation in connection with the pseudo public utility society under these Bills? In this Bill special facilities are given to public utility societies and special grants-in-aid are being made to persons operating through a public utility society. Will it be possible under the new definition for a person who is a building contractor or a person who is simply an individual to go round to persons and say to them "if you give your name into me as part of a public utility society that we will make up, we can get bigger grants from the State for the purpose of building houses than we would normally get." The attention of the Minister has already been drawn to what is operating and I would like to know whether it is going to be made easier to have that kind of thing of getting larger grants from the State operate. We put down amendments when the Bill was before us asking, in order to be clear in the matter, and in order to see that where public utility societies were organised in rural districts that they would serve some useful purpose. I ask that the Minister would make some regulations governing the operations of public utility societies.
I do not know whether the statements of the Deputy are quite relevant because he suggests that fraud has taken place in connection with the operations of public utility societies. If that is so I am not aware of it, and I am surprised that the Deputy has not taken steps to remedy the situation. The position I am in is that I have powers under Section 13 of the Bill to make regulations governing this matter. I do not propose to sanction any public utility society which I am not satisfied is a satisfactory one both in its personnel and in its object. I think that is all the assurance that I can give the Deputy. Public utility societies come under the regulations of industrial and provident societies or friendly societies. I understand that all public utility societies which are dealing with building have incorporated in their rules certain standard regulations which are said to be very good of their kind. If the Deputy has particular cases in mind in which he thinks fraud is likely to arise, I would be glad to have some information from him on the subject. The same will apply in the case of other Deputies. The definition has been changed in the case of societies which are, in fact, companies and so as to allow the wisest possible classification in regard to philanthropic organisations, and when the Deputy asks whether this change is likely to increase or decrease fraud, my only answer is that I cannot say. I am not aware that there has been any fraud. I intend, when I examine the whole question, to see that the regulations are such that they will not allow any societies to exist which contemplate fraud on the State. That is the only assurance I can give the Deputy.
Question agreed to.
I move: That the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment 2:—
Section 2. Lines 39-42 inclusive deleted.
This is an amendment to which amendment No. 1 is a corollary.
Question agreed to.
I move: That the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 3:—
Section 2. After the word "person" in line 43 the words "whereever it occurs in Part II of this Act" inserted.
The amendment is purely a drafting amendment.
Question agreed to.
I move: That the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment 4:—
Section 5, sub-section (1). The words "in a rural area" deleted in line 52, page 5.
Amendment 4 extends the reconstruction proposals which are being made for small farmers and agricultural labourers in rural areas. It makes the reconstruction proposals applicable to urban areas as well; that is to say, a person who can prove that he or she comes under the definition of small farmer or agricultural labourer will not be prevented from getting a reconstruction grant by reason of the fact that he or she is living in an urban area. As the Bill stood, it was confined to rural areas.
Question agreed to.
I move: That the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment 5:
Section 5, sub-section (1). The words and figures "within the meaning of the Housing (Ireland) Act, 1919" deleted in lines 66-67, page 5.
Amendment 12:
Section 8, sub-section (1). The words and figures "within the meaning of the Housing (Ireland) Act, 1919" deleted in lines 33-34.
goes with amendment 5.
I move: That the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment 12.
Questions agreed to.
I move: That the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment 6:
Section 5, sub-section (1). After the word "tenancy" in line 14, page 6, the following words inserted: "to a person of the working classes at a rent not exceeding such rent as may be approved of by the Minister"
This amendment has been inserted as a safeguard in connection with the removal of the qualification in the Housing of the Working Classes Acts relating to public utility societies. Owing to the acceptance of a new definition of public utility societies to meet those who are interested in the matter, it has been necessary to insert this amendment so that the Minister will have some control in regard to the profits of public utility societies, not by directly limiting their profits, but by limiting the rents that they may charge.
