Vol. 99 No. 7
I have already indicated that I propose to ask the House to agree to these amendments. I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 1:—
In page 3, line 1, after the word "proper" the following words "treatment or for his" inserted.
Question agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in Amendment No. 2:—
In page 3, line 9, at the end of subparagraph (a) the following words: "or towards the alteration or modification of an existing room" inserted.
Question agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 3:—
In page 3, line 11, at the end of sub-paragraph (b) the following words: "or of the alteration or modification of an existing room" inserted.
Question agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 4:—
In page 3, line 18, at the end of subparagraph (d) the following words: "or for having an existing room altered or modified" inserted.
Question agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 5:—
In page 3, line 21, after the word "room" the words "or the alteration or modification of an existing room" inserted.
Question agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 6:—
In page 3, line 26, after the word "room" the words "or the alteration or modification of an existing room" inserted.
Question agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 7:—
In page 3, Section 3, before sub-section (6) a new sub-section inserted as follows:—
(6) Every regulation made by the Minister under sub-section (5) of this section shall be laid before each House of the Oireachtas as soon as may be after it is made, and if a resolution is passed by either such House within the next subsequent 21 days on which that House has sat annulling such regulation, such regulation shall be annulled accordingly, but without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done under such regulation.
Question agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 8:—
In page 4, before Section 5, a new section inserted as follows:—
5.—(1) Where—
(a) a house has been built or reconstructed with the aid of a grant under the Housing (Financial and Miscellaneous Provisions) Acts, 1932 to 1944,
(b) the county medical officer of health or medical superintendent officer of health acting for the area in which the house is situated certifies that a member of the household of the house is suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis for which he is undergoing treatment and that the accommodation of the house prior to the provision of the extra room referred to in paragraph (c) of this sub-section was inadequate for his proper treatment or for his segregation from the other members of the household, and
(c) it is certified—
(i) that an extra room has been provided in or attached to the house,
(ii) that the provision of the extra room has been completed in a proper and workmanlike manner, and
(iii) that a grant has not been obtained under Section 3 of this Act in relation to the extra room,
the valuation of the hereditament or tenement consisting of or including the house shall not, on any valuation or revision of the valuation thereof coming into force within seven years after the completion of such provision, be increased on account of any increase in the value of the hereditament or tenement arising from the provision of the extra room.
(2) In paragraph (c) of sub-section (1) of this section, the word "certified" means, in relation to the matters specified in that paragraph, certified by an officer appointed by the Minister to certify those matters or, in the case of an appeal to the Minister from a refusal by the officer so to certify, by the Minister.
(3) A person aggrieved by the refusal of an officer appointed under this section by the Minister to certify the matters referred to in paragraph (c) of sub-section (1) of this section may appeal against the refusal to the Minister, and on the appeal the Minister may, as he thinks proper, either confirm the refusal or give the certificate which was refused, and the decision of the Minister on the appeal shall be final and conclusive.
Will the Minister say anything to us on amendment No. 8?
The purpose of this amendment is to extend the benefit of remission of rates to be granted under sub-section (4) of Section 3 of the Bill to all houses built or reconstructed under the Housing and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1932, in respect of which additional accommodation has been provided under the following circumstances: that the medical officer of health certified that there is a member of the household suffering from tuberculosis who would benefit if this additional accommodation were provided.
I understand that this refers to houses that are already relieved of part of the rates for a particular period and that this brings the new addition to that house under that arrangement for a particular period?
Yes, provided that the extension or reconstruction has been undertaken for the purpose of providing segregated accommodation for a sufferer from tuberculosis, and provided again, as I have said, that the house has been built or reconstructed under the Act of 1932.
Does that mean that it refers to an addition that has already been made and that it brings an addition that has already been made in under the terms of this new Bill?
No, it does not apply to one that has already been made but it applies to one that will be made in future.
The rates remission plan gave the builder of a house a 10 years' period of remission or some finite term of that kind.
Seven years.
Is it seven years?
Yes.
If a house was built under the Miscellaneous Provisions Act and has enjoyed three years' remission of rates and then this new structure is added, is the new structure exempt from rates for the remaining period of four years or does the remission of rates in respect of the new part extend to the full term of seven years?
If the Deputy would refer to sub-section (4) he will realise the effect of this when I say that it is the purpose of the amendment to put those houses in which additional accommodation has been provided without the help of a grant contemplated under the original Act, on all fours with houses to which additional accommodation has been added but in respect of which a grant was applied for and received under this Act. If all the conditions, except the application and receipt of a grant, are complied with in respect of one of these houses, then that house would be put in exactly the same position as a house for which a grant has been received. Accordingly, sub-section (4) of the Bill, as originally introduced, will apply, that is to say, the valuation of the hereditament shall not be increased on account of the increase in value arising from the accommodation until a period of seven years has elapsed. That is as clear as I can explain the position.
Can the Minister say if that will apply retrospectively?
No, it will only apply in respect of a house to which the additional accommodation is built.
Question agreed to.
