Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 20 May 1931

Vol. 38 No. 13

In Committee on Finance. - Vote 55—Land Commission (Resumed).

That a sum not exceeding £383,901 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1932, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Irish Land Commission (44 and 45 Vict., c. 49, s. 46, and c. 71, s. 4; 48 and 49 Vict., c. 73, ss. 17, 18 and 20; 53 and 54 Vict., c. 49, s. 2; 54 and 55 Vict., c. 48; 3 Edw. 7, c. 37; 7 Edw. 7, c. 38 and c. 56; 9 Edw. 7, c. 42; Nos. 27 and 42 of 1923, 25 of 1925, 11 of 1926, 19 of 1927, and 31 and 41 of 1929).

Debate resumed on the motion:

"That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration."—(Deputy Derrig.)

Mr. Killilea

Last evening I was dealing with the very slow progress made by the Land Commission, first in the taking over of ranches, and secondly in the division of these ranches. I gave a few cases to illustrate this. I was dealing with the Pollock Estate. In County Galway, so far as I can see, more than in any other county in Ireland, the question of the division of the land is a tough problem. We have farms taken over by the Land Commission eight or ten years, and there has nothing been done in the matter of their division as yet. If one goes round and examines the circumstances of some of the tenants around these ranches, and sees how they are situated, one sees the little bit of land they occupy, while somebody or other in their immediate neighbourhood has 300 or 400 acres of a ranch. In one particular case to which I was called quite recently up in Clonfert, the average holding would be six or seven acres of low-lying land which is flooded nearly all the year round, and in the midst almost of such holdings there is one farm of 300 acres, another of 500 acres, and another of 1,700 acres. First of all, the people with the six or seven acres pay £1 2s. 6d. an acre for their land—land that is no good to them during the winter months, and off which they cannot take any hay or grow any crops in the summer. I would like to know from the Parliamentary Secretary what is being paid for the land all around these holdings, the large farms. The estate I am referring to is the Samer Estate. What is being paid for that? I believe that while the rent of the prime land is only 6s. or 7s. per acre, the poor people have to pay £1 2s. 6d. an acre for the rubbish that is left. That is one of the most disgraceful cases I have seen.

I asked a question here recently about the Buston Estate. It is flooded from one end of the year to the other, and the answer the Parliamentary Secretary gave me was that that was the first time he knew about it. There are numbers of Land Commission officials paid out of the public moneys to go and investigate those things, and it should not be my duty to go and bring it up here or anywhere else. These people are paid for doing that work, but they are not doing it.

Yet in spite of all that, if these occupiers refuse to pay a half year's annuity that they are unable to get out of the land, the sheriff walks in there almost at once and takes away whatever stock there is on the land. That side of the question is not overlooked for six months. There is no sympathy in that direction for these people. I would like if the Parliamentary Secretary when replying would tell us what his policy is in regard to men selling farms of 80 or 100 or 120 acres in congested areas where the people have no more than three or four acres of land, some of them not that much at all. I would like to know why the Land Commission do not step in and take over those farms if they are out to relieve congestion. There was one farm sold quite recently; I asked a question about it a month before it was sold. It belonged to Mr. Garvey in North Galway. Nothing was done by the Land Commission about it. Another question I raised here was in connection with the Bermingham farm on the O'Rorke Estate. I asked that question on the 5th March, 1930, and the Parliamentary Secretary said they were about taking it over. They are still about taking it over. Probably I will come into this House next year, if I do come into it, and ask another question about this farm and get a similar reply and the same thing will happen the year after. There is another case of a man who bought a farm of 150 acres of land. That man hopped off to America and he set the land for grazing to the people around. If he can afford to give it to people in that way I see no reason why the Land Commission cannot take that farm from him altogether, and hand it over to the people who have already to foot the bill. I could possibly bring up some 50 or 60 similar cases. There is then no use in standing up here and telling us that the division of the land is going on rapidly. We cannot see it, and we cannot believe it is. At any rate I cannot see it. There is not much use in a Deputy like Deputy Gorey standing up here and taking the part of the Parliamentary Secretary when he knows nothing at all about conditions in the West of Ireland.

