Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 20 Apr 1945

Vol. 96 No. 22

Committee on Finance. - Vote 52—Lands.

Minister for Lands (Mr. Moylan)

I move:—

That a sum not exceeding £713,158 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending the 31st day of March, 1946, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Offices of the Minister for Lands and of the Irish Land Commission (44 & 45 Vict., c. 49, sec. 46, and c. 71, sec. 4; 48 & 49 Vict., c. 73, secs. 17, 18 and 20; 54 & 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; No. 25 of 1925; No. 11 of 1926; No. 19 of 1927; No. 31 of 1929; No. 11 of 1931; Nos. 33 and 38 of 1933; No. 11 of 1934; No. 41 of 1936; and No. 26 of 1939).

I understand, Sir, that there is only a limited time this morning for dealing with this question of Lands, and I wonder if the Dáil would be good enough to permit me to utilise that time to make a statement in regard to Lands, Forestry, and Gaeltacht Services, so that the field would be clear, when we take up the question again, for Deputies to devote themselves to any criticisms they might feel compelled to make.

Mr. Roddy

Hitherto, I think it has always been the practice to discuss these three Estimates separately. There may be some Deputies who will have a lot to say on Gaeltacht Services, and I think that that should be taken separately. While we are anxious to facilitate the Minister in every way, I suggest that in the interests of Deputies, generally, it would be better to take each of the Votes separately.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister, I understand, desires to make a statement covering the three Votes. That would not prevent Deputies having a separate debate on each of them.

Mr. Roddy

I submit that it would be better to have a separate statement on each.

Mr. Moylan

It is only to facilitate business that I propose to utilise this time this morning by making a statement covering the three Votes.

Mr. Roddy

I think it is important that they should be dealt with separately.

Mr. Moylan

It is not so very important.

Mr. Roddy

It would be better to deal with them separately.

Mr. Moylan

Very well. I shall take Lands first.

An Ceann Comhairle

Lands to be taken separately.

Mr. Moylan

As I remarked last year, in introducing the Estimate for Lands, the restriction of activities imposed by the emergency conditions has virtually stereotyped most of the sub-heads of this Estimate and no appreciable change can be expected at present. Of the net increase of £52,475 on last year, £49,172 is due to increases in salaries under sub-head A, reflecting the argumented Civil Service bonus.

The increase of £5,000 for Travelling Expenses under sub-head B, is mainly due to the return to the Land Commission of the some of the inspectors lent to the Department of Agriculture for compulsory tillage duties. Until conditions permit the return of the new numerous inspectors still on loan, and the filling of vacancies, no great inspection activity can be anticipated.

The changes in the other sub-heads are mostly too trifling to call for particular comment; the increase of £750 under sub-head N, is due to anticipated carry-over expenditure on embankment works designed for last year but not yet completed. The decrease of £500 under sub-head P follows the approaching completion of the few remaining proceedings in respect of Direct Sales under the Land Acts of 1903-09, and the decrease of £135 under sub-head Q (1) is also consequent on the winding up of these old proceedings.

As regards expenditure on Estate Improvements under sub-head I, it is difficult in present circumstances to forecast what can be accomplished in the way of land division during the current year. Building activities are bound to be restricted by shortage and increased cost of materials, and the future generally is uncertain. The best that can be done is to put down approximately the same sum as last year under sub-head I. During the year ended 31st March last the expenditure under this head totalled about £192,000.

In introducing last year's Estimate for Lands on 26th April, 1944, I explained fully the peculiarly difficult position in which the Land Commission has been placed by the emergency conditions, and it seems unnecessary to go over this ground again. But, despite what I said then, and have said since on other occasions, there appears to exist still in the rural mind —and even among Deputies who should be conversant with the true situation —a sense of grievance against the Land Commission for not proceeding with the acquisition and division of land on the former scale. It is astonishing how many people refuse to face facts in the ardour of desire. It is both unjust and useless to blame the Land Commission for circumstances which are completely outside their control. Without adequate staff, and without adequate material, it is impossible for them to get on with land division. Even now, when we may look forward to the possibility of an early ending of war in Europe, that will be far from ending emergency conditions. We shall have to face up to a very different set of economic conditions. and probably to keen competition for many of the essentials of civilised life. Land settlement, however desirable it may be, must be subject to reservations of material and money. Further, we have learned by sad experience that it is worse than useless to set men up on new holdings without enough stock, implements, experience and capital to make the best use of the land. It is a wretched necessity for the Land Commission to have to undo something of their previous labour and to dispossess allottees proved unworthy or incompetent, but that necessity has got to be faced. In the harder struggle for existence that the immediate future envisages, we cannot afford to be tolerant of slackness or incompetence where the vital matter of agriculture is concerned.

