Vol. 48 No. 12
I move:—
Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £1,250,000 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1934, chun Deontais i gCabhair do Chiste na nIasachtaí Aitiúla.
That a sum not exceeding £1,250,000 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1934, for a Grant-in-Aid of the Local Loans Fund.
Would the Minister say if in the near future he can promise that there would be any reduction in the interest charged on loans to local authorities for doing sewerage and waterworks schemes? As I pointed out on previous occasions on this Vote, a great deal more work could be done by local authorities so far as such schemes are concerned if a lower rate of interest had to be paid on loans obtained from the Local Loans Fund. I would like to know from the Minister if he can hold out any hope to local authorities that, say, before the end of the year he will be in a position to have a lower rate of interest charged on such loans. I think the Minister will agree that more work of this nature, work of a very valuable kind that contributes directly to the health of the people, would be done if a lower rate of interest were charged on the loans, and that a great many more local authorities would take advantage of the facilities provided under the Local Loans Fund.
I would like to have some information from the Minister with regard to this Vote in view of the proposals in Sections 12 and 13 of the Land Bill circulated to-day. Under these two sections a certain amount of arrears under the Land Acts is to be liquidated. We know that up to this when people who had purchased their lands were not prompt in meeting the payment of their annuities to the Land Commission the sum represented by their default was deducted from the grants made to the local authorities. Now under the Land Bill certain of these arrears are to be cancelled. I want to know from the Minister if a sum representing the amount of the cancelled arrears will be made good to the local authorities? The position with regard to loans advanced by the Board of Works to farmers also comes under the new Land Bill. I want to know if in the case of current loans the interest charged is in accordance with the price of money to-day, or is it being maintained at what was the standard rate when the loans were made? Owing to the high cost of money over the last fifteen years, numbers of farmers throughout the country have been held up, in fact one might say prohibited from carrying out improvements on their holdings, such as the erection of fences and out-offices. I would like to know from the Minister whether or not money is being advanced now at the current rate of interest or at the rate that prevailed during the inflation period?
The Minister to conclude.
I did not quite get Deputy MacMenamin's references to Section 13 of the new Land Bill but, in regard to the point which has been raised by Deputy Corish, I should like to say that I feel that, possibly, it would be beneficial, as I have already indicated in the course of the Budget statement of last year, that the interest chargeable upon local loans should be reduced. I say that for the reason that I think it would be possible in that way to stimulate local authorities to carry out public works of a nature which, otherwise, they might not be inclined to undertake. Unfortunately, an examination of the position of the local loans has shown that the case is a much more complex one than might appear at first sight; because, obviously if there were to be any departure from the principle which hitherto has been followed in regard to this matter, and if loans were to be made available from this fund at anything less than the rate of interest which the Government itself would have to pay for this long-term borrowing we would have to consider not merely new applications for advances from that fund but also advances which have already been made, and considerable readjustments would have to be made in regard to the repayment of moneys already advanced. Apart altogether from the fact that the Government has not yet floated a long-term loan on its own account, I have been unable to determine what would be, in the present circumstances, the cost and what would be an equitable charge for borrowings from the Local Loans Fund. As moneys which hitherto have been borrowed from the account of that Fund have been borrowed at from 4½ to 5 per cent., I have been compelled to charge, so long as advances have been made out of these loans, rates which would be related to them. When, however, it becomes necessary for us to go to the public again for another loan, and if we are able to raise that loan on the very favourable terms which I now anticipate we shall be able to secure the money, I will look into the whole matter again and see whether adjustments cannot be made in accordance with the terms of the statement I made on the Budget in 1932. With regard to Section 13 I did not quite get Deputy MacMenamin's point. Perhaps he would make it again.
The point is that under Section 12 of the Bill all arrears in excess of three years are going to be liquidated altogether, to be forgiven. They are to be forgiven with regard to the general Land Acts. Under Section 13, with regard to the purchase annuities payable to the Commissioners of Public Works, a similar provision applies. Moneys have been retained from the Agricultural Grant representing those arrears under these two Sections 12 and 13. Now I want to ask the Minister will these moneys that have been retained, or that will be retained when this Bill becomes law, be put to the credit of the local authorities?
I think our position with regard to these matters has been already explained several times. Assuming that the moneys come in, then there can be no question that——
But the moneys will not come in in these cases.
If they do not come in naturally they cannot go to the credit of the local authorities. As soon as they come in they will.
But you are bringing in legislation to prevent the recovery of these moneys and in that way you are penalising the local authorities.
