Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 27 Jun 1946

Vol. 101 No. 19

Committee on Finance. - Vote 73—Transition Development Fund.

Mr. Aiken

Tairgim:—

Go ndeontar suím na raghaidh thar £5,000,000 chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfas chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31ú lá de Mhárta, 1947, chun an Chiste Fhorbartha Idirlinne (Uimh. 15 de 1946).

This Estimate arises out of the Finance Act of this year which was signed by the President to-day. Section 30 of the Act establishes the Transition Development Fund and provides that, in the current financial year, there shall be paid into the fund out of moneys provided by the Oireachtas a sum not exceeding £5,000,000. The Estimate, it will be observed, is for the full amount of £5,000,000 mentioned in the Act and it is proposed to make payments into the fund at such times and of such amounts within that limit as may be considered necessary from time to time.

In regard to the purposes to which moneys in the fund may be applied, the Act allows me a wide discretion, subject to the overriding consideration that the purpose must be conducive to the development or improvement of the capital resources of the country, and the further limitation implied in the definition of public moneys as meaning moneys charged on, or issued out of the Central Fund, or provided by the Oireachtas. On the negative side, accordingly, I am debarred from utilising moneys in the fund for any service which has not already been submitted to and approved by the Dáil and for or towards the cost of which the House has not already authorised some measure of assistance out of the public purse.

As to the purposes to which the fund will be applied, I have already given some examples to the House both in my Budget statement and on various occasions when the Finance Bill was going through the Dáil. We are passing through abnormal times at present when materials needed for the carrying out of desirable works of a capital nature, which normally would be fully provided for in the ordinary Departmental Estimates, or as Central Fund services, are costly and difficult to obtain. My idea is that the extra cost attributable to the exceptional conditions prevailing should be met out of the Transition Development Fund.

Among the services which are being considered for assistance from the fund is, first of all, housing. It is proposed to encourage local authorities to go ahead with housing schemes by making supplementary grants available to them out of the Transition Development Fund towards bridging some of the gap between the existing standard subsidies under the Housing Acts and the increased cost of the dwellings. The Minister for Local Government and Public Health explained the administration of the fund by his Department recently, and it is the intention that each application for a supplementary grant by a local authority out of the fund will be considered on its merits and in relation to the reasonableness of the tenders. Grants may be made in respect of houses provided by local authorities since the 1st April, 1945, on the same terms as will apply to houses now being built or which will be started during the current financial year.

As Deputies are aware, the Minister for Local Government and Public Health a year or two ago asked the local authorities to go ahead with housing, stating that he would see that the subsidies were adjusted afterwards to meet it. A rough estimate of the cost of these supplementary grants up to the end of the next financial year is £1,100,000. This will include both the extra subsidies earned this year by local authorities in the building of houses, as well as the extra subsidies that will be given to them on foot of the houses they completed last year.

Secondly, there is the farm improvements scheme. As I indicated in the debate on the Finance Bill, it was considered at the time of framing the Estimates for the current year that a provision of £400,000 would be sufficient to cover all applications for grants under the scheme. The number of applications received proved, however, to be greater than was expected and if some of them were not to be rejected, additional money would be required to cover the surplus. Rather than refuse these additional applications, I have agreed to provide out of the Transition Development Fund the extra amount required.

It is estimated that an extra £60,000 will be required to enable all applications under the 1946-47 scheme to be dealt with. Another £60,000 may be required to cover works authorised under the 1945-46 scheme, bringing the total extra requirements to £120,000.

Supplementary grants will also be made available out of the fund to enable local authorities to undertake water supply and sewerage schemes. The additional money is required mainly for the reasons that (1) the cost of these schemes has risen considerably since pre-emergency days; I propose to give grants from the fund to the local authorities to meet part of this increased cost, and (2) owing to shortage of materials, etc., the undertaking of water and sewerage schemes was retarded during the emergency, and it is intended that such schemes should now be put in hands as soon as possible. This will involve a considerable increase in the normal assistance given annually from State funds towards such schemes and it seems appropriate that this additional temporary charge should be borne on the Transition Development Fund.

No decision has yet been reached as to the precise basis on which the amount of the supplemental grants to be made available from the fund towards the additional cost of these schemes as compared with pre-emergency days will be determined, and the matter is under active discussion with the Department of Local Government and Public Health. I am sorry I am not in a position at this stage to say what amount exactly will fall to be met out of the fund for this purpose.

Another purpose which comes into the picture is rural electrification. Expenditure on rural electrification is proceeding on the basis of the 50 per cent. subsidy provided for in the Electricity (Supply) (Amendment) Act, 1945, but should the actual expenditure disclose justification for a higher subsidy it has been suggested that the extra amount required should be met out of the Transition Development Fund for a period of two years. It is not possible as yet to say what rate of progress the Electricity Supply Board will make in the carrying out of the rural electrification scheme—expenditure on which is expected to be spread over many years—nor is it possible yet to say at what date in the future the Electricity Supply Board will look to the Government to make available the subsidy involved in expenditure already incurred. An Estimate for subsidy will probably be submitted to the House by the Minister for Industry and Commerce in 1947-48 to make good to the Electricity Supply Board the free grant portion of rural electrification expenditure incurred during the calendar year 1946, and when that Estimate has been settled it should be possible to indicate what amount, if any, will require to be paid from the Transition Development Fund in addition to the Vote subsidy.

That is in addition to the 50 per cent. subsidy already authorised in the Act.

A further purpose to which the fund might be applied is suggested by a proposal I have received from the Minister for Industry and Commerce for a research grant to the Irish Alcohol Company. This proposal is being examined in my Department and the tentative Estimate submitted indicates that annual expenditure on research would amount to about £2,000 a year for four or five years. It has yet to be decided whether the fund should be used to finance the work during the first couple of years.

I have already indicated to the House that I was considering defraying out of this fund the cost of the additional rating relief in respect of agricultural land provided for in this year's Budget. I think the general character of this relief and its temporary duration make it an appropriate charge against the fund, but no final decision will be reached until the terms of the new legislation which the Minister for Local Government and Public Health has in hands comes to be settled.

