Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 26 Nov 1941

Vol. 26 No. 2

Architects (Registration) Bill, 1941. - Expiring Laws Bill, 1941-Second and Subsequent Stages.

Question proposed.: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister for Finance (Mr. O Ceallaigh)

This Expiring Laws Bill, as the members of the Seanad know, is a kind of hardy annual. It used to be a much more formidable affair than it is this time. Some years ago I think there were as many as 20 Acts which had to be re-enacted about this time of the year. Now the number is down to six or seven. The Bill proposes to continue for a further year the same statutes which appear in Parts I and II of the Schedule to the Expiring Laws Act, 1940.

A memorandum regarding the Acts to be continued has been circulated to Senators, and I hope that the explanations given for continuing the various Acts will prove satisfactory. Of the nine Acts affected by the Bill provision has already been made for the repeal of three. I refer to the Poor Relief (Dublin) Act, 1929, the Local Government (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1923, and the Local Authorities (Combined Purchasing) Act, 1925. This latter Act will go when the Local Authorities (Combined Purchasing) Act, 1939, comes into operation, but as it may not be feasible, owing to the emergency, to give effect to that Act before the 1st January, it is necessary to continue the temporary measure. As regards the other two Acts, both will be repealed when the Public Assistance Act, 1939, and the Local Government Act, 1941, come into operation.

I might add that the Acts appearing in the Schedule are reviewed from time to time to consider whether legislation might be introduced to give permanence to any of them. Apart from the three Acts already mentioned, it is not considered desirable at present to make provision for any of the remainder. It will be appreciated that the Schedule of enactments to be continued has shrunk considerably over a number of years and we are now left with a mere handful of Acts which will shrink further as opportunity presents itself.

Mr. Douglas

I do not suppose there is any Senator who could put up any good case, not against some of those Acts, but in favour of abolishing them suddenly to-morrow or the next day without any other provision. The principal reason why I intervene is that apparently the Minister is pleased to see this Bill shrinking. I have been wondering for the last 17 or 18 years why it should be continued in this form. It seems to me simply a relic of a somewhat ancient British practice which it appears quite unnecessary to continue in our Parliament. This is not a new idea of mine. I expressed it a considerable number of years ago. When we find that the Government is considering, amongst others, whether an Act of 1868 or 1869 should be made permanent or not, the word "permanent" or "temporary" takes, to put it mildly, a new meaning. It seems to me, now that it has shrunk to this extent and that provision is made for three Acts out of the number concerned, it would be better to simply say that the other Acts are continued until repealed and deal with them in the ordinary course. It has come to the stage now when there is no public gain by bringing them up in or about December each year. I would like to know if the Minister could tell me the reason against simply altering this and instead of saying that the Acts mentioned in the Schedule shall be continued until the 31st December, 1942, say, "until repealed". I think the time has come when we may do that instead of keeping on what is to my mind an antique and unnecessary practice. It has never been part of our practice in this country to have annual legislation. I do not know of a single case of an Act introduced by our Parliament for one year only. It is simply a matter of British Acts which we have to continue. I may not be right in that, but if there have been such Acts they have been very few. It certainly is not the general practice. I suggest that, if not this year, next year, we might have done with it by simply leaving on the Statute Book those that the Government have not time to deal with. Obviously no one who has read them is perfectly satisfied with the Corrupt Practices Act and the Parliamentary Elections Act, but no one thinks we would be better off without them.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I think, if I may say so with respect, that that is a valuable suggestion of the Senator's. I am afraid, though, that we could not adopt it this year. The Bill has already been adopted by the Dáil and, therefore, will have to go through this House.

Mr. Douglas

Not this year, but I am suggesting it for next year.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I do not know why the idea has not been thought of. As Senator Douglas has said, he has already expressed himself in a similar manner on a previous occasion. There may be some reason against it that I am not aware of, but it seems to me that the suggestion is one that should get very serious consideration.

Mr. Douglas

Perhaps I may say in reply to what the Minister has said —if it would be in order—that the reason some time ago was that there was a very much bigger list, a number of which it was considered should be brought up each year. Next year there will not be any left that there is a prospect of their being dealt with, except as general legislation.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take remaining stages now.

Bill considered in Committee.

Sections 1 and 2 agreed to.

Schedules 1 and 2 and Title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment.

Question-"That the Bill be received for final consideration"—put and agreed to.

Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."