I have been looking up some figures since speaking here on this debate last week, and I discovered that there are 396,245 occupiers of holdings in the Free State. I also discovered 254,020 of these have an average of 11½ acres each. That would be roughly about 62 per cent. About 62 per cent. of the occupiers hold only 3,000,000 acres, whereas 8,128 occupiers hold over 200 acres of land each, that is over 3¼ million acres. In other words, 2 per cent. of the occupiers hold more land than 62 per cent. of the population. I would like to ask Deputy Gorey, if he were present, if he stands up for this sort of thing. I would like to ask the remainder of the Cumann na nGaedheal Party on the opposite benches if they stand up for that sort of thing. It is all very fine for a man like Deputy Gorey to get up here and talk about the western congests, but he does not for one second think or know of the way in which a number of the people of Connemara are still living the lives of slaves. Of course, many of them got work on the Shannon Scheme recently, but a great many of them have to go over to England and Scotland, and if they were the type of workers that Deputy Gorey talks of I wonder where they would find employment. Whatever Deputy Gorey thinks, we believe that these people should be given a chance of making a living on the land. And the land, when it is acquired, should be allotted to them, and not continue the system that is being carried on at present—taking over a farm and holding it for five or six years, drawing rents out of the half-starved people's pockets, and then handing it over to them when they are not able to pay any more. One matter I mentioned last week was the question of the road in my area, Boher Branagh. I am glad the Land Commission has started work on it, and not before it was full time.

Mr. Carty

I want to say first of all that there has been a marked improvement in the administration of the Land Commission in one respect—recommendations now made by Fianna Fáil Deputies receive more favourable consideration than was the case some years ago. Until a year or two ago it was mere waste of time for a member on this side of the House to approach the Land Commission on behalf of his constituents, whether it was to recommend a tenant for an allotment of land, to obtain grants for the repair of bye-roads, or to have drainage schemes carried out. Any recommendation made by a Fianna Fáil Deputy was invariably turned down. I have had practical experience of this in my own constituency. During the last year or so, however, there has been a marked improvement in the attitude of the Land Commission in this respect. A considerable number of applicants for land, whose names I recommended to the Land Commission during the last two years, have been provided with allotments. This is a step in the right direction on the part of the Land Commission officials. Every deserving person, irrespective of his political opinions, is entitled to a fair share in the distribution of land, and the small farmers and the unemployed are entitled to similar consideration whenever relief grants are being distributed by the Land Commission. While there are still many cases where undoubtedly unfair discrimination has been shown by the Land Commission, the number is not near so large or so glaring as it was a few years ago. In spite of all we hear about the efficiency of the Land Commission, I am forced to the conclusion that many years will elapse, at the present rate of progress, before the land question will be definitely settled in the West. According to a recent report of the Irish Land Commissioners 38,578 acres of untenanted land have been the subject of proceedings or inquiries in Co. Sligo under the Land Act of 1923. The total area of untenanted land distributed among uneconomic landholders and others in Co. Sligo since 1923 is shown as 19,259 acres. At the present rate of progress it will take the Land Commission upwards of ten years to distribute what remains.

The present rate of progress in the acquisition and subdivision of untenanted land seems unnecessarily slow. Apart altogether from the delay in the inspection and acquisition of untenanted land, it seems unreasonable, where land has been acquired, that one or two years should elapse between the date of acquisition and subdivision. In South Sligo a number of farms have been acquired by the Land Commission for a considerable time, and so far these lands have not been divided among the congested tenants in the vicinity. The Heather farms at Knockadoo and the Bearlough farm on the Basil Phibbs estate are cases in point. Surely a scheme for the subdivision of these farms could be prepared more expeditiously? In many cases congested tenants in the vicinity of untenanted farms obtain conacre tillage on these lands prior to their acquisition by the Land Commission. After these farms are acquired the tenants are deprived of conacre until such time as the lands are subdivided, often for a period of two years. This delay imposes a very great hardship on the congested tenants concerned. Immediately land has been acquired the Land Commission should take steps to expedite subdivision as much as possible.

