Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 26 Nov 1980

Vol. 324 No. 8

Building Societies (Amendment) Bill. 1980: Committee Stage (Resumed) and Final Stages.

Question again proposed: "That section 2 stand part of the Bill."

Minister for the Environment (Mr. R. Burke)

Deputy Fitzpatrick and Deputy Tully suggested in their contributions that the present mortgage rate should be subsidised by the Government. Let me remind the House how the subsidy which this Bill provides for came about.

Arising from a proposal by the Irish Building Societies Association in April this year to recommend to their members an immediate increase in their mortgage and interest rates, the Government decided, on foot of a report by a working group set up to examine the matter, to subsidise the interest rates by 1.75 per cent. The circumstances obtaining at the time were that inflows to societies were at such a low level that the Government accepted that there was justification for an immediate increase in the investment rate to enable societies to retain even their existing funds, not to mention attract new funds.

The Government's action had the effect of pegging the mortgage interest rate at 14.5 per cent. Without a subsidy all mortgagees would have had to pay 16.5 per cent. Subsequent reductions in interest rates generally and a substantial increase in the inflow to societies in the months July to September made it possible for the subsidy to be terminated with effect from 1 October. The high rate of inflow has continued throughout October and the early part of this month. The Deputies are now suggesting that the mortgage interest rate should be reduced by way of a further subsidy. I agree that the rate should be reduced but I do not agree that that should be brought about by an injection of public money into societies. The circumstances applying now are quite different from those which applied when the subsidy was introduced as is evidenced by the very high inflow of funds to societies in recent months and the continued general downward trend in the interest rates of other investment agencies.

Deputies are aware that I have urged strongly on societies to effect a reduction without delay in their mortgage interest rates, in view of the present healthy state of their net inflows and in view of the discrepancy between their present interest rates and those of other financial institutions. In these circumstances it makes little sense to talk of a further Government subsidy. The societies' representatives for their part have undertaken to consider these points at their next council meeting in early December and to inform me without delay of the outcome. Societies have been made aware that the Government will have to give serious consideration to failure on their part to respond in a positive manner to the Government's request for a reduction in their interest rates. I was interested to hear a representative of the societies' association on the radio on Sunday indicating that they would respond to the Government's initiative in this matter at an early date. I hope that it will be an early date.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): It is the desire and ambition of all of us to see the mortgage interest rate brought down. We are not in dispute with the Minister about that. That is common case and I wish the Minister luck in his negotiations and trust that they will end in a reduction of interest rates.

However, I share with him also the view that the present rate of interest, 14.15 per cent which is a record, is too high. I was taking this opportunity of suggesting to the Minister that if it is not possible to persuade the building societies and if the building societies can convince him that the result of a reduction in the mortgage interest rate would be a reduction in the deposit rate with a reduction in the inflow of deposits, then the Minister should subsidise. That is the case we make and it is clear.

I understand that in the month of October something like £18,330 million was invested as compared with £18,215 million in September and £17.289 million in August in what are known as the big five. It is not my business here to make a case for the building societies and I am not doing that. I am sure that they are well able to look after themselves; they are professional people at this sort of business and if they reduce their interest I will be happy. If they can convince the Minister that the end result of a reduction of the lending rate would be a reduction in the deposit rate, a reduction in deposits and a falling off in the amount available for house building, then the Minister should bring about a reduction by a subsidy. That is all I have to say on that.

Mr. Tully

What Deputy Fitzpatrick has said makes a lot of sense. Not alone is the interest rate being charged by the building societies the highest ever, it is an appallingly high rate. I do not want the Minister by waving a big stick — which could turn out to be a very small switch — to try to enforce a reduction. The authority which the Government have over the building societies, apart from doing something about the question of income tax, is not very much. I would hate to see action taken for the purpose of getting publicity and giving the impression that the Government are doing something. The result would be that very much less would be available for house-building.

