Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 6 Feb 1941

Vol. 81 No. 12

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Ashford, County Mayo, Lands.

asked the Minister for Lands if the lands acquired on the estate of the Hon. E. Guinness at Ashford, Cong, County Mayo, have proved to be of greater extent than are required to meet the needs of the forestry branch of his Department, and, if so, whether he will take steps to have the surplus lands, if any, divided amongst the former workmen on the estate who have lost their employment and reside in the vicinity of Cong, and amongst the inhabitants of Cong.

The estate of the Hon. E. Guinness at Ashford, Cong, was taken over for forestry purposes and any land surplus to immediate requirements and suitable for tillage or grazing is being let for these purposes to ex-employees and other persons resident in the neighbourhood of the estate.

Is it the intention to give these out permanently to the ex-employees?

The position is as was explained by my predecessor, that these lands were taken over with the intention of having a good forestry centre and to give as much employment as possible. If we tried to relieve congestion, it would be quite impossible to do anything for anybody, except the persons actually on the estate, the former employees.

I do not think the Minister has quite grasped my question. I am entirely with the Minister in the view that as much of the lands of Ashford as are required for forestry should be retained for forestry purposes, but, where there is a surplus, my suggestion is that it should not be let out in temporary lettings, but should be given as permanent holdings to the ex-employees. Will the Minister consider that?

Seeing that no provision whatever, as the Minister pointed out in 1939, can be made for the adjoining congests, and if it seems doubtful—I really cannot say at the moment—whether you could even provide accommodation for all the ex-employees, we think it better——

Would the Minister divide it amongst the ex-employees, because I certainly think they have a priority claim? If the Minister will undertake to consider the matter and let me know, I will not press him any further.

I do not propose to reconsider this matter. A decision has been come to, and I see no grounds at present for revising the decision.

I do not know what the decision is. The Minister has not made it plain to-day.

Top
Share