No doubt as time goes on other schemes for the improvement or development of the capital resources of the country which would qualify for assistance from the fund will suggest themselves and Deputies may be assured that any suggestions they wish to put forward in regard to any schemes that occur to them as worthy of assistance from the fund will receive due consideration.

Mr. D. Morrissey

I am sorry the Minister was not able to give us some fuller information. He has announced Estimates of expenditure amounting approximately to one-fourth of the £5,000,000 for which he is now seeking authority from the House. Practically all of that is for housing. But the Minister at one stage stated that the relief to be given local authorities in respect of housing from this Transition Development Fund would be approximately the additional cost over pre-war. He then went on to say that it should be an amount which would help to bridge some of the gap. We ought to get something more definite than that. We should like to know to what extent this fund is going to be used, to keep rents of houses built by local authorities somewhere within the capacity of the people who are going to occupy them.

It will be admitted that the rents which had to be charged for houses built by local authorities, even prior to the war, were certainly at the maximum that the average occupier could afford to pay. If the houses which it is contemplated will be built in the coming year, are to be built at a cost which will make it necessary to increase pre-war rents, I am afraid these rents can only be met by the people whom we are anxious to see put into decent houses by sacrificing some of the essentials.

I think the House is entitled, when there is such a sum as £5,000,000 required, to ask the Minister to state to what extent he proposes to bridge the gap between the present day cost and pre-war cost of houses to be erected by local authorities. I assume that the figure £5,000,000 is based on some consideration of the various matters. It was arrived at, I hope, after a search ing inquiry as to how the money could best be spent and allocated out of the £5,000,000 in respect of the various schemes. I should like some further information as to why we are being asked now for a sum of £5,000,000, when the Minister can only give a rough estimate covering expenditure in the present financial year of £1,250,000 or £1,260,000. I should like to know whether the Minister proposes, as an inducement to local authorities to go ahead, to give them out of this fund any additional grant towards the development of building sites. Like the rest of us, the Minister is aware that materials are in short supply, and are likely to be in short supply for a considerable time. We cannot tackle the housing problem in the way in which local authorities would like to tackle it, but they could be making considerable progress in the development of sites, by making roads, laying water mains, sewerage and so on, thereby being in a position to take immediate advantage when building materials become available and, incidentally, giving much needed employment.

I would like if the Minister, in replying, would deal with that aspect of the housing situation because, so far as I could follow the Minister, this Estimate of £1,100,000 is based upon what is called the "all-in" cost of a completed house. I should like to know also whether it has been considered by the Minister, in relation to this £5,000,000, giving increased or supplemental grants to private persons who are building houses for themselves, There are many people in this country to-day who would, I think, be prepared to undertake the building of houses to be occupied by themselves and their families if the Government would be prepared to give them some additional financial help. I think that citizens who are inclined in that way and who are able to undertake the building of their own homes should be encouraged to the fullest possible extent. I do not think there is any development, so far as housing is concerned, where we should be prepared to go further and to give the fullest possible encouragement than to encourage people, as I say, to provide their own homes. In that connection it would be, perhaps, the greatest help that we could give to such persons if, either through their local authorities, or otherwise, sites could be made available at a reasonable price or at a reasonable rent on a long lease to private persons who are anxious to build their own homes; as we all know, if a person wants to build a house for himself one of his greatest —if not his greatest—difficulties is to secure a suitable site and to secure it at any sort of reasonable price. That has been so now for a long period, but it was never more true than it is at the present time. I would like if the Minister would tell us whether that aspect of the matter has been considered in any way or to any extent. If it has not been considered I certainly think that the Minister should take it into consideration now.

I particularly welcome the Minister's statement in regard to providing whatever additional money is required out of this fund to meet claims under the farm improvements schemes. That, in my opinion, is one of the really good schemes. I have stated that on many occasions in this House. It is perhaps the most fruitful scheme of all the schemes that have been introduced here.

Not only the individuals concerned, but I think we can safely say that the nation itself has benefited considerably as a result of the expenditure of these moneys. I trust that we are now in a position, as a result of the Minister's decision in connection with this particular fund, where any person applying, who is prepared to carry out the necessary improvements, will not be turned down merely because there is not a sufficient amount of money available. I think the Minister said that he was restricted in his allocation of this money to schemes which had already been passed or which had secured the approval of the Oireachtas. In one way I regret that because there is a work—I mentioned it here on a prior occasion although I come from an inland constituency myself—a very necessary work, in my opinion, which can be done, and which should be done, and which would give considerable employment, particularly in areas where other forms of employment are not readily available. I refer now to the question of coast erosion. I think money could be very, very usefully spent in checking coast erosion and I think that such a scheme would give very useful employment.

The Minister also mentioned that it was proposed to make available out of the fund certain moneys in connection with the provision of sewerage and waterworks. In that connection I want to say—I do not know whether this is the experience of other Deputies in this House—that we are all anxious to see sewerage and waterworks undertaken and we know that a great number of such schemes have been carried out in the last 20 or 23 years. We know that waterworks and sewerage schemes have been carried out, particularly in the smaller towns and villages; but I would like to know from the Minister whether any inquiry has ever been made by the Department of Local Government and Public Health as to the extent to which those sewerage and waterworks schemes have been availed of by the inhabitants of the particular towns or villages. You lay on the water and the main is there.

In a great many cases the people living in those towns and villages are too poor to afford the additional cost of having the water and sewerage connections made to their own homes. We know that for the average person, particularly nowadays, that is a costly process. If you go into a house tomorrow which has not been connected with sewerage or with waterworks and you have to undertake the work of connecting up your house to both the sewerage and the waterworks, you will find that the cost of doing so will amount to a considerable sum. My point is that to a very large extent in the average town or village those connections have not been made and, in so far as that is the case, the waterworks and sewerage schemes are a complete failure and a complete waste of money. That is an aspect of the matter which ought to be taken into consideration by the appropriate Department. I think, before the Minister makes this additional money available, he ought to get from the Department of Local Government and Public Health a report on the schemes which have already been carried out, the extent to which those schemes are being availed of, or can be availed of by the citizens living in the particular town or village. I can speak only from my own experience of the particular cases and schemes which have come under my own notice; but I am sure that what has come under my notice and what has been brought to my notice has probably come under the notice of other Deputies as well. To say the least of it, it does seem to me rather futile to expend thousands and, in some cases tens of thousands, of pounds on sewerage and waterworks schemes in towns and villages and then leave them there, a very big number of householders being unable to meet the cost of having their houses connected up.