Has the Minister any reply to the representations made recently by local authorities that they should get some relief in the payment of loans which they had contracted with the British Government to pay? They claim that they are entitled to relief just as much as the rural authorities and they ought to get a reduction the same as the land annuitants are getting. Some of us are getting resolutions from them every day. All the urban local authorities in my constituency are making representations. I should like if the Minister would state what are the intentions of the Government and whether it is their intention to give relief to the urban authorities? These loans were made by the British Government and the urban authorities think that when the loans are being collected from them and not sent over to the British Government they are entitled to some relief. I should like to know whether the Minister is going to give them any relief?
I do not know whether widespread representations have been made in this matter. I understand that the question has been recently raised. Up to now, however, it has not come under my notice. Accordingly, I am not prepared to make any statement in regard to it.
Surely that question raised now by Deputy Corish was raised in this House before. That very same question was raised.
I regret that my memory is defective.
All the urban authorities in my constituency raised it with the Minister.
It was raised here in the House.
Will the Minister say out of what funds are the local loans financed? The Minister spoke of the interest paid for the money out of which he finances the local loans. If any local loans are issued at the moment out of what fund moneys does the Minister finance them? What interest does he pay?
I pointed out that hitherto most of the advances had been made out of borrowed moneys.
At what interest?
I pointed out that the interest would be from 4½ per cent. to 5 per cent. I do not know that there is anything more to add to that.
Are there any advances being made out of the local loans and at what rate to the local authorities? At what rate has this money been borrowed by the local authorities?
The Deputy will recollect I answered a question put down by Deputy Morrissey, that it was from 5½ per cent. to 5¾ per cent.
I would like to refer again to the extract from the Minister's own speech last year. We were talking of the practice that had been followed to a small degree of funding——
On a point of order, if the Deputy, who has just now entered the House, intends to make a speech, I would like him to understand that I was called upon to conclude.
It is impossible to hear the Minister.
The Minister was called upon to conclude the debate.
Surely, on Committee Stage, the Minister is at liberty to answer questions put to him.
I do not wish to challenge the ruling of the Chair at all, but may I ask, with all possible respect, whether any rule of procedure has been rigidly enforced in regard to a Minister concluding a debate in Committee?
I answered a similar question about a week ago.
I was not here on that occasion.
During the consideration of Estimates, which are discussed in Committee on Finance, there is no definite rule of procedure that the Minister should conclude, but, on looking through the records of eight years, I found only one instance in which the Minister did not conclude when called upon to do so. Although the House is in Committee, some finality is required in the matter and I definitely called on the Minister to conclude on this occasion as no Deputy offered to speak.
May I suggest that the questions now arising are questions arising out of the Minister's answer and it is customary when a Minister has concluded on an Estimate to have questions raised on the details of the Estimate. As a rule what happens is that the general question of the Estimate is first debated and after that there is more or less a desultory debate on details, even after the Minister has concluded. If I may say so, that has been the practice.
I have no desire to upset, or even to attempt to upset, the practice which has been declared by the Chair. If I may say so, I think it is quite right. But when there is no evident desire to prolong a debate unnecessarily, and when the members of the House, following a Minister's speech, wish to ask certain question, or, if necessary, to make a short statement, I think that has always been allowed unless the Chair saw quite clearly that there was a desire to obstruct or unnecessarily continue the debate. I do not think there is any evidence of that in this instance.
There is absolutely no evidence of that sort. That is not the intention.
Questions relevant to the Minister's statement are allowed within reason and the Chair has no intention of being rigid or ruling strictly on that point. Relevant questions may be asked, but no lengthy speeches will be allowed.
I quite agree. I hope the Minister will take that to heart and that he will not be continually raising points of order when there is no necessity for doing so.
Now to resume my interrupted question——
Having already risen to conclude the debate, I do not propose to reply to any further questions.
We are going to insist on our full rights.
You have all arrived at the eleventh hour.
Of course the Deputy is always here.
Anyway, this is a matter that I can easily raise again on the Appropriation Bill. As a matter of fact, I am giving notice to the Minister now that I will raise it again on the Appropriation Bill; but so that the Minister may be better advised as to how to answer, I am afraid I shall have to put the point now. The Minister, in the course of his Budget speech last year, said that the question as to whether local loans moneys should be funded or not was a matter for argument. He did say, with regard to his own proposals, that it was not proposed to continue the old practice of charging a remunerative rate, and under these circumstances he thought local loans moneys should be met out of Revenue. We are not now meeting local loans moneys out of Revenue; we are going to borrow. Therefore, I assume from his own statement of last year and the correct finance he prided himself on that there is going to be charged this year the full remunerative rate to county councils. That question has not been precisely answered, even to Deputy Corish. I am asking it now and I intend to press for a reply on the Appropriation Bill.