Despite the Minister's statement to the effect that the house-building industry is in a tremendous position and doing very well and there would be record house-building this year. I was informed by the CIF only 10 minutes ago that that is not so. They believe, as I do, that every assistance that can be given must be given to the house-building industry. I am glad that the banks did as I suggested here on the Second Reading of this Bill. Obviously the Minister has prodded them into coming up with an extra £20 million. I am glad that the Minister apparently has taken the hint and has got at least that much done, and there are other sources from which he can get money.

As far as the building societies are concerned, with the present cost of building a house and, therefore, the present high cost of borrowing for the purpose of building a house, the number of loans being given are not nearly as much as would be required to keep the building industry and the supply of houses in a healthy state. As Deputy Fitzpatrick has said, it is not purpose to try to make a case for the building societies but there is an onus on us to ensure that they do not, as a result of some action mistakenly taken and by being able to say, as they have done previously, that they are closing their books, that there will be no loans available for a period or that they require a person to have £1,000 on deposit for a year or two before giving a loan. Some people — not only the Minister's party — seem to imagine that the building societies are financed by wealthy people — but it is my experience and belief that they are mainly financed by small savers, people who put in a small amount of money and leave it there because it is handy as much as anything else. For that reason we should be very careful about how we handle building societies.

I think the Government made a mistake in removing the subsides so quickly. I know they are very short of money and saving the subsidy on interest was one way of economising but I doubt if it was a wise decision. If the Minister has the figures available now for the actual number of loans issued this year month by month as compared with last year I should like him to let me have them. If he has not the figures now perhaps he could let me know later. That would make a very interesting comparison. We have heard of the increase up to now in money invested in building societies but traditionally from now until about February the movement is the other way. People seem to consider that around Christmas the money should be taken out of building societies and the net inflow is likely to drop considerably. For God's sake, let us not create the situation where the relatively small amount of money going to house building will be cut again.

On the Second Reading I mentioned — I do not know if anything has been done about it — that I would like the Minister to let me have his views on this: I consider that if the building societies are not competing with each other for money it is wrong that they should spend so much money, not so much on advertising although some of them are spending a lot more than they should on advertising, but in subsidising certain sporting events in a big way. That is very galling to the person paying 14.15 per cent on a building society loan. The societies have not been given money to give it away and that in effect is what is being done. They are supposed to be non-profit making and to be there for the purpose of assisting people to build houses and in no way should they be entitled to do this other sort of thing. All of us are interested in seeing a flow of money for house building. Local authority houses are not being built; SDA loans are not available. They have been promised but the money has not been forthcoming and I suppose that at most about 50 per cent of the money required by local authorities has been made available in the case of any that I know of. In case the Minister is doubtful about the number of local authority houses being built this year, most authorities are down to less then 100 and God knows what will happen next year.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is getting away from the section before us.

Mr. Tully

I should like to make the argument that if we are talking about building society loans now we must compare it with the situation when ample housing finance was available from other sources. I suggest it is within the Rules of Order to say that if money is not available for SDA, local authority houses or other building, the building societies will have a very big drain on them.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We are dealing with building societies, their interest rates on loans and their money in this section.

Mr. Tully

With all due respect, I do not agree that we should be put into a straitjacket to please anybody. This Bill deals with building society money for house building and it must be affected by the flow of money from other sources. If the money is not coming from other sources the drain on the building societies must be very much heavier. It would be foolish and stupid if in this House we were confined to talking about something in a watertight compartment——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy knows possibly better than the Chair that on a section of the Bill in Committee one can only deal with what is in the section.

Mr. Tully

Your ruling, which I must accept if you insist on it, seems to suggest that we should simply say that the building societies collect money and give some of it for the purpose of building houses by means of loans.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair will give Deputy Tully every latitude but we cannot go over the whole building industry when we are dealing with a particular section of a Bill.

Mr. Tully

You are not giving me very much latitude now if you want to rule out my comparison with the situation when there was adequate money available under other headings for house building. If you are ruling that it is wrong for me to compare a situation now when that money is not available with the situation existing when the money was available, I think your ruling is unfair. However the facts are that the building societies are now charging 14.15 per cent interest. I consider that excessive. It would not be so high if the Government had not taken away the subsidy which they were giving until October. If that had continued the present rate could be reduced by that amount. The Minister should be satisfied that whatever he does about the interest rate, if he is persuading the societies to reduce it themselves, should not be done in such a way as to affect the amount of money available for building houses over a two-year period.