The only other matter to which I wish to refer in connection with this Vote is the reference made by the Minister to grants for rural electrification. The Minister was unable to give us any information on that matter. He intimated, I think, that it was hoped that the Minister for Industry and Commerce during the financial year 1947-48 might be in a position to come to the House and give it information as to the sum required by way of additional financial provision for the Electricity Supply Board in connection with their rural electrification scheme. However, to sum up, we are being asked here to provide a sum of £5,000,000 for a Development Fund.

At the moment the Minister, apparently, is unable to give us even an estimate covering more than a quarter of that sum. I must confess that that does not satisfy me. There are many useful schemes of work which could be embarked upon even now. We have more than enough unemployed people, more than we could hope to put on these schemes; but I think that we could make an appreciable mark on the number of unemployed and provide useful work and useful schemes which would give a return that would justify the expenditure of this money. I must confess that I find it difficult to understand why we should be asked at this period to provide £5,000,000 when, so far as we can see from the Minister's statement, the Minister does not hope to spend more than about one-quarter of that money between now and the next financial year.

Mr. H.M. Dockrell

For a Minister for Finance, the Minister was very short of details in explaining this scheme to the House and why it is presented in this form. The Minister told us that it is a transitional scheme. Of course the name Transition Development Fund would show that. But it seems to me as if it is an excuse to save the Government from making up their minds on certain fundamental points upon which they really ought to make up their minds, and the sooner the air is cleared the better. Years ago I heard that most housewives had in their kitchen a stock-pot out of which they made a whole lot of things. Soup and gravy and various other parts of the meal were enriched out of it. It seems to me as if this Transition Development Fund is somewhat like the stock-pot of the households of ancient days. There is to be a little ladled out for housing and a little ladled out for water and sewerage schemes.

The Minister should try to give us some illustrations of the way this scheme will work. Most people regard the cost of houses as having risen by anything from 50 to 75 per cent. above pre-emergency days. I do not know, and I suppose the Minister does not know, how much higher, if anything, costs will go. The Minister told us that some sort of calculation would be made about the rate at which the money was borrowed, what increased rent they would have to charge the tenants, and certain other factors, and that when these items were made into one bill the Department would tell them what they were to get. I do not know why the Ministry would not take their courage in their hands and say: "We will give so much over 50 per cent." or something like that; in other words, enable the local people to make some calculation in advance.

There is another aspect of this matter with which I am rather disappointed. So far as I can make out, the speculative builder who builds a house for sale—it is largely for sale now—is not to get anything. Does the Minister consider that that individual is a sort of social leper who should be driven out of the community? I have always felt that anybody who built a house in town or country was contributing to the solution of the housing problem. One of the things which has really brought the housing problem to a desperate position is that a whole lot of houses that have been vacated by the better class portion of the community are not available, as they were in the past, as a sort of glorified flats or tenements. Nobody suggests that that is a desirable thing to aim at. But I suggest to the Minister that it is very desirable during the transition period, and I am sure that the Minister would be the first to make those houses available, if that were possible. Those houses are not now available and that is one of the factors contributing to the present desperate housing situation.

I should like to plead for the speculative builder to be retained in this country. It is quite possible that some of them, if they find the draught too much at the present time, could pack up their traps and take their experience to a neighbouring country with very great disadvantage to us here and to the solution of the housing problem.

Deputy Morrissey complained that the water and sewerage schemes that had been installed had not been availed of to the extent that they should have been. I think that is very true. But I suppose that when materials get cheaper a lot of people in rural areas, who have not done it up to the present, will avail themselves of these amenities. In any case, the sewers and the water pipes were installed when they were much cheaper to instal them than at the present time. Side by side with that, in a whole lot of other districts they did not proceed with sewerage and water schemes to the extent that they might have during the emergency. I think it is quite true to say that there are whole districts in the country that are desirable for building, where sewerage and water schemes are only in contemplation. I urge the Minister to try to get back to more normal conditions by treating the problem from a more normal angle, giving grants for the building of houses in such a way that most intelligent people could see where they were before they embarked on house building, and local authorities also could have a better idea as to what their financial position would be. I think the position of the Minister towards the local authorities is "Well, trust me, and I will see you right; I will not let you down." That is all very fine, but it is an indefinite way of dealing with a very real problem.

Mr. Hughes

The Government are very reluctant to make a decision on this question of subsidies for housing. This is merely an attempt to postpone a decision as to what subsidy will be paid for housing in the future. It is all very fine for the Minister to say it is an attempt to bridge the gap between pre-war and present costs. That may be, but we have a very acute shortage of houses. Many young people are anxious to get married, but they cannot get a home, and that is a very serious matter. We have to realize that that policy will not be helpful so far as local authorities are concerned. Very heavy financial commitments will be necessary for housing over the next ten years and the sooner the Government face their responsibilities the better. They should let the country know what the financial provisions for housing will be.

This is merely a tentative proposal to cover a short period. People interested in housing are asking what subsidy will be provided in the future. I agree with other Deputies that whatever financial assistance will be made out of the sum that is earmarked, it ought not to be confined to local authorities and State housing schemes. There ought to be some extension to private individuals who are prepared to invest money in providing houses for themselves. The Minister has neglected another important aspect, and that is some method of stimulating private enterprise. That ought to make a very important contribution to our housing requirements. If State assistance is to be confined to local authorities, it will mean that the whole problem of housing will have to be solved by the State, and that is a short-sighted policy. Full examination ought to be given to the possibility of inducing private enterprise to make a substantial contribution to this problem.