Mr. Counihan

With regard to Senator Douglas's suggestion I think it would be better if we had a continuation of the present form. If there is any portion of any Act that we want to have repealed, we would have an opportunity of discussing it and of putting forward the Acts we would like to have repealed, but if his suggestion were adopted we would have no chance of discussing any of the Acts in the Statute Book. I do not think much of the time of the House or of any of the Departments is taken up by having that Bill coming on in the ordinary way before the Oireachtas. I think the Minister would be just as well advised to leave the matter as it is and to have a continuation of the Bill in its present form.

Mr. Hawkins

I wonder if it would be possible to get from the Minister at this stage a statement of the Government's intention in regard to the Report of the Town Tenants' Tribunal? At the moment we have before us a proposal to continue the Increase of Rent and Mortgage Interest (Restrictions) Act, 1923. Most of us, I am sure, have read, or partly read, the Report of the Town Tenants' Tribunal. For many years past agitation has been carried on in the country for legislation to deal with this particular interest of the people. We all know that there are grievances in every town and city. I wonder would it be possible at this stage for the Minister to give an indication to the House as to when it is proposed to introduce legislation to deal with it. The Act of 1923 was based on the 1914 rents and valuations. Many things have happened since then and this legislation is completely out of date. Owing to the emergency and the consequent restriction of materials for building purposes, building at present is almost at a standstill. If this position is allowed to develop for five or six years then the position of housing in the country is going to be very serious. I believe the best way to overcome the whole difficulty is by providing sufficient housing for the people. That would probably solve the difficulty in itself, but I should like to know if the Minister would be good enough to give us an indication of what the Government propose to do.

Mr. E. Lynch

I support Senator Counihan's suggestion that this legislation which comes before us here should be continued. It gives an opportunity of having the various enactments set out in the Schedule criticised, if it is desirable that they should be criticised. If the other suggestion were carried into effect, it is possible that matters might arise in relation to certain of these Acts in the Schedule which the Oireachtas would desire to discuss and which they would not have an opportunity of discussing. I hope, therefore, that the present system of reviewing these enactments which lapse annually will be continued, because I think it the better system of the two.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I note that there are two opinions on the question.

Mr. Baxter

There are always two.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Probably more than two, but at any rate everybody does not accept Senator Douglas's view, I note. I accepted his view because it is certainly much more convenient for Ministers, but I can see the point of view of Senator Counihan and Senator Lynch. I would see it much more readily, of course, if I were in their position. However, nothing will be done about it this year. It will possibly be done next year, but God only knows.

With regard to the point raised by Senator Hawkins, I am sorry that I am not in a position to say what the Government's intentions are with regard to the report of the Town Tenants' Tribunal. The report has been circulated, but it has not yet come formally before the Government, and no decision has been taken as to what legislation, if any, might be introduced. In reply to, I think, Deputy Dillon in the Dáil, the Minister for Justice said that he and his Department were considering legislation to deal with certain aspects of the town tenants' problem, that is, in relation to tenement rents. When that legislation will be introduced, however, I am not in a position to say, as it has not yet come before the Government. It is at present in the Departmental stage. We discussed this matter last week in the Dáil when it was raised on the consideration of this Bill. The whole question of town tenant legislation is a very intricate and difficult problem. The last Government dealt with it and brought in a variety of amendments, which had the effect of bringing the legislation to a certain extent up to date, but the legislation then passed does not appear to have brought a great measure of satisfaction to town tenants. As to whether they are very difficult people to satisfy or not, I had better not express any opinion.

Mr. Madden

On the contrary. They are the most patient and most suffering section of the whole community.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Senator must be a town tenant. It is, as I say, a difficult problem, and I think this Government have dealt with some aspects of it by legislation. As a result of great pressure by town tenants and interested parties all over the country, they set up this tribunal, and, as members know, the report is very voluminous. In fact, there are a variety of reports. I think there are as many appendices or minority reports as there were members of the commission, which will give an idea of the complexity of the problem. However, even though it is as complex as that would seem to indicate, I realise that it is a matter which will have to be faced. The Government will have to make up its mind one way or another. They will not satisfy everybody and maybe will not satisfy a large proportion of those interested, but certain aspects of the problem will have to be dealt with, and probably will have to be dealt with soon. I know that the matter is being considered, but I am not in a position to say when legislation will be introduced.

Question put and agreed to.

Ordered: That the Bill be returned to the Dáil.