The cost of building the ordinary three-bedroom house, as the Minister knows, has increased from about £13,000 to approximately £27,000. That means that people borrowing money must borrow very much more — if they can get it — than they would borrow two or three years ago. To compare the amount of money now going into the societies with the amount being taken in two or three years ago does not give the whole picture.

Can the Minister tell me the number of loans issued? I think that is the whole question. I would be very glad to see the interest rate being charged to borrowers substantially reduced but I would be very careful about considering whether such a reduction would affect the amount of money available to lend to borrowers. There are two types of people, those who want loans and those who have loans. Those who want loans, particularly those who have to go to a bank for bridging money do not know the facts always and think if they can get money and build a house that is all that matters with the result that their outlook is entirely different from that of a person living in a house and who has a building society loan and is unable to repay it with interest. Very little can be done about this but it is our desire and, I am sure, the Minister's, to try to keep the rate of interest to borrowers as low as possible. If it cannot be done by the building societies then the onus is back on the Government; they must do it.

Mr. D'Arcy

There are one or two points I wish to bring to the Minister's notice regarding loans and building societies. First, there is the question of paying out portion of the loan by instalments. The majority of building societies absolutely insist on paying the loans only when the person goes to reside in the House. I should like the Minister to comment on the suggestion that building societies should be forced by legislation to pay out portion of the loan after a certain part of the work has been completed because people are being forced to go to the banks for bridging loans which are very costly.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is bringing in matters that are not relevant to the section; it deals only with the question of a subsidy in respect of interest on loans. The section is only authorising the Minister to pay this subsidy in certain circumstances. We cannot go into the whole area of the administration of these subsidies.

Mr. D'Arcy

If we are paying subsidies, should the Minister not have some control as to how the building societies operate in respect of loans? Another matter that concerns me relates to the privileged position of the building societies compared with the other money-lending agencies. We must give the Minister credit for requesting the societies to reduce their interest rates but so far there has been a more or less negative response to his request. The societies are talking in terms of a possible reduction of 1 per cent but such a reduction would still leave them in a privileged position. The Minister has referred to the possibility of bringing in certain legislation. He would be correct in doing that and I should like to hear of his plans in this regard and what would be the position vis-à-vis other money lenders.

Minister for the Environment (Mr. R. Burke)

Deputy Tully painted a picture of gloom as to the state of the house-building industry, but then the Deputy would be familiar with a situation of gloom because of his having presided over the Department at a time when the building industry experienced one of its roughest periods.

Mr. Tully

A record number of houses was built at that time.

Mr. R. Burke

In the first ten months of 1980, using the exact system of calculation as was used by Deputy Tully——

Mr. Tully

It has been changed.

Mr. R. Burke

——there were completed 24,888 new houses compared with 21,567 in the first ten months of 1979 which was an exceptionally good year for completions.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We are now entering into a debate on the number of house completions and on the number of houses to be built.

Mr. R. Burke

I am trying to answer some of the points raised.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): We are talking about the necessity for money.

Mr. R. Burke

In the first ten months of 1980 also building societies made available 13,555 loans to the value of £215 million compared with 12,511 loans valued at £167 million last year. Since the Deputy raised the question of SDA loans, a question which I appreciate is hardly relevant to the Bill, I would remind him that in the first nine months of 1980 local authorities made available 5,493 house purchase loans amounting to a total of £57.22 million as against 4,193 loans valued at £29.76 million in the first nine months of 1979.

Mr. Tully

Those figures represent a fall of 2,000 houses — 1,000 in each case.

Mr. R. Burke

That is not so. The figures show an increase. The same situation applies in the case of the building societies. They made available 13,555 loans valued at £215 million compared with 12,511 loans last year.