The Minister has given us very meagre information. He has made no attempt to tell the House over what period he hopes to spend the £1,100,000. What are the prospects of an immediate start on house building? Surely he is in a position to give the House more information on that matter?

So far as the £120,000 for farm improvement schemes is concerned, it is to meet a deficit of £60,000 from last year, and to meet £60,000 for this year, as the sum estimated originally was not sufficient to cover the enormous increase in applications. I think that at the present time, while conditions are favourable to the farmer, it is sound policy to encourage him to make all the improvements he can, particularly in relation to drainage, reclamation and farm roads, before any depression occurs. The moment there is depression, it is inevitable that these improvement schemes will fall off. Anything we can afford to spend in that way now will be a sound investment.

In the matter of production, evidently the Minister has not given consideration as to how we could spend a capital sum to stimulate production. I do not know whether he has given any examination to the condition of the arable land, which has stood up to a severe strain in the emergency period in the production of our cereal requirements. Has he given any consideration to the condition of the soil, how far we have depressed fertility, and how far it would be necessary for the State to take responsibility in that connection?

If, as a result of any depression that has occurred in fertility, production is reduced, it will be a very serious matter for the State. In the last analysis, we all live out of the national pool of production. We can have very fine social schemes and we can plan for social improvements, but it is out of the national pool of production that all have to be met.

An Ceann Comhairle

That is a bit wide of this Vote.

Mr. Hughes

I suggest it is not.

An Ceann Comhairle

It relates more to agriculture.

Mr. Hughes

We are spending £120,000 on farm improvement schemes.

An Ceann Comhairle

The matters to which the Deputy is referring might be more relevant to the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. Hughes

We are providing £120,000 for farm improvement schemes. The Minister has earmarked less than half of £5,000,000, and surely he expects some suggestions from the House as to how he might spend that sum. It would be very peculiar if the Minister went out of the House with the feeling that the House is barren of any ideas. I am merely stressing how we should spend the sum that is provided for the transition period. We ought not to overlook one primary consideration, and that is, how we can permanently step up production. If we could do that, it would help the national income and it would have a definite bearing on our capacity to provide social amenities in the matter of housing and other things. I understand the Minister was contemplating the provision of £1,000,000 out of this sum for the relief of rates. We were definitely given to understand that, because of a surplus likely to accrue from the Budget, £1,000,000 would be provided. It is obvious the Minister is barren of any constructive ideas. He is now going to earmark £1,000,000 out of this fund. Surely it is time for the House to wake up and say that if this is to be a transition fund to help to start housing activities and other State activities, it ought not to be earmarked for that sort of thing when we can make provision out of savings and when the Minister has already informed the House that he has made provision out of savings for that £1,000,000 that he is now providing in the way of relief. It ought not to be spent for that purpose, and I believe the Minister ought to be able to find other places where he can usefully and beneficially spend the money.

The Minister mentioned water and sewerage, and again he was unable to give the House any information as to the extent to which money is to be provided to help local authorities in their activities in that respect and over what period it is likely to be spent. The Minister ought to be in a position to give us more detailed information. The question of rural electrification, again, has to be examined. We all appreciate the difficulties that confront the Electricity Supply Board in the matter of securing supplies of poles and wire for rural electrification but, having regard to the present rationing of electricity and to the fact that consumers who have been connected since 1941 have a very low ration, it is hardly possible to extend the network until our output has considerably increased. The whole situation is very vague and very fluid. We do not know where we are and the Minister, apparently, is not in a position to provide us with very much information.

In regard to the few points that I have raised, I would ask the Minister, when replying, as far as possible to give us the information we are looking for. I am particularly anxious that something should be done by way of capital provision to ensure that there will be a definite and permanent stepping up of our productive capacity. I submit that it is a vital and a very important consideration if our commitments and administrative costs are very high. The question of the real national income ought to be ever present to our minds and the financial provision that can be made for purchasing or helping to purchase substantially increased quantities of artificial manures for the purpose of correcting soil conditions to whatever degree they have been impaired during the emergency. That matter ought to receive the careful consideration of the Government. Every effort should be made to secure substantially increased supplies of essential fertilisers.

Mr. Cogan

I was not present when the Minister was introducing the Vote and as I anticipate that some of the matters which we are discussing now may arise again on the Estimate for the Taoiseach's Department next week, I shall be rather brief. One of the main purposes to which the money allocated under this Vote will be devoted is the provision of additional grants to local authorities for housing, in order to offset increased costs. That is desirable and will meet with the unanimous approval of the House. I think a question arises here as to whether we intend, as I hope we do, to bring grants to local authorities to a level which will mean that the State will be paying the same proportion of the costs post-war as they paid pre-war. Then there is a case for reviewing the whole position of housing grants to private individuals. We all realise that grants to private persons engaged in housing, pre-war, were inadequate and compared very unfavourably with the grants made to local authorities. I am not suggesting that a private person building a house should receive the same proportion of the costs from the State as a local authority receives, but such a person is entitled to a higher proportion than was given pre-war. Certainly, the grants should be reviewed in the light of increasing costs.

In the pre-war period a £40 grant to a small farmer for reconstruction of a dwelling-house was very beneficial. Advantage was taken of those grants to a great extent and a great deal of useful work was carried out. It seems to me, however, in view of the increased costs, that increased grants should be given. Then there is the case of farmers whose valuation was over the maximum that would qualify for a grant. As there is a special fund now being set up, some part of it should be used for the benefit of those people. The Minister, when he travels throughout rural Ireland, must be struck by the inadequate and inferior housing accommodation available for a large percentage of farmers. That applies not merely to small farmers but to farmers up to £50 and £60 valuation. Their housing accommodation is altogether inadequate and the assistance they can receive at present from the State is not sufficient to induce or enable them to provide better accommodation. Something should be done to meet the just claims of these people, particularly as an attempt is being made to meet the difficulties of local authorities.