Regarding the acquisition of untenanted land under Sections 24, 35 and 36 of the Act of 1923, it would appear that some sinister influences are at work to delay the acquisition of such land in County Sligo. I have already pointed out that upwards of 38,500 acres of untenanted land remain to be acquired in County Sligo. Is it not time for the Land Commission to speed up the acquisition and subdivision of such land? Before Deputy Roddy was elevated to the position of a Parliamentary Secretary he was very emphatic in his condemnation of the dilatory methods of the Land Commission in dealing with the problem of congestion in the West. Now that he is in charge of the Land Commismission, and vested with ample powers, I think he should direct his attention to this urgent and pressing problem. Any person who is familiar with local conditions in Sligo—and I am sure the same applies to other Western counties—must admit that the Land Commission have been very dilatory in dealing with the problem of congestion.

[An Leas-Cheann Comhairle took the Chair.]

Almost every week since I entered this Assembly I have had to approach the Land Commission regarding the acquisition and subdivision of non-residential farms in County Sligo, and I must say frankly that I am thoroughly disgusted at the snail-like progress of the Land Commission.

I have already referred to two farms at Bearlough and Knockadoo that have been acquired for a considerable time without being subdivided. There are also other farms that have been acquired at Kilcreevan and Treanscrabbagh on the Gorman estate, and at Heathfield and Derroon on the Phibbs and Gore-Booth estates. I hope the Land Commission will see to it that these lands are divided immediately. Lists containing the names of deserving applicants have in each case been forwarded to the Land Commission. In addition to those I have already named there are other farms that should be acquired with as little delay as possible. I would like to mention a few in particular. There is the Rolston lands in the parish of Castleconnor. There is a very considerable amount of congestion in this parish, and it is a matter of urgent importance that this farm should be acquired and subdivided immediately among the uneconomic tenants in Castleconnor. There are also two other farms in this parish—one belonging to Bartley Maughan at Corballa and the other owned by Mrs. McHale at Killanly; these farms should be acquired and subdivided without delay. In the parish of Dromore West there are three farms which should be taken over by the Land Commission for the relief of congestion—the Giblin farm at Ballyglass on the Palmer estate, the Laugton farm at Belville on the McMun estate, the Cuffe farm at Leharrow and other lands and turbary at Croagh and Duneil, all on the Cooper estate. Most of the tenants in this parish are living on uneconomic holdings, and some effort should be made to relieve the congestion that exists.

Another farm to which I have already directed the attention of the Land Commission is the Keogh farm at Geevagh. A list of deserving applicants for this farm has been sent to the Land Commission some months ago. There are two other farms—one at Streeda, Grange, on the Jones estate and one at Moorfield, Drumcliffe, on the Gore-Booth estate, which are urgently required for the relief of congestion. There are also a number of non-residential farms at Classiebawn and Mullaghmore on the Ashley estate, in the parish of Cliffoney, together with turbary situate between Ballincastle and Clooncoo, and between Enenreva and Drumfad also on the Ashley estate, that are required for the relief of a large number of congested tenants in the parish of Cliffoney.

Then there is the McKim farm at Carrownacreevy or Branchfield, in the parish of Mullinabreena, containing upwards of 270 acres to which I have repeatedly directed the attention of the Land Commission. This land should have been acquired and subdivided years ago. There are a large number of uneconomic holdings in the vicinity. Unfortunate tenants are huddled in small farms on the side of the Ox Mountain in close proximity to this substantial farm, the subdivision of which would give much-needed relief. I hope no time will be lost in the acquisition of this farm.

There is another matter in connection with the division of land to which I would like to direct the attention of the House. It has frequently happened in my constituency that the owners of large non-residential farms, which should have been acquired for the relief of congestion, are allowed to dispose of their farms with the sanction and approval of the Land Commission. I think it is criminal on the part of the Land Commission to allow such lands to be bought over the heads of the tenants, in many cases by ex-members of the R.I.C. and other well-to-do individuals. A very glaring case occurred recently in the parish of Killyglass on the Gordon estate. A large non-residential farm at Chapelfield was allowed by the Land Commission to be sold over the heads of ten congested tenants in the vicinity.

Mr. Roddy

A large farm? Perhaps the Deputy would tell the House the area.

Mr. Carty

I have not the exact acreage.

Mr. Roddy

If the Deputy knew the exact acreage he would not use the expression "a large farm."