I am hopeful of succeeding within a matter of weeks in relation to what I am attempting to do in respect of the building societies. I am basing my optimism on the statement from the spokesman for the societies to the effect that both deposit and mortgage rates will be reduced. I look forward to developments in that area. However, there appears to be some conflict in the minds of Deputies opposite on this whole question. They seem to be telling me that, instead of asking the building societies to reduce their interest rates, the Government should subsidise them. This is at a time when every other investment agency are reducing their rates. But, having said that, I share the concern of the Deputies in that the inflows to the societies should not be damaged. There is a conflict in this area and the Government are of the opinion, an opinion based on the best advice available to us, that the inflow situation should not be damaged by reason of the suggested cuts in interest rates. The relationship in interest rates as between the societies and the other investment agencies has been distorted in favour of the societies in respect of interest rates on deposits. I am attempting to have that relationship restored to its normal level.

Deputy D'Arcy raised the question of phased payments. I discussed that matter with the societies and it is being considered. While I accept much of what the Deputy has said in this regard there are problems involved for the building societies in terms of legal and other difficulties.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): Section 2 is drafted specifically to enable the Minister to regulate if necessary the inflow of money to the building societies. I use the word “regulate” because by way of subsidy the Minister can either reduce or increase the deposit rates and that would have the effect of regulating the inflow of money and, in turn, the amount of money that will be available both for building houses and for buying houses that have been completed.

There has never been such a necessity as there is now for the societies to have a liberal amount of money available to lend because, as Deputy Tully has said, since 1976-77 the price of the average house has doubled — from about £13,000 to about £26,000. These are not my figures. They are the figures supplied to me every three months with the compliments of the Minister for the Environment.

Obviously, there is a shortage of finance in the housing sphere. One need only drive through the country to realise that this is the case. Large numbers of new houses have been on the market for some time. Within a mile of where I live ten houses have been completed and there has been a for-sale sign on them for the past six months. These are not houses in the upper income market. They are modest type houses. Within a few hundred yards of where I live there have been a couple of houses on the market for several months. In a situation in which there was an adequate amount of finance available at reasonable rates of interest, houses such as those would not remain unsold for so long.

Though the question of SDA loans might not come directly within this section, it comes within the argument that because money for these loans is not available one is told by county councils that they will pay the loans when the Minister gives them the money. There was a time when they were reluctant to say that but now we have got to the stage that they say they will pay the loans when they receive their allocation. That being the situation, it is important that we have an adequate supply of finance available to the building societies. They believe it will take an additional £50 million to finance the same number of houses in 1981 as they financed in 1980; in other words, they expect to lend about £250 million in 1980 and they calculate it will take £300 million to finance the same number of houses in 1981. Given that situation, we should not do anything that might slow down the amount of money the public will invest in building societies. I do not believe the building societies should have a bonanza or that they should make too large a profit. Friendly societies are not supposed to operate on a profit basis. I am wholeheartedly with the Minister in getting down the interest rates one way or another. Certainly the building societies should not charge more than is necessary to enable them to operate and to attract deposits.

It should be stated that the interest rate can be regulated in more ways than one. For example, some building societies only charge interest on a loan from the date the loan is released to the borrower or his agent but other societies charge interest from the date they write the cheque. However, because of title difficulties or delay in completing a house that cheque may not be released for several months afterwards and the building society concerned uses the money represented by that cheque and, at the same time, gets interest on it. That is not fair. There is no use in representatives of such a building society saying they must have money ready to be drawn. Surely they can have an arrangement with their own solicitor that he will notify them when the cheque is released and then they can make the necessary arrangements.

There have been quite understandable complaints that borrowers are compelled to pay the costs of two solicitors — their own costs of purchasing the house and the costs of the building society solicitor. With commonsense and an arrangement between the building societies and the Incorporated Law Society, I believe one solicitor could be used to clear the title for the purchaser and to issue a certificate of title acceptable to the building society. I agree it is not all plain sailing. There may be obstacles to be negotiated but it is high time that some arrangement was made in order to save time and money.