The provision of grants to supplement the farm improvements scheme is very desirable. It is very beneficial that the State should undertake half the cost of works under this scheme. The results have been satisfactory, and I think it a very useful purpose to which to apply this fund. There are, however, as the Minister must know, big areas of land which require reclamation, drainage and improvement, the owners of which cannot undertake the work, even with a grant of 50 per cent. An idea which has often occurred to me is that where there are large areas of such land, the State should be prepared to purchase it, to reclaim it and improve it, and then make it available for distribution. That is a work which, if undertaken, would provide a large amount of employment, and would add to the total area of land available for agricultural purposes and for distribution to economic holders. A big scheme and a far-reaching scheme is urgently needed in regard to such land, and if the State were prepared to pay a reasonable price for inferior land of that type, to take it over, reclaim it, improve it and drain it, a great deal would be added to the productive capacity of the State.

As we are providing a large sum of money for what is known as the transitional period, it is no harm to direct the Minister's attention to particular lines of development. Another matter to which the Minister referred was that of further assistance to local authorities in regard to the provision of sewerage and waterworks. The same considerations apply there as apply to housing. Why should the private individual, living in a rural area, who requires to embark on expenditure in order to improve the amenities of his home, not be treated at least as generously as the local authorities are treated with regard to urban sewerage and waterworks? The main point to which I want to direct the Minister's attention is that, if he is giving additional grants to a particular section of the community, he must be impartial and absolutely fair, and distribute these grants equitably as between one type of citizen and another in respect of similar services.

Mr. Byrne

I welcome the Minister's statement that it is intended to increase the grants to local authorities for housing, but the Minister has not given us any idea of what the rents of these houses are likely to be. I want to remind him that cottages which cost the municipality £400 to build ten years ago cost £800 to-day, and I express the hope that the grant which he will make towards each house will be commensurate with the increase in the cost of building and of acquiring sites and that he will not be niggardly in the distribution of this £1,000,000 grant to local authorities.

The housing position is almost indescribable at present because of the inability of the municipalities to get materials for carrying on their housing schemes. In addition to encouraging municipal authorities, I ask the Minister to go a step farther and to extend these grants to public utility societies and to any person who will put a roof on a house. I ask him to give every encouragement to those who engage in this great national work, because the position, so far as Dublin is concerned, is appalling. The old houses are falling down and new ones are not going up rapidly enough to take their places. In addition, the increasing population, due to people coming from all parts of Ireland into Dublin, has put the idea of getting a flat or a cottage completely out of the minds of thousands of people who are anxious to set up homes of their own.

I therefore ask the Minister to do his utmost to encourage not only existing public utility societies but the starting of new public utility societies, and, in this respect, I think the parish councils have lost glorious opportunities. The parish council idea was a splendid idea, but it did not appear to be taken up very seriously in many parts of the country. I think the feeling was that their powers were too restricted, but I suggest that, where parish councils can put up proposals for housing, they should get every encouragement.

I should like to know also if the Minister proposes to allow any of this money to be used for a differential renting scheme. The municipality of Dublin has at present in mind a scheme for the differentiation of rents in cases where men fall sick or become unemployed. We have a number of people in sanatoria and the Minister for Local Government has urged—local bodies have agreed, and other authorities have recommended—that, while a man is in a sanatorium, he should not have to worry about the fear of eviction or the fact that his rent is running up. Public men in Dublin feel that that differentiation in rents should be made, but it gives rise to a new problem. When the contract is made and the tenants go into the house at a fixed rent, when that rent has to be reduced to enable the tenant to pay his way, the problem arises: out of what fund is the loss to be met? I think the Minister might agree that that loss might be met out of this fund.

In cases where a mother becomes a widow or a man becomes a patient in a sanatorium and is unable to pay the full rent, there ought to be a fund at the disposal of the public authority out of which the difference could be made up, so as to avoid imposing further burdens on those who are already in houses in respect of a differentiation of rent. When a man has to go to hospital, and when the Government has in mind certain social services, that man should not be worried to any extent because he is not able to pay rent while he is away. This is an opportunity for stating that, out of some of this money, municipalities and local authorities could make up the difference that arises in connection with the renting of houses in such cases. I put that point to the Minister, so that he may consider it when he comes to make allocations from this fund for houses and flats.

It is not known to many that old tenements that have fallen into decay have been converted into four flats. I wonder if the Minister is aware that it costs £1,000 to make a tenement habitable for four families. It represents more than the cost of four cottages on the outskirts of a city. I want to say that I am in favour of conversion schemes. I am in favour of flats in cities near people's work and at rents that they can pay. If they have to travel long distances and pay high transport charges, it is only adding to their burdens, and means taking something off the breakfast table.

I appeal to the Minister to see that the grants he will make to local authorities will be substantial, and that power will be given to take from such grants any loss that would be incurred by the reduction of rents of tenants who are not able to pay what they undertook to pay. It was appropriately stated by the Minister for Local Government that he proposed to allow £100 for the provision of an additional room in houses where there were tuberculosis patients. Owing to the way tenements are constructed in Dublin it is not possible to put up additional rooms for that purpose. For that reason I hope the Minister will consider the point I made in reference to a differentiation in rents.

I welcome this measure, but I impress upon the Government the necessity of bearing in mind the increased cost of materials for house building. That is imposing a burden on the ratepayers that they will not be able to stand much longer. There is a huge demand for houses in Dublin. They would want to be provided by the wave of a wand. Meanwhile, people are being evicted.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is straying now.

Mr. Byrne

I only want to show the need of getting houses put up quickly and giving more money for doing so.

Mr. Cosgrave

There are so many different purposes for which this Transition Development Fund could be sought, that I have some sympathy with the Department of Finance in deciding to what purposes it will be devoted. It is generally agreed that the most necessary purpose is the provision of houses. I see the housing problem in this light, that the first responsibility of the State is the provision of houses for those who are unable to provide for themselves, namely, subsidised houses.