Mr. Carty

I am aware that ten small land-owners, who were at one time members of Cumann na nGaedheal and strong supporters of the Parliamentary Secretary, made representations to the Land Commission to have this farm acquired. I would like to hear what excuse the Parliamentary Secretary has to offer for this action on the part of his officials. I would like to know if it is the considered policy of the Land Commission to allow farms like that at Chapelfield to be bought by wealthy individuals over the heads of uneconomic holders in the vicinity, and, if not, why it was that permission was given by the Land Commission to the owner of Chapelfield to dispose of his holding.

Mr. Roddy

Would the Deputy cite the other cases?

Mr. Carty

I can cite one case. The Land Commission permitted the sale of the Brett farm, a non-residential holding, at Ballinacarrow, on the Perceval estate.

Mr. Roddy

Was it subject to a Land Commission annuity?

Mr. Carty

Yes.

Mr. Roddy

Then it was not necessary for the owner to get the consent of Land Commission. He had a perfect right to sell.

Mr. Carty

Local members of Cumann na nGaedheal made representations to the Parliamentary Secretary to have this land acquired, and they were so disgusted at the attitude of the Parliamentary Secretary in this matter that there is no longer a branch of Cumann na nGaedheal at Ballinacarrow, in spite of the fact that the Parliamentary Secretary visited the district after that farm was sold in order to try and revive what was left of the organisation. There are still complaints in my constituency regarding persons who have been provided with allotments. A number of cases have been reported to me where the claims of deserving tenants have been brushed aside and the land given to outsiders. In one particular case, the Hunt farm, at Rockley, tenants who lived miles away were given allotments to the exclusion of a number of local fishermen in the vicinity whose forefathers originally owned this land. I hope the Land Commission will take immediate steps to rectify the grave injustice done to these poor fishermen, who have to depend for a living on a few acres of land and a chance catch on the sea. I understand that one of the Land Commission engineers, responsible for the subdivision of this farm, was afterwards convicted and imprisoned for accepting bribes and for the misappropriation of money entrusted to his care by the Land Commission.

Mr. Reynolds

You did not swear against him.

Mr. Carty

I will leave that to Deputy Reynolds. He would make a good-looking and impressive witness. I think the Deputy should confine his attention to the railway men in Ballinamore. I have also received complaints regarding the subdivision of the Clarke farm at Carrowmoran, in the parish of Templeboy. This farm is adjacent to the seashore. The tenants provided with allotments are denied access to the seashore, and are unable to collect seaweed, although, according to my information, these tenants have to pay a special rate for seaweed. It seems very unfair that tenants should have to pay for privileges which they do not enjoy.

The manner in which relief grants have been spent in my constituency certainly calls for investigation. There are two glaring examples in the County Sligo of the manner in which public money has been squandered by the Land Commission. Some time ago a new road was made by the Land Commission up to the side of the Ox Mountain in the townland of Dunflin Upper, in the parish of Skreen, at a cost, I understand, of about £500. This road was supposed to be made for the purpose of enabling tenants to reach bog on the mountain-side, but when the road was finished it was found that there was no bog within reach, and even if bog were available the road was so steep that it could not be used for vehicular traffic. The only value this road has been to the district, and to the farmers it was supposed to benefit, is the number of tourists it attracts. I understand that a considerable number of foreigners have already visited the district, anxious to view one of the wonderful achievements of the Land Commission.

In the townland of Altonelvick, in the parish of Dromard, another similar road was constructed up the side of the Ox Mountains. In this case it was also supposed to be constructed for the purpose of enabling farmers to reach bog on the mountain, but when this road was finished it was found to give access only to a large swamp on the mountain. Had the engineer responsible for this road any knowledge of local conditions he could have constructed a road, at much less cost, in the townland of Carrowvard, a short distance away, which would have given access to upwards of 500 acres of excellent bog. I would like to hear from the Parliamentary Secretary who was responsible for selecting the sites of these roads, and what outside influences were brought to bear to induce the Land Commission to squander public money on such useless work.

A very strong case has already been made by the various Deputies who spoke for referring this Estimate back for reconsideration. In addition to referring the Estimate back for reconsideration, I think the time has arrived when the administration of the Land Commission should be made the subject of an inquiry by a Select Committee appointed by this House.

Mr. Jasper Wolfe

I have listened with much interest to the admissions made by Deputy Carty, in which he stated that there has been a marked improvement in the Land Commission in the last few years. I am afraid the Deputy has hardly done justice to himself in confining improvement to the Land Commission alone. I think the Deputy's views and the views of those who sit with him have changed in a marked degree compared with their views of two years ago.