I wonder will the Minister elaborate this matter? Will he give the Dáil any idea as to what rents he has in mind? I understand he is removing a provision by which public utility societies will be restricted in the amount of interest they may make on their money. On the other hand, he takes powers to restrict them in the rents they will charge and the type of person to whom they may let the house.
The position is not that the Minister has really framed a definite policy with regard to the restriction of rents. The reason for the amendment is that under the Bill as it left the Dáil, public utility societies had to receive sanction from the Minister for Finance in respect to their rates of profit. The dividend, I think, was fixed at 6 per cent. When we changed the definition of public utility societies we did away with that limitation and that restriction upon profits imposed through the Minister for Finance. We have now taken these powers. I cannot say to what extent it will be necessary to use them, because the matter only came up in the Seanad. In any case the Minister is definitely going to have the power to restrict the profits of public utility societies in this way. I think that particular proposals from public utility societies will have to be examined on their merits and I could not give an explanation at present of what exactly our policy will be except that we will have to be satisfied that their proposals are reasonable without, at the same time, being so low as to be unremunerative and uneconomic.
I am afraid the Minister will not have anything to do under this whole section, because I fear the section will not come into operation at all by reason of everything that is implied in it. The section sets out that if a local authority gives a certain grant the State will give another grant, the grants in all totalling one-third of the total cost of the house erected by the society for letting in the way contemplated in the section. The figures quoted with regard to the square feet dimensions of the house and the amount of money quoted contemplated, before the new taxes on steel or iron, a return to the building costs of 1922; at any rate, the building costs of 1924. There is contemplated the all-in cost of a house at £450; that is the maximum cost implied in the section. You have also the 500 square feet. There is a return to the building cost of 1922 when it was 14/- or 15/- a square foot instead of the figure of 9/4, referred to here on another occasion, or the other figure relating to good schemes in particular counties where building costs had been reduced. If we are to be guided by the costs contemplated by the Minister's money, and if we are to be guided by his statement with regard to square feet, then the rents of these houses, without any profit at all to public utility societies, may run up to 10/-, exclusive of rates. If there is to be any kind of profit at all, the figure will run considerably higher than that. Depending, as the Minister is, on the assistance of local authorities and on what is contemplated in the way of building costs in this measure, I do not think he is likely to have very much work under it. I suggest this throws a very big sidelight on what is likely to occur under certain other sections of the Bill.
I do not think the Deputy is quite right in his little disquisition about building costs. My information is that Continental steel and iron and Continental cement are as satisfactory as British steel and iron or British cement and are cheaper. Therefore, I do not see how the question which the Deputy has artfully endeavoured to introduce into his speech about increased building costs, arises. It only shows that the Deputy, when he was Minister, might have looked around to see where really cheap materials could be got. When our proposals are elaborated, and when we have a Housing Board set up, it will be the chief function of that Board to see that building materials, satisfactory in quality and reasonable in price, will be obtainable, due preference, of course, being given to Irish materials. Where Irish materials cannot be got, we will get the materials elsewhere in, I think, sufficiently large quantities and at a sufficiently economic rate to enable us to build houses more cheaply, at any rate, than during the Deputy's period of office as Minister for Local Government. I do not think the question really arises. The Minister in this amendment is taking power to fix the rent, one of the main purposes of the Bill being to provide houses to let for working-class people and that these houses will be let at a fair economic rent.
I had hoped that I made it clear that, apart altogether from the increased cost of cement, steel and iron——
There is no increased cost.
Any possible increase. The figures provided for here in the matter of grants and the limitation on the size of the houses are such that when the two are put together the Minister will see that he is going back to the building costs of 1924: that is, he is going back over eight years of progress in the matter of building costs. I have asked him if, now that he is doing away with any restriction of profits to the building societies in connection with this matter, and is going to restrict the rent, what kind of rent he thinks he is going to fix? It is a matter purely of arithmetic.
Is it intended to withhold these subsidies until after the person has been installed in the house and has a rent approved by the Minister?
No.