The Minister boasted that more houses were completed in the first ten months of this year as compared with last year. I should like him to tell us the position regarding new house starts in the local authority sector and in the private sector.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair must point out that this is not relevant to the section. We are getting into county council and local authority matters.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): I am making only a passing reference to local authorities. There were no starts in the local authority sector this year because they did not get any money. In regard to private houses, it is relevant——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

All we are doing here is giving an authorisation to a Minister, with another Minister, to provide a subsidy in respect of interest on loans. I have given the Deputy a lot of latitude but he is widening the scope of the debate very much.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): I am arguing that there is every necessity for that and that the subsidy should be operated in view of the state of the market. I am told that the number of starts in the private sector has slowed down dramatically and that the reason is difficulty in getting finance. For example, I have been told that damp-proof courses which are put in at the early stages of building are not being used——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair must ask the Deputy not to continue on those lines. We will not debate the entire house building area. The Deputy has gone far from the section before the House.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): I think housing finance is relevant.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is not. The only relevant point here is the authorisation to provide a subsidy if it is considered necessary. The Deputy is very far from the section.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): I agree with the Chair that the subsidy should be provided if it is considered necessary. I am arguing it is necessary. I am saying that this year new starts have fallen dramatically and that some new houses cannot be sold, whether they be small schemes of houses or individual houses. I am saying the Minister should be careful. Like him, I was glad to hear Mr. Malone on the radio last Sunday state that there was some scope for reconsidering the matter. However, my information is that the increase in deposits for the past three months has been negligible. Perhaps the Minister will give the House figures in respect of this matter. My information is that the figure was £17 million in September, with a subsequent increase of approximately £1 million. I appeal to the Minister to make sure he does nothing to slow down housing finance. There is also the necessity for a reduction in the cost of money. It was stated in the housing section of the manifesto that it would be made easier and cheaper to get houses. I know that that is one of the things which the Minister is trying to do here but, in doing that, let him be certain that he does not slow up investment in building societies and, as a result, also slow up the building of houses.

Mr. Tully

All sides of the House must agree on three things, the first being that the interest rates are too high. That brings us to the section to which the Leas-Cheann Comhairle has referred so often, the right to subsidise interest rates. We are agreed, if the occasion arises, on having interest rates subsidised. One should not have to do it semi-illegally for a while and eventually get legislation passed in this House. We are not in agreement on whether or not at present the interest rates should be subsidised. The Minister seems to be living in cloud cuckoo land. If he thinks that the building industry is flying, that there are plenty of houses and that there is plenty of money to buy them, then his argument that there is no necessity for subsidising the building industry is correct up to a point. But I definitely claim that that is not so. I claim that there is a grave shortage of housing finance. I am not in the position I was in some years ago and I am not sure whether or not a reduction in the interest rates would result in a drop in the net inflow of building society finance. The Minister should be in a position to know, but he has not convinced me that he is sure that this is the position. He has given me figures about loans. I have asked him for the figures and I am grateful to him for giving these figures, but they refer to houses which were started 12 months or two years ago and which have been completed this year.

What I am interested in — and this is a point which Deputy Fitzpatrick touched on — is that people applying now for loans, and to whom the interest rate will apply from the time they apply, are talking about building houses and they are the people who are interested in what is being started now and being built now. The difficulty we are all in is that we do not know whether or not the building societies will have enough money to keep giving out loans. They have given a certain number of loans but will they be in a position to keep this up? The outrageous thing is that the cost of housing has increased so much and of course the size of the loan affects what people have to pay out by way of interest. Here we have the vicious circle. Very often the person starts off with starry eyes, picks his or her house, gets the loan and then finds, with dismay, what the interest rate on that loan will be. I have come across some people recently who are hurriedly trying to arrange for somebody else to take the house off their hands. They are tied up in a legal knot because of the building society loan involved. If they go through with it, it will take ever so long.

On the question of whether one solicitor should handle those cases, I would be opposed to that. I know that it costs more to have the solicitor looking after one client, but I have seen too many cases where a solicitor who was dealing with a case for his client and the client who comes in subsequently is a client in a different way and may eventually finish up, even though everything appears to be legal and above board, not getting what he is paying for. I am sorry to say that, but it appears to be so. In a recent case——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We should not be arguing this point on this section. Deputy Fitzpatrick raised it.