Mr. Carty

On a point of explanation, I said there was a marked improvement in the administration of the Land Commission in one respect, that representations made during the last year or two by Deputies on these benches have received consideration from officials of the Land Commission which they did not receive two or three years ago.

Mr. Wolfe

I have heard Deputy Carty advocate very strongly the compulsory acquisition of land for the relief of congestion. I have heard him complain of the delays which have taken place in that respect. I have heard him say that the delay was caused by sinister influences. I also listened to the speeches of Deputy Killilea and Deputy Walsh. I wonder would that be the same Deputy Carty who two years ago voted for a Bill that had as its primary object the taking away from the Land Commission for all time of any power compulsorily to acquire land for the relief of congestion? Is it the same Deputy Carty? Is it the same Deputy Walsh? Is it the same Deputy Killilea, or have they completely altered their views? Are they going to tell us that when they voted for that Bill, which had for its plain object the taking of these powers from the Land Commission, their mentality was such that they did not know what they were voting for? When we find Deputy after Deputy coming up with a complete change of front and advocating a policy which each of them denounced and voted against two years ago, I think the House is entitled to know in all fairness why this change of front has taken place and why, having voted, as they did in 1929, in favour of taking these powers from the Land Commission, they proceed in 1931 to denounce the Land Commission for not being speedy enough in the acquisition and division of land.

Are we to assume that these Deputies have completely changed their views? If so, why, how, and when? Would it not come better from some Deputies other than those who were so fierce in their advocacy in 1929 of taking from the Land Commission compulsory powers for acquiring land —why not leave it to them to attack the Land Commission for delay in 1931? The other day I heard, or perhaps I read, a statement by Deputy Lemass in which he accused the Parliamentary Secretary of having cogged or copied the Bill introduced by Deputy Derrig some years ago. No greater slander could be uttered against the Parliamentary Secretary than that he copied or got any inspiration from a Bill which was a monstrosity on the face of it.

Mr. Allen

I suggest that there is no Land Bill under discussion now and that the Deputy should keep to the Estimate.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I quite agree.

Mr. J. Wolfe

To impute to the Parliamentary Secretary any connection with that Bill, which was introduced two years ago and which was on the face of it a disgrace to legislation and a disgrace to the country, would be a cruel slander on him, and should not be repeated throughout the country. I agree as to what has been said about the good work that has been done in the Land Commission, particularly recently. A stupendous job had to be undertaken. If Deputies only knew what it meant they would agree that no Department in the country ever got through such a big job in such a short time and with such satisfaction as the Land Commission did in the last two or three months in speeding up the operations of land purchase. They have done a job which reflects great credit on them, particularly on the head of the Department. It must have been a great pleasure and a source of pride to the Parliamentary Secretary to know that he had officials who in an emergency like that could undertake such a vast job and do it so quickly.

I want to suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that as regards his staff the system of employing temporary labour is not a good one, or, at all events, is one that may be carried to an extent which would not be justified by results. There are officials in the Land Commission who have been there for over twenty years but who are still on the temporary staff. That, in my opinion, is not right. I do not think that it is economical because you will not get the best results, no matter how good and how faithful the officials are, if they are only temporary employees. It would take a saint to resist the temptation of not killing the goose that laid the golden eggs. I agree that it is necessary to employ a temporary staff in the Land Commission to some extent but I think it would be much wiser if men who have been there for eight or ten years were placed on the permanent staff. If the Parliamentary Secretary did that, I believe that he would get even better results. In my view, men who have been in the Land Commission for twenty years and over in prominent and responsible positions and who discharged their duties with credit to themselves and to the Land Commission, even though they are technically on the temporary staff, could not be discharged without getting compensation. As I say, I believe it would lead to better results if these officials who served a long apprenticeship were taken on the permanent staff. The Land Commission must still take a considerable period to complete land purchase. It is essential that examiners of title, for instance, should be thoroughly efficient and, if you are to get the best results from them, they should not be merely temporary men, men who, knowing that their job is only temporary, would naturally be inclined to take their time over it.

The Dáil went out of Committee.

Progress reported.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 3 p.m. Thursday, 21st May, 1931.