In the past the subsidy for these houses was, in most cases, fairly generous, and considerably assisted local authorities, but since the war the cost of building has risen so steeply, coupled with the scarcity of materials, that it is difficult to forecast what the housing problem will mean for local authorities. Dublin Corporation floated a loan for housing at a cheap rate. As the House is aware that will partially meet the problem in the city. In County Dublin, where the county council proposes to build 1,400 houses, it is essential that they should float a loan due to the substantial increase in the cost of building.

While that is the position as far as subsidised houses are concerned, the Minister is aware of the fact that before the war a depositor who went to a building society got a loan for the building of a house by putting down an amount in the region of £100. He was then facilitated by the building society and secured a fairly decent sized house. The position now is that building societies expect a deposit of about £300 and, with the continued high rate of interest, I cannot see how a depositor, considering the depreciation in the value of money, can afford to pay such a large deposit. I want to know from the Minister what proposal the Government has to meet the position of a person, who is between the subsidised class in the community and others able to provide for themselves. I refer to a person who is prepared to pay a deposit, or alternatively prepared to pay a rent, in excess of the rent charged by a local authority but who, as a result of the Rent Restrictions Act, cannot get accommodation. The effect of the Rent Restrictions Act at present is that no builder will build houses for letting purposes. It does not pay a builder at the present time to build houses for letting. All the builders with whom I have come in contact, or about whom I have learned anything, have all decided that the minute they have finished their houses they will put them up for auction. While that is desirable from the point of view of allowing people to purchase their own houses, it has the obvious disadvantage that the person who is unable to purchase a house for himself and who cannot, in so far as his immediate needs are concerned, put down sufficient money to purchase a house, finds himself faced with the problem that he is ineligible to receive a house from the local authority and is unable to purchase a house, or put down a deposit, to a building society. I would like to hear what proposals the Government can put forward to meet that situation.

That situation has been considerably aggravated by the war, on the one hand, and by the depreciation in money and the fact that wages and salaries have not been raised commensurate with the increase in costs and, on the other hand, by the reduced building which has taken place and by the fact that a considerable number of people have got married since the war and are now looking for houses—people who formerly did not require them. In other words, there is a vicious circle which prevents quite a large section of the community, who are unable to provide wholly for themselves, but who would be prepared to make some contribution, becoming entitled to local authority assistance.

I would like to hear what view the Minister has in regard to that. I would also like to know if he is now in a position to say whether the Government proposes to tackle the problem of the high rates of interest charged by building societies. That may be slightly outside the scope of this Transition Development Fund, but it has some bearing on it. The banks have agreed to facilitate the Government and local authorities and, in most cases, these are being facilitated by a low rate of interest so far as building is concerned. The only people who are not facilitating the borrowers are the building societies. I would like to hear the Government's view on it.

I am not sure whether the £1,000,000, which is mentioned in the Budget statement in relief of rates, is to come out of savings or out of the Transition Development Fund. If it is to come out of savings, I take it the £1,000,000 now is additional and there will be altogether £2,000,000 in relief of rates. I would like to impress upon the Minister that, if rates rise in the next year as they have risen in the past year, particularly in view of the pending enactment of two Bills, the Local Government Bill and the Public Health Bill, it is reasonable to assume a very rapid increase in rates will take place. If the total relief of rates this year amounts to £1,000,000 the Minister might well consider devoting another £1,000,000 from this fund in order to reduce the burden on the ratepayers. I think these are the two principal problems. Certainly, for the next two years the largest problem facing any local authority, or the largest problem facing the country, is the question of housing, and I think no effort should be spared to reduce the burden on the local authority and on private builders in this matter.

Mr. Allen

There is just one matter which I wish to raise in respect of this fund. Will any portion of this sum be allocated for the purpose of sanitation and water schemes to local authorities or will cognisance be taken in that respect of grants that were given previously to local authorities by the Department of Local Government in regard to such schemes? Formerly, the local authority, who undertook a water or sanitation scheme, received a grant amounting to 40 per cent. of the capital cost. Will that grant be given in the future, or is it proposed to supplement it out of this fund? Is the fund merely for the purpose of subsidising or helping to reduce the cost of building?

Deputy Cosgrave mentioned the problem in regard to private builders. The problem is there, but it is also there in respect of small holdings to which a reconstruction grant of £25 was hitherto applicable. There is a huge number of these holdings which are badly in need of reconstruction and improvement. Every day there are inquiries from these holders as to the possibility of some grant being made available to them for improvements, Perhaps the Minister could make available some portion of the £5,000,000 in this respect. It would be a very desirable thing to do and it would confer a benefit on a worthy section of the community. It would also be desirable to make some portion of the fund available to the private builder, particularly if the private builder is going to be called upon to help in solving the housing problem. Like the local authority, he would need a larger grant in the future to encourage him to build. I do not quite understand what Deputy Cosgrave means when he says the Rent Restrictions Act prevents the private builder building at the moment.

Mr. Cosgrave

It does not prevent him building but it forces him to sell when he does build. Private builders will not let houses.

Mr. Allen

As far as I know, the Rent Restrictions Act does not apply to new houses. If I build a house in the morning the Rent Restrictions Act does not prevent me fixing a rent which will compensate me for the cost of building.

Mr. Cosgrave

It would not affect you for a year or so, but it would not pay you to continue.

Mr. Allen

The rent is fixed by the court. It will not be based on the 1914 rent.

Mr. Cosgrave

It is based on 1941.

Mr. Allen

The cost can be taken into consideration by the judge in fixing the rent. However, I am mainly interested in the subsidy towards sanitation and water schemes.

Mr. O'Donnell

I had not the pleasure of being in the House when this was introduced, but I got the sense of the debate from a confrére. I understand that the principal objects are water, electricity and drainage. I congratulate the Minister on his efforts in this direction. In connection with the grants for repairs to farmers' houses, I noticed in the papers in the last few days that the Parnell celebrations are about to take place. In his native county, Wicklow, there are a number of houses being built for agricultural labourers, together with houses in the urban areas. It was the idea of Parnell and his colleagues to build cottages for the agricultural workers. The result of that policy was that it was possible to keep the agricultural labourers on the land. In my young days I saw them knocking down a good many of those cottages. If things continue as they are at present there will be nobody left on the land. Everybody is moving to the cities and towns. Some people say that the cities and towns are becoming top heavy.