The most essential task for the Land Commission in the immediate future is to concentrate on clearing up an immense accumulation of arrears arising out of previous operations. Counting in the residue left from tenanted estates purchased under the pre-1923 Land Acts, there are at present about 90,000 holdings of tenanted land vested in the Land Commission and awaiting revesting in the tenants. Last year an effort was made to expedite revesting and 1,600 holdings were disposed of, as against 676 in the preceding year.

But far more in the way of output must be achieved if these arrears, much of which dates back 20 and 30 years, are to be cleared off in anything like reasonable time. Besides, revesting is a process requiring much care and attention, particularly as half of the 90,000 holdings remaining are so poor, small, and scattered as to require improvement, enlargement or rearrangement prior to resale.

Perhaps I may anticipate here criticisms likely to be offered by some western Deputies as to the Land Commission keeping on hands for considerable periods holdings vacated by migrants from the congested districts, instead of promptly dividing them among local congests. In many cases, delay in allotting such holdings has been completely unavoidable, owing to the areas on hands being too small in themselves to satisfy a comprehensive scheme of local rearrangement, or owing to lack of inspectors trained in this specialised work, or—last but not least—owing to non-co-operation of the local congests in rearrangement schemes proposed by the Land Commission. In the last few years building difficulties have also accentuated the delay. I hope that the task of rearrangement of holdings will be taken up vigorously at the earliest possible moment, and ways and means are now under earnest consideration. I consider this work more urgent and important than the undertaking of fresh acquisition and division of untenanted land in the less congested counties.

In addition to the 90,000 tenanted holdings awaiting revesting, there are some 45,000 parcels of untenanted land, allotted under the Land Acts, 1923/39, to be revested in the allottees. This post-division work occupies a large part of the time of the Land Commission staff and the sooner the revesting of the bulk of these parcels is accomplished the sooner can fresh activities be pursued. Last year it was possible to vest only 560 parcels, but this year it is hoped to increase the number considerably. Most of the indoor staff of the Land Commission lent to other Departments for emergency duties during the past three or four years have returned, and a special drive is being made to clear up arrears of indoor work in respect of both tenanted and untenanted land. The Emergency Powers Order (No. 110), 1941, which suspended some of the tenanted land operations of the Land Commission was revoked as from 1st March last. As to the acquisition and division of untenanted land, owing to the emergency restrictions—a phrase which by this time has become a wearisome cliché, but still unfortunately has to be used—during the past financial year only lands in respect of which commitments had been made were acquired for distribution. Precise figures as to the results are not yet available, but roughly it may be said that some 14,000 acres were acquired and 12,000 acres divided during the year.

As regards migration from the congested districts under what is known as the "group migration scheme", nine tenants have recently been, or are in process of being, transferred from the western counties to holdings provided for them in the midlands. The present difficulties of house-building hamper the general migration policy, and account to some extent for the comparatively large area of untenanted land kept on hands of the Land Commission for division.

As regards turbary development, there has been a decided increase in the amount of turf cut on Land Commission bogs and at least 200,000 tons of turf were cut during the past year, on bog lettings. A sum of approximately £45,000 was expended during the year on turbary development.

It is usual to say a word about the position of the collection of land purchase annuities. The collection was reasonably good last year and the arrear for all gales since the enactment of the Land Act, 1933, represented at 31st January last only about 2 per cent. of the total amount collectable. Since that date, the collection of arrears has continued to be satisfactory.