What is the meaning of the sub-section, then?
No answer.
There is no answer required.
The sub-section reads now: "Such public utility society undertakes with the Minister that such society will not sell such house and will let such house only on a monthly or lesser tenancy to a person of the working classes at a rent not exceeding such rent as may be approved of by the Minister."
Surely that can be done before the House is ready for occupation?
Question put and agreed to.
I move: That the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 7:—
Section 5, sub-section (6). The sub-section deleted.
This is to delete the sub-section here, and in amendment No. 11 we shall have a new section which will be Section 8 if passed.
Question put and agreed to.
I move: That the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 8:
Section 6. A new sub-section added at the end of the section as follows:—
(5) The regulations made by the Minister for the purposes of this section shall provide that in the allocation of any houses in respect of the provision of which a contribution is made under this section preference shall be given, wherever practicable, to families living in one-roomed dwellings where either
(a) one or more members of the family is or are suffering from tuberculosis; or
(b) one or more members of the family, exclusive of the parents, has or have attained the age of sixteen years; or
(c) the dwelling has been condemned as being unfit for human habitation.
In this amendment it is sought to give preference to certain classes of persons in slum areas where slum clearance schemes are being carried out and to ensure that in providing for those who have been cleared, so to speak, and who have to be provided with alternative accommodation that preference will be given to families in which there is tuberculosis and in which there is at least one child of the age of sixteen; and, in addition to these circumstances, that the dwelling has been condemned as unfit for habitation.
May we take it that nothing in these regulations will prevent a local authority carrying out a process of filtration by which, if they have some houses of their own, they may transfer the inhabitants of these houses to the new houses, if they are more suitable, and take the people from houses that have been condemned, or some of the other classes referred to in the section, and give them accommodation in the evacuated houses? A number of local authorities find a filtration process like that satisfactory.
The amendment provides that, wherever practicable, preference will be given to the class I have indicated. I understand this is a policy which has been carried out under the local authority in Dublin; that, in fact, they are endeavouring to give preference to families where tuberculosis exists and where there are children over sixteen.
Question put and agreed to.
The following amendments were agreed to:
9. Section 7, sub-section (3). The word "certified" deleted in line 16 and the word "specified" substituted therefor.
10. Section 7, sub-section (4). After the word "person" in line 24 the words "or public utility society" inserted.
I move: That the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 11:
New section. Before Section 8 a new section inserted as follows:—
8. (1) In this section references to the commencement of a house shall be construed as referring, in the case of a house erected under a contract, to the date on which such contract was made, and, in the case of any other house, to the date on which the erection of such house was begun.
(2) This section applies to every house which is commenced after the passing of this Act and is erected either
(a) by a local authority; or
(b) in an urban area by a public utility society; or
(c) in an urban area by a person who is by trade a builder under a contract or for the purpose of being let or sold.
(3) The Minister shall not make under this Act a grant or a contribution to annual loan charges in respect of the erection of a house to which in his opinion this section applies where it is shown to his satisfaction that throughout such erection rates of wages have not been paid or conditions of labour observed at least as advantageous to the persons employed in such erection as the appropriate rates of wages or conditions of labour generally recognised by trade unions at the commencement of such house.
This is a new section inserted in the Seanad. In the Dáil, I accepted an amendment by Deputy Norton providing that conditions of labour approximating to the conditions laid down by trade unions should be observed wherever Government grants were being paid to local authorities, public utility societies or builders. Under the amendment as accepted in the Dáil, however, this provision would have applied to rural areas. We have eliminated that portion of it and have altered the wording to suit.
Question put and agreed to.
The following amendment was agreed to:
12. Section 8, sub-section (1). The words and figures "within the meaning of the Housing (Ireland) Act, 1919" deleted in lines 33-34.
Reported: That the Committee had agreed with all the Seanad amendments.
Question: "That the Dáil agree with the Committee in its report"— put and agreed to.
Message ordered to be sent to the Seanad accordingly.