Mr. Tully

I do not propose to develop it. As it has been brought up, it is fair to make a comment on it. This is all I propose to say on that subject. Good luck to the Minister if he can get the building societies' mortgage rates down. Those who are paying mortgages very much need a little assistance. The building societies may persuade him that to do that will leave them very short of money and that their other incomes are not sufficient. Possibly, a tightening up on the spending of money by building societies on other than house building might put just a little more money in. Whether in Government or in Opposition, I am interested to get houses built for those who need them. If the Minister finds that there is no way to continue the inflow of funds necessary to have the number of houses required, then the State must begin to look at the whole question of subsidies. For that reason, I support this section of the Bill.

Mr. R. Burke

I should like to answer some of the points made. The situation is that the Government are looking to the societies this year to provide £250 million for loans for house purchase. In fact, the societies will have over £325 million available for loans in 1980. This must answer the case made by both Deputy Fitzpatrick and Deputy Tully that in some way, with the action which I have been taking with regard to the interest rate and particularly the mortgage situation, this will cause damage to the inflows into the societies. These figures speak for themselves.

Deputy Fitzpatrick suggested that there has been a shortage of house loan finance. Again to give some figures, 20,207 loans were paid in the nine months to 30 September, amounting to £275 million, by all lending agencies. The figure for the same period last year was 17,087 loans, totalling £198 million. I am constrained again, regretfully, to refer to SDA loan situation, but it is necessary for the record to correct the misrepresentation by Deputy Fitzpatrick. This year the Government provided £58.75 million for SDA loans and, as part of their input to the national understanding the Government have increased this to £65.75 million.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): Everybody knows that the local authorities have had no money for the last six months.

Mr. R. Burke

This compares with £46 million last year, and for the last year in which the Deputy was a member of the Coalition Government the figure was £17.6 million in the last budget introduced by a Coalition Government.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): Would you send us on the money?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Would the Minister and the Deputy please listen to the Chair for a moment? The SDA loans situation is not relevant to this section. I have said that on about four occasions and cannot get it across.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): There are many people to whom it is very relevant, who are waiting and who cannot get these houses.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy will have another opportunity of raising that matter.

Mr. R. Burke

I shall finish by saying that I am pleased with the welcome that has been given by the Deputies on the far side to this section of the Bill and that they agree with it. Once again to re-emphasise — Deputy Fitzpatrick was out of the House when I gave the figures — as he said himself, the Government are looking to the building societies this year for a figure of £250 million. They will have more than £325 million available this year for loans. That answers the point about the necessity for a subsidy at this stage.

Question put and agreed to.

SECTION 3.

Question proposed: "That section 3 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): I agree with this section which enables building societies to pay out funds standing to the credit of a deceased depositor without a grant of administration. That is a good idea.

Mr. Tully

I should strike my breast and say mea culpa because when the first Bill dealing with building societies for more than 103 years was introduced by me I did not spot the necessity for that provision. No other Member spotted it either. It is a good idea and I am sorry I did not think of it.

Mr. R. Burke

I am glad I had the opportunity of correcting the Deputy's error.

Question put and agreed to.

SECTION 4.

Question proposed: "That section 4 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): On Second Stage the Minister said section 4 was no longer necessary because he could do under section 2 what section 4 enabled him to do. Is that correct?

Mr. R. Burke

This section will repeal section 12 of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1979 which provides for the payment of an interest subsidy in respect of certain loans which were issued by building societies and are guaranteed by housing authorities. Any future payment of subsidies in respect of such loans will be made under section 2 of the Bill.

Mr. Tully

Do I take it that in the event of Fianna Fáil running short of money to pay out they will not leave it to us coming up to an election to try to get the matter straightened out?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We are all short of money.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): Fianna Fáil will not run short of promises.

Question put and agreed to.

Section 5 agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment and passed.