Deputies will see that there is really nothing new in the Land Commission's report for the past year, and I assume, judging by experiences, that there will be nothing new in the criticisms. The Land Commission has had to survive various plans of attack of relays of critics over the years. The complete incompetence and ineffectiveness and even contempt for public opinion which have been mentioned by our critics would possibly, if they existed, have devastated the Land Commission completely, and called for its immediate abolition, but, in spite of all the attacks, it has continued to function over the years with satisfaction to the vast majority of those whom its functioning affects. To-day, we have only a very short period in which to discuss lands. I am sure most Deputies will agree with me that the time is quite enough to deal with the whole matter of land acquisition and division and Land Commission activities generally, particularly when we have to devote the rest of the time to the discussion of a really significant expenditure. The amount which the Land Commission asks to carry on for the coming year is not comparable at all to the amount that has to be debated in the next few hours. I would suggest, therefore, that anyone who really is interested in Land Commission activities could, from the debates of the previous years and the criticisms of the previous years, ascertain everything he wants to know about the Land Commission, and I would ask the Dáil to pass this Vote with very little debate.

Mr. Roddy

Evidently, the Minister is anxious to avoid repetition as much as possible. I agree with him, from sad experience, that there is always a tremendous amount of repetition on Land Commission Estimates and it is inevitable that there should be some repetition on this discussion. On this occasion the Minister deserves sympathy more than blame for the inactivity of his Department. His report follows on almost identical lines those of last year. I say it deserves sympathy, because of the fact that he has been denuded of staff and that the Emergency Powers Order has deprived the Land Commission of its main function, namely, the acquisition and distribution of land.

Personally, I always thought that that Emergency Powers Order was a mistake. I do not know the circumstances which prompted the Government to issue such an Order, but I think it was a mistake. After all, land distribution was really more important during the emergency than it was during any other phase of Land Commission history. A small addition of land to smallholders throughout the country during the extra tillage campaign would have been an invaluable boon. As it is, many of those smallholders have cultivated their land to the point of exhaustion, and it will take many years to bring it back again to the state of fertility it was in prior to the emergency. A small addition of land would have relieved the situation somewhat. I admit that, if the Land Commission were carrying on its activities on the same scale as in pre-war years, perhaps only a small percentage would have been accommodated with land, but even that small percentage would have relieved the problem to some extent.

There is one item in the Estimate which I do not understand and I do not know whether the Minister explained it when running rather hurriedly through the different items —it is the increase of £5,000 for travelling expenses. I do not know if the travelling expenses of the officials transferred to other Departments are charged to the Land Commission or not, but, assuming they are not, the increase of £5,000 seems to be abnormal for a Department which has been, to a large extent, inactive during the last year. Probably in his reply the Minister will explain why there has been this particular increase.

The other items are mainly statutory items and the Minister has no option but to make provision for them. I am glad to learn from him that the Emergency Powers Order in respect of the acquisition and distribution of land has been revoked and I am anxious to know when it is intended to resume activities. So far as I can see, no move has been made to initiate proceedings for the acquisition of any new land. I understand from the Minister's statement that he is awaiting the return of the staffs seconded to other Departments. He should make an effort to get those staffs back immediately, to undertake their proper duties.

In passing, it seems to be rather false accountancy to charge up the salaries of those men to the Land Commission when they are engaged in the work of other Departments. It gives a misleading impression of the cost of the Land Commission and seems to be entirely unfair to that particular Department. These men have been seconded for the past three or four years and, during that time, the Land Commission has been bearing the cost of their salaries. Ultimately, it makes no difference, as the bulk sum comes to exactly the same figure; but it gives an entirely false impression to an outsider looking through the Book of Estimates. He sees that the Land Commission costs £1,118,000 and does not appreciate the fact that many of its staff are working now, and have been for years, in other Departments, although their salaries are still charged to the Land Commission.

I assume the Minister will also give some indication as to when acquisition proceedings will resume. The impression seems to prevail that he has a new Land Bill in contemplation and is holding his hand until it is passed by the Dáil. Even before that, however, I assume he can engage in preliminary work of investigation as to lands to be acquired in different parts of the country.