An Ceann Comhairle

What about the Vote now, Deputy?

Mr. O'Donnell

Yes. I am really speaking on the Vote. Unless you make rural life more attractive you will not be able to keep the people on the land. I congratulate the Minister in connection with the suggestion for water schemes. I noticed in the Census we were required to give some data in connection with water and sanitation. There were eight or ten questions relative to the water supply and sanitation.

An Ceann Comhairle

What about relative to this Bill?

Mr. O'Donnell

This is mentioned— the necessity for water in rural areas. I am speaking on that matter. We have here water, electricity and drainage. There was a time when fixity of tenure, fair rent and free sale were called the Magna Charta of the Irish farmers. The present Magna Charta of the Irish farmers—it is not, perhaps, so alliterative—is water, electricity and arterial drainage. They are most important, and I congratulate the Minister on the assistance he proposes to give in that direction.

It has been mentioned in this House by a Parliamentary Secretary that £1,750,000 had been spent on regional schemes in three years. The estimate for Scotland, which. in area and other matters, resembles our country very much, is £8,000,000. The majority and minority reports of the Agricultural Commission recommended an adequate national survey of the watertables with a view to having an adequate supply of pure water in every rural area. I do not know that the Government has gone as far as they should in their regional scheme. A national survey is required. Where you have a regional survey, you have people living on parallel roads and roads at right angles clamouring out for water. We have a case in Tipperary like that where the water is coming from the Galtees. There are people on 20 adjoining roads requiring water. It is Ireland's greatest need at the moment. The Census returns will reveal that. Two Deputies, not members of my Party, made a tour of my constituency when travelling to and from a congress in Killarney. They told me that some Deputies thought I exaggerated this matter, but they had travelled, through 40 miles of my constituency and found that I had not exaggerated. The regional schemes are very laudable and good. I am not boasting of it, but I was the first to suggest in this House the provision of a water supply for rural areas. As a result it was taken up by Lord Beaverbrook and his syndicate of papers and it is being put into operation in Great Britain. I suggest that the regional survey will not be a success. We need a national survey and we should get it. I would put the provision of a pure water supply for the rural areas before the rural electricity scheme and the arterial drainage scheme. If you give a rural dweller his choice he will elect for a pure water supply and stick to paraffin and candles.

At present the farm labourers' wage is £114 a year. That is nothing to boast of. If a labourer is employed on a farm at drawing water with a horse and cart and barrel for a quarter of a day, that amounts to £28 a year. The horse, cart and harness, etc., would come to another £28. If he is at it for half a day it means another £28.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy should deal with this Vote.

Mr. O'Donnell

Regional schemes are mentioned in this Vote.

An Ceann Comhairle

That does not justify a rehash of what the Deputy said on another Estimate.

Mr. O'Donnell

Each Deputy can relate it to his own area.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy must relate it to the Vote and what he desires to be done with the £5,000,000, without going into details.

Mr. O'Donnell

I suggest that the regional scheme will not be the success the Minister thinks it will be, although I partly approved of it. It is not grappling with the question as it should be grappled with. The matter should be tackled in a broad national way.

Major de Valera

I do not intend to take up very much of the time of the House on this Estimate, but I should like to suggest to the Minister for consideration certain problems that have arisen in or about the City of Dublin which are difficult of solution at the present moment. The Minister, of course, and everybody else here are aware that there has been a relatively big expansion of the outskirts of the city and, in particular, of areas like Cabra and similar areas on the south side, which grow up relatively quickly. Large numbers of people were transported or transposed into these areas. A lot of that development took place during the war years and under conditions where schemes for building and developing new areas were seriously handicapped. The result is that at the present moment you have in these areas virtually new towns, new urban districts, attached to the city. But these districts are lacking in certain amenities which are more or less necessary to them for normal functioning.

I should like to suggest to the Minister that possibly some of the moneys to be allocated under this Vote could be very usefully spent in dealing with the problems in these areas. Take a place like West Cabra. It is virtually a new town. It is far enough from the city to be self-contained, and it must be self-contained in regard to shopping facilities, dispensary facilities, and that kind of thing. On the other hand, because it is near Dublin and is part of Dublin it will have to be developed as if it were a part of Dublin, not as if it were a country town, so to speak. One of the difficulties that arises is the provision of sufficient school accommodation.

I am informed that in some of these areas the question of developing recreational facilities for the children is somewhat urgent. There is the question of medical facilities, the provision of an adequate number of dispensary centres and child welfare centres and things of that nature. Then there is the transport problem. For instance, a large number of workers in these areas have to come into the city or have to go to other out-lying parts to work. The difficulty is that workers in the south city, say, in the Rathfarnham area, under the present transport arrangements have to come into the centre of the city and then go out again. It is particularly awkward for workers who have to go from Cabra to the south city. A more direct route would be better; for instance, a route right across by Manor Street, crossing the river somewhere about the Kingsbridge, and then going into the Crumlin area. I might be very well asked what this has to do with the scheme.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair was on the point of so inquiring.

Major de Valera

The point I am making is that under this transitional development scheme there is room for the development of cross-arteries or boulevards. That is what I am really driving at. I am suggesting that a certain amount should be spent in Dublin. We must remember that Dublin is absorbing a large number of people from the country and it is continually growing.

Mr. O'Donnell

And absorbing money from the country, too.

Major de Valera

I would like to mention, in connection with these transitional development schemes, that there are districts around Dublin which should be considered. As an example, I am suggesting that schemes to develop transverse communications, which are singularly lacking in this city, would be very desirable. Up to 20 years ago Dublin was a relatively small city. Because of the addition of Crumlin, Cabra, Killester, Mount Merrion and other areas, not only has it grown in population, but its area has grown. Nevertheless, the old communications exist and the whole tendency is to come to the centre. It is not sufficient for the city, as it stands, to converge on the centre and diverge out again and I make the plea for the outlying areas of Dublin.