The Minister has suggested that land acquisition is likely to be slowed down in the future and that the staff will be concentrated chiefly on the arrears which have accumulated over a number of years. I agree that it is very important to have the arrears cleared off, more especially in the congested districts. There are many instances of congested district boards taken over some 30 or 40 years ago and which are still in an unfinished state. From time to time, questions are asked here, especially by western Deputies, about those particular estates, in order to elicit information as to when the work will be concluded. There has been no indication that it will be concluded for many years to come. In many instances, the Land Commission is trying to secure other lands, especially where it is necessary to carry out a rearrangement of holdings, but even so the delay in acquiring that additional land has been somewhat abnormal. In some cases suitable land has been available and for some reason it has not been acquired. As a result, all these rundale lettings and uneconomic holdings are awaiting rearrangement and have been allowed to remain in that condition for the last 20 or 30 years. I agree with the Minister that a special effort should be made to clear off the arrears as quickly as possible.

I suggest that it is even more necessary now than ever before that the Land Commission should engage in the acquisition and distribution of new land. After the war, the small farmers will require some new additions, to enable them to carry on in a reasonably economic way. Whilst I do not believe, and never did believe, in rushing land distribution, I still think it should be carried on on a reasonable scale, even admitting that there is other work which is, perhaps, as important. I know perfectly well that the Minister is not thinking in the traditional way as far as Land Commission matters are concerned, that he has a fresh mind and a fresh outlook. I am glad of that and I am sure he will apply his mind in a new way towards a solution of many of the difficulties which have encumbered the Land Commission in the past.

I suggest that, when land acquisition is resumed, the Minister should reconsider the policy in regard to the area given to allottees. Hitherto, about ten Irish acres of land were considered to be an economic holding. The standard has been increased somewhat since the days when I was in the Land Commission and I imagine that the standard to-day is somewhere between 20 and 25 statute acres. It is doubtful if that will be regarded as an economic standard after the war. The probability is that some revolution will take place in agriculture and the tendency may be towards more mechanisation. If that occurs, the addition of land to uneconomic holdings should be much larger.

I suggest that is one important matter which the Minister should look into. I admit the standard varies in different counties, but, speaking generally, I think in every county it was somewhere between 20, 25, or 27 statute acres and I think the Minister will agree, in view of the circumstances brought about by the war and the circumstances which are likely to prevail when the war is over, that it is necessary that these standards should be revised.

I suggest also the price standards need to be revised. The prices paid in the past bordered almost on confiscation, the prices not only for untenanted land, but for tenanted land resumed by the Land Commission for the purpose of creating economic holdings for surrounding tenants. That is another matter that requires investigation. The Minister indicated quite recently in the Seanad, when the Land Bill was introduced there, that he was giving some consideration to the question of price. I do not wish to say anything more on that subject. I am sure the Minister will examine the matter exhaustively especially in relation to the new legislation which, I understand, is contemplated.

I notice in the Land Commission Report for 1944 that 335 acres of land were taken from unsatisfactory allottees and reallocated to 28 new allottees. In my opinion, that is an unfortunate happening and I do not think that it should have taken place. As the Minister is aware, it was the policy of his Party when they came into office to rush land distribution. In discussions on Land Commission Estimates I protested year after year against that policy. I considered it a mistaken policy and a policy not in the best interests of the country. This is one of the fruits of that policy. There is a limited area of land to be distributed in this country. At the most, we could provide for only 40 per cent. of the congests, no matter on what basis the land is distributed, and it is only right and fair that a thorough investigation should be carried out into the claims of applicants for land.

If that thorough investigation had been carried out since Fianna Fáil came into office, I believe the Minister would not be confronted with this job of having to remove unsatisfactory tenants from holdings given to them by the Land Commission. That is a condition of affairs which should not have arisen. In future the Minister should insist on the claims of applicants for land being exhaustively examined and he should insist that the inspectors will be satisfied that when a man gets a holding he will make good use of it and there will be no likelihood of having to remove him from it subsequently.

In that connection I would like to offer another suggestion. Under the Land Acts the Minister must provide for certain classes of people who lose employment, especially on the big estates. There are not many estates of that type left. Some of the employees on these big estates may not have very much experience of the working of land. Some of them might be engaged in carrying messages between the mansion and the nearest town, or conveying parcels from the mansion to the nearest town, and their experience on the land would be almost negligible—that is, from the point of view of the practical working of the land. There is a statutory obligation on the Land Commission to provide land for such people. There should be a moral obligation on the Land Commission to afford a person of that type some assistance so that he will have an opportunity of working the land for his own and the country's benefit.

I think the time has arrived for some form of co-operation between the Land Commission and the Department of Agriculture and when land is given to a person of that type the Land Commission should get in touch with the Department of Agriculture and arrange for an agricultural instructor or an inspector to help that man to cultivate his holding to the best possible advantage. It is inevitable that a man of that type will want some coaching, some assistance for a number of years until finally he gets into the position that he will be able to work the land for his own advantage and the advantage of the country.

I had exactly the same problem confronting me when I was in the Land Commission. I came to the conclusion that it would be much more economical and advantageous from the point of view of the State to compensate these people rather than provide them with land. I mean monetary compensation, because some of them, no matter what assistance they might get from agricultural experts, would never make good on the land.

It is very unlikely that they ever would work the land to advantage. If a man is to make the best use of land he must have some agricultural background, some tradition and experience. Some of these people acquire land when well advanced in years and, no matter what assistance they may get from Government Departments, they never make up for the lack of tradition and experience. I suggest the Minister should consider that aspect, the provision of some form of co-operation between the Land Commission and the Department of Agriculture for the purpose of bringing assistance to a class of people whom the Land Commission is statutorily obliged to give land to, in order that they may be able in time to make good use of it and that they will be of benefit to the country.

In reply to a question put by Deputy Hughes yesterday, the Minister mentioned that since 1923, 31,000 holdings had been vested finally and there remained 74,000 holdings to be vested. Presumably a substantial proportion of the 74,000 holdings has been vested provisionally. At that rate of progress it will take another 50 years to vest all these holdings finally. I think the Minister will agree that it is not fair to these unfortunate tenants that they should be deprived of their full legal title to their holdings for that number of years. I admit that there is a good deal of work to be done in connection with some of these holdings; there are improvements of one kind or another to be carried out. I hope it is not anticipated that the Land Commission will go on for ever. Some day it must come to an end. It is, I think, most unfair to these unfortunate people, who are waiting to have their holdings finally vested, that they may have to wait for 50 years before the vesting is completed.

I do not think the Minister's figures were correct. As a matter of fact, I think the number of holdings still to be vested is much greater than 74,000. Unless I am mistaken, I think he mentioned 90,000 holdings in the course of his statement. That makes the position worse. I earnestly suggest that the Minister should consider this question of vesting and ascertain the cause of the delay in relation to all these holdings. Some appropriate steps should be taken for the purpose of speeding up the work of vesting.

The Minister, like the Minister for Industry and Commerce, has suggested that land should be given only to people who make the best use of it and that if they are not making the best use of it, it should be taken from them. I agree that up to a point that is probably a correct view, but there is a terribly long tradition behind land in this country, and Ministers should be very careful in making statements of that kind lest they create any feeling of insecurity. The Minister for Industry and Commerce indicated in a speech in Cork recently that unless farmers cultivated their lands in the interests of the State there was a likelihood that their farms would be taken from them. That was the inference to be drawn. The Minister conveyed a somewhat similar idea in his statement here to-day. There was a prolonged fight in this country for fixity of tenure, and it is rather late in the day for Ministers of this or any other Government to suggest that there is a danger of farmers losing their title to their land if they do not manage that land in accordance with the wishes and desires of the Government of the day.

An Ceann Comhairle

Might I remind the Deputy that in discussing an Estimate one Minister has responsibility?

Mr. Roddy

The Minister himself made that statement, and he has already dispossessed a number of men of their land for the reasons I have indicated.

An Ceann Comhairle

Did not the Deputy introduce another Minister?

Mr. Roddy

I am referring now, of course, to vested land, land to which the tenants have a full title. The problem can be minimised somewhat by acting as I suggested earlier, by the exercise of the greatest care by the Minister and the Land Commission to ensure that the people who get land are qualified to work it to the best possible advantage.