I know the Minister cannot do everything we ask. He has a certain amount at his disposal and his problem is to make the best of it. We understand that, and we know that he will consider these things sympathetically. I plead for these areas, just as Deputy O'Donnell is pleading for adequate water supplies throughout the country.

Mr. Aiken

No matter what may be the type of public development for which a local authority gets a grant from the Exchequer, additional grants can be given in order to cover the abnormal expenses due to the present high cost of materials. That would apply to the development of roads, sewerage, housing and all other types of development, but, of course, out of this fund we will not give grants to substitute what local authorities should do themselves—substitute the money which they should raise and spend themselves.

I tried to give in the Budget speech, and since, some idea of how this Transition Fund might be used for development purposes. I pointed out that the reason it was being brought in and that moneys were being provided in this form was because I could not foresee exactly the schemes which might be put forward, on which it would be spent. I gave some schemes like housing and farm improvements. To-day I give a few more, such as sewerage, waterworks and rural electrification. Deputy Dockrell and others are not satisfied with the examples I gave. They want me to give in detail an indication of how £5,000,000 will be spent. I cannot give them that; I cannot even say whether it will be all spent or not. All I can say is that if public authorities and State and semi-State organisations have schemes which they want to carry out, and which have been held up because of transitional difficulties and the high cost of materials, I am prepared to help them out of this fund in the next couple of years, and this year, to the extent of £5,000,000 out of this particular Vote.

However, Deputy Dockrell is not satisfied and he wants me to treat the problem in a more normal way, as he says. If the problem were normal I would treat it in a normal way. I am reminded of the late Father O'Flanagan's story. When, with a friend, he was going along a road he saw a man being chased by a bull. The man was defending himself with a graip. Father O'Flanagan's friend said to the man: "It is a shame for you to use the prongs of the graip on the poor old bull. Why do you not use the other end of the graip?""I will," said the man in the field, "if the bull attacks me with the other end." If the problems were facing me in a normal fashion, I would tackle them in a normal way, and the normal way for providing funds for various purposes is to give a detailed Estimate to the Dáil in advance as to how it is proposed to spend the money. It is because I could not give that detailed Estimate, and because the Departments were not in a position to do it when preparing the Estimate, that I brought it forward in this particular form.

There were very few additional suggestions made on this Vote as to how we should spend this money. There were some proposals upon which we could not spend money out of this Vote because at the present time there are no public funds being devoted to the purposes suggested. Somebody wanted to spend money developing sites for private builders. There is no sum being spent out of public funds for that purpose, so that we could not do anything for it. We can, however, provide, and always have provided, for development work in relation to schemes of houses for public authorities. A fair amount of that was done during the war out of the ordinary unemployment schemes Vote and I promised in the Budget speech that if local authorities would carry on building houses, even if they were not in a position to complete them to the point at which they could give them over to tenants, that I would, out of the Transition Fund, carry the capital charges until they were in a position to complete them and have them ready for renting.

Deputy Dockrell wanted me to say that we should give to local authorities a certain percentage of the sums they spend on houses over 50 per cent. addition on pre-war costs. A 50 per cent. addition on pre-war costs or a percentage above that, if it were a fixed percentage, might have the result of giving too much to certain local authorities and not enough to others. I think it is more fair to say to local authorities: "Get your tenders. If the tenders are reasonable we are prepared to give you a grant out of the Transition Fund which will so reduce the charges on that house as to bring it within the power of the incoming tenant to pay having regard to the current level of wages." I have nothing against the speculative builder, as Deputy Dockrell seemed to allege. All the local authorities, I think, take advantage of the ordinary private builder to get houses built. Very few local authorities build houses by direct labour. Private enterprise is being enlisted in the building of houses for local authorities.

In regard to the other question of giving additional facilities to speculative builders to build houses for sale, I do not know that this is the time to encourage that over much. With the shortage of materials, additional grants to private people for the building of houses by themselves or through the speculative builder, will simply have the result of increasing competition for the restricted amount of material and have the effect of increasing the cost of house building. If, however, materials became freely available it would be a different matter.

Deputy Allen was not present when I introduced the Estimate. We do propose to give to local authorities for sewerage and water schemes an additional grant beyond the 40 per cent. up to £40 that has been given heretofore. The Minister for Local Government and I are in consultation about that at the moment and we will be able to make an announcement to the local authorities in regard to it.

Mr. Allen

Forty per cent. was given in the past up to any sum, even on a £20,000 scheme.

Mr. Aiken

I mean per house. I think there was some limit per house, too, in the scheme.

Mr. Allen

Yes.

Mr. Aiken

I forget what the figure was. However, we are considering it and any local authority who has a proposition to put forward should go ahead and have the plans in order. I will say a word now to Deputy O'Donnell. There is nothing to prevent a local authority going ahead and providing water. There is nothing in the law that stops them from doing so. I do not know what grants they get normally from the Department of Local Government for such schemes, but if the normal grant is not sufficient to encourage them to undertake the work and if there are additional costs due to the emergency and they want an extra grant out of the Transition Fund, we will help them out of that fund to go ahead with the work of providing and extending the water supply, rather than have them waiting and putting it on the long finger.

Deputy Byrne talked about differential rents. The differential rent idea could only be worked by the local authority. This Transition Fund is to reduce the rents of houses now being built or to be built in future to such a figure as will be reasonable, having regard to the existing level of wages. If there is a catastrophic decline in the income of some family due to disease or accident or similar cause, the local authority will have to chip in to help. That is what they are there to do. That is one of their functions.

Mr. Byrne

Out of what fund?

Mr. Aiken

If the local authority want to subsidise the rent or to pay the rent for some person, they pay it out of their rates. If the local authority wants to do it I think it is right that they should do it themselves rather than that they should be the agency simply for distributing an unlimited amount of State funds. We would very soon get rid of all the State funds we had or could collect in that system.

Vote put and agreed to.

Vote reported and agreed to.

The Dáil adjourned at 7.50 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 2nd July, 1946.