With regard to land improvement, what struck me on looking through the report of 1944 was the dissimilarity between the amounts expended in the different counties. In County Leitrim, not quite £2,000 was spent on land improvements, and in my own county, £7,000, whereas in the two neighbouring counties, Roscommon and Mayo, over £21,000 was spent. I am sure the Land Commission was not influenced by any political considerations or anything of the sort, but why such large amounts were spent in these two counties and such a small amount in Sligo does, on the face of it, require some explanation. A lot of land in Leitrim still needs improvement, but, of course, the area requiring improvement would not be nearly so large as in other counties, but the same applies to Galway. I think that double or treble the amount has been spent in that county as was spent in the other counties I refer to. I am not suggesting that Deputies from these counties were more active than those from Sligo or Leitrim, but it does look rather peculiar that such very large sums were spent in these three counties. The same discrepancies appear with regard to the southern counties but not to the same extent as in the West.

I should be interested to hear from the Minister what progress he is making in the reclamation work undertaken 14 or 15 years ago in Cloosh and Donegal. Has the work been abandoned, or is it being continued, and with what result? I am interested because I believe it to be important, and will be even more important in future, that we should try to reclaim every inch of land that that can be reclaimed in order that we will be in a position to avail of the opportunities which will present themselves when the war is over. The experiment in Cloosh promised well, but I do not know how it has developed, as I have lost contact with it. The experiment in Donegal also promised well, but I do not know what progress has been made in the work since it started.

With regard to the improvement of holdings, and especially fencing, all over the country, in the West and elsewhere, even where there are plenty loose stones available, the tendency is to put up sod fences which have not proved satisfactory anywhere. After 12 months, or after even a shorter period, they tend to fall down. The fence bursts and the whole thing collapses. These sod fences again involve an enormous waste of land because you have to cut on either side to get the sods. It was suggested in previous years that it would be more economical to erect concrete fences. I admit that at the moment cement is not obtainable, but I suggest that, when it is available again at a reasonable price, the Minister should look into the question of the fencing of land distributed by the Land Commission, and examine whether it is not more economical to erect a concrete fence rather than to continue erecting sod fences. Concrete fences would certainly be much more satisfactory and much more durable.

Mr. Blowick

I was pleased to hear from the Minister that the Emergency Powers Order prohibiting the Land Commission from acquiring land had been revoked some time ago. The Minister said that western Deputies might have a good deal to say on this Estimate, and I am afraid that is perfectly true, because the problem of the wretchedly-small uneconomic holdings is most acute in Mayo, portion of Galway, Donegal, Leitrim, portion of Clare and portion of Kerry. I think I am not very far wrong when I say that these are the counties mainly affected. As a new Deputy, I often wonder in exactly what manner the Land Commission was run in the years previous to 1943, because my experience since I was elected is that a kind of paralysis seems to pervade the whole Department. Whether that is the fault of the Minister or of the higher officials, I do not know, but time and time again I have sent complaints into 24 Merrion Street and never got a reply. I have not received a reply to some which I left in as long ago as 15 months. I do not know what the cause of that is, but, even allowing for the fact that a great number of the staff have been lent to other Departments, owing to the emergency, I cannot see why they could not send even a short note stating that the thing could be done or could not be done and set the matter at rest.

In my county—in my constituency more than in the constituency of North Mayo—this land question is very serious. I spoke last year on this Estimate of conditions in Mayo. I do not want to ask the Minister or the Land Commission to do impossible things, but, at the very least, a much greater effort by the Land Commission is needed than we have seen hitherto. At present it seems that things are no nearer a solution in this respect than ever. There are estates which have scarcely been touched yet by the Land Commission.

The rundale system still obtains. I spoke strongly on that last year, but, yet, nothing has been done. People are still living in wretched holdings such as you would not expect to see in Africa, Russia or some of the most backward countries in the world. Within a quarter of a mile of the town of Castlebar you have people living on holdings of six and seven statute acres of reclaimed bog which are divided into 20, 30 or more plots of unfenced land. I now make another appeal to the Minister to do something. His hands have been freed by the revocation of the Emergency Powers Order, and I suggest to him that he should do something about these bad spots in my county which are really a blot on our civilisation. On the Peyton estate, outside Castlebar, and on the O'Dowd estate, outside of Louisburgh, the conditions—I went to see them myself—are really appalling. In some cases the houses are a quarter or half a mile from the road, so that the people have to cross streams, footpaths and mountain bridges to get to their houses. They cannot bring a farm cart nearer than a quarter of a mile to the house. In a townland in the Ballinrobe area, you have 22 tenants on a total arable area of 53 acres. They have a run of 300 acres between them, but that is subject to flooding. I have brought these cases to the notice of the Land Commission time and time again, but I have never received any satisfaction. A kind of paralysis seems to pervade the whole Department.

I could not understand one remark that was made by Deputy Roddy when he referred to the sums of money spent in the various counties. He said that perhaps the reason for that was that some Deputies were more active than others. I cannot understand that because Deputies are not the Land Commission, or at least should not be. I have been as active as I possibly could, but I have not succeeded in getting anything for all my trouble. I see the Minister smiling. I would ask him to come down to Castlebar, Westport, Louisburgh and Ballinrobe and meet the people who are living there under conditions as primitive as they were in the landlords' time. I assure him that if he does, he will not smile. I also suggest to him that he should avail of some of the extra £5,000 in the Estimate for travelling expenses to come to the West and see with his own eyes the conditions there. If he does he will find that Deputies from the western counties are not talking or abusing him about something that does not exist.

The Minister gave us a very poor list of the activities of the Land Commission for last year. I want to make a suggestion to him. The sum collected annually in land annuities amounts to in or about £1,500,000. I put it to him that he should approach the members of the Government and ask that this sum of money should be reserved and applied each year for the settlement of the land question in the counties where it is a serious problem. Let us settle this land question once and for all. The Minister should be able to arrange that with the Minister for Finance. If my suggestion were put into operation over a period of four, five or six years it would be possible to deal with one county each year, and in that way finally settle this land question.

We all hope that Land Commission activities will come to an end some time. Unless my suggestion is adopted, it will take about 700 years to settle the land question. Something, at all events, should be done to make conditions fairly decent in the western counties. At the present time we have about 2,200 families who need to be migrated out of their holdings. If there is not enough land in their own locality to make suitable provision for them, there is at least enough untenanted land in the County Mayo, and enough land held by the Land Commission itself to ease the situation in at least 75 per cent of the cases in County Mayo. I do not know what happened in the past—I am open to correction on this—but I believe a good deal of trouble was caused by people seeking, for political reasons, to try to set the farmers of the West at loggerheads with those in Leinster and Munster. That is the impression I have got, but perhaps I am wrong. I want to say that, without ever crossing the Shannon, the land question in my county could practically be settled without ever taking the people beyond their own boundaries. I know myself of farm holdings which were taken over in 1915 and 1916 by the Congested Districts Board and they are still undivided. I know one such farm which has been let for grazing and for tillage during the emergency, and in respect of which the actual amount taken in rent for the lettings has actually exceeded the amount paid to the original owner. While that is so, you have people living in the vicinity of it who want land and cannot get it. In that way, the Land Commission itself has become a landlord, although at one time we thought we had abolished landlordism in this country.

Legislation has been passed by this House for the abolition of slums in the towns and cities, but while that is so nothing is ever said about the slums in the rural areas. I can assure the Minister that we have slums in the rural areas which are a disgrace in this supposed civilised age. The amazing thing is that under prevailing conditions there have not been outbreaks of diseases and fevers in some of those areas. The wonderful cleanliness of the people is, I suppose, responsible for the fact that such outbreaks have not occurred. In some rural areas you have four or five houses so clustered together in a small street, not the size of this chamber, that the people in one house can hear what is being said in the other. The Minister may throw up his hands to heaven in horror because he cannot get money to put his plans into operation, but a helpless cry of that sort is of no use. Something should be done, once and for all, to settle this land question, so that I seriously ask the Minister to consider the proposal I have put forward in regard to the application of the land annuities' money for its settlement in the western counties. I think my proposal is not an unreasonable one. Then we will get somewhere. I do not think that any objection can be taken to my proposal. The Minister should tackle this job in a manly way and get a proper staff. I am afraid there seems to be some influence in the higher branches of the Department which can stop everything. As I have said, I have written over and over again about extreme and urgent cases. I have also seen some of the officials, and yet I have not got anywhere. I have received no reply to my letters to the Department, some of which were written 15 months ago. I would not like to say that the Department has something special against me, and I do not want to make any groundless charges. I know, of course, that a great many of the Land Commission staff have been lent to the Department of Agriculture during the emergency. Even so, I do not see why my communications should not be answered. I move to report progress.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.