Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 27 Oct 1954

Vol. 147 No. 1

State Property Bill, 1954—Second Stage.

I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time. This is another of those very technical Bills and, as Deputy Aiken will know, it is one that has been under consideration for a very long time indeed. I think that almost every Minister for Finance has had a finger in the pie, in the production of this Bill.

The main purpose of the Bill is to make provision, as contemplated by Articles 10.3 and 10.4 of the Constitution, for the management of and the control of the alienation of certain State lands. Deputies will have seen that there is a fairly full memorandum circulated with the Bill and they will have an opportunity from that of getting the details of the Bill before them. Therefore, I want to deal only with a few rather general matters.

Article 11 of the Constitution of 1922 provided, in relation to lands which were State lands immediately prior to the 6th December, 1922, that they should be

"controlled and administered by the Oireachtas, in accordance with such regulations and provisions as shall be from time to time approved by legislation"

and that they might be granted by way of lease or licence for terms not exceeding 99 years, to be worked or enjoyed under the authority and subject to the control of the Oireachtas. This article was implemented by the State Lands Act, 1924, the State Lands (Workhouses) Act, 1930, the Prisons Act, 1933, and the Foreshore Act, 1933, and all these Acts are still in force.

Article 10 of the present Constitution prescribes, inter alia, that provision may be made by law for the management of lands which were State lands immediately before the coming into operation of the Constitution and lands acquired thereafter and for the control of the alienation, whether temporary or permanent, of such lands. No mention is made of control by the Oireachtas or of restriction of alienations to terms not exceeding 99 years.

The State Lands Act, 1924, applies only to land which by virtue of Article 11 of the Constitution of 1922 belonged to Saorstát Éireann. The administration of those lands has, however, been hampered in several respects by certain restrictive provisions of that Act. One provision is that particulars of proposed leases and licences must be laid before each House of the Oireachtas for a period which involves a delay of at least four weeks before formal effect can be given to them. One effect of this is, for example, that at present unimportant grazing lettings on the eleven months' system, weekly or monthly tenancies and occupations of State premises by State servants for official purposes, have to be held up for a period of perhaps four weeks for the purpose of being laid before the House under the 1924 Act. Small lettings of that sort clearly should not be held up in that way.

The second difficulty was that the Act permits only of alienations for terms not exceeding 99 years, and it empowers the Minister for Finance to make the necessary leases and licences and requires him to make these by deeds under his official seal. It is obviously desirable to extend that.

The third objection is that the Act did not permit of lettings involving removals of sand, gravel, stone or clay. The fourth objection is that it did not permit of the sale or surrender of lands and premises no longer required for State purposes. There have been many cases over the years where that restriction has caused some anxiety and some difficulty.

Article 10 of the present Constitution enables the difficulties of administration which I have enumerated to be removed and also enables the making of legislative provision for the management of lands acquired by the State since 1922. It is accordingly proposed to repeal the State Lands Act, 1924, and to enact more suitable and more comprehensive provisions to govern the vesting in State authorities, that is to say, Ministers of State and the Commissioners of Public Works, of State land not already so vested, for example, former Crown, Admiralty and R.I.C. lands, or doubtfully vested and the transfer of State land by one State authority to another. These matters are provided for in the Bill which also empowers State authorities in relation to State land, other than certain lands specified in the First Schedule to the Bill, to make sales, exchanges, grants, surrenders, leases and licences. Leases and licences may be for any terms, grants may be gratuitous, dedications for use by the public may be made and the public may be permitted to use such land subject to by-laws. State authorities may waive and release covenants in leases and may waive and release rents and arrears of rents. These powers of State authorities are to be exercisable only with the consent, either general or particular, of the Minister for Finance. Control by the Houses of the Oireachtas similar to the control prescribed in the State Lands Act, 1924, is not proposed. Instead, it is provided in Section 10 (6) of the Bill that half-yearly reports, giving particulars of sales, exchanges, grants and leases, other than leases for terms not exceeding 21 years, should be laid before each House of the Oireachtas. Similar provisions have been made in legislation passed since 1924, dealing with alienations of minerals, foreshore and fisheries.

Apart from the main provisions of the Bill to which I have referred, the Bill also provides for a variety of other matters the more important of which are outlined in the opening paragraph of the Explanatory Memorandum and all of which are explained in some detail in the body of the memorandum. It is hardly necessary for me at this stage to supplement the information contained in the memorandum on these miscellaneous provisions but if any Deputy desires additional information on any point of general principle affecting these matters, I shall be only too glad to give it.

I think everybody will agree that it was wise that Article 10 of the Constitution did not have any such restrictive effect on the alienation of State lands as was contained in the State Lands Act of 1924. From time to time, various Ministers, who have plenty to do otherwise, find themselves the possessors of lands which they do not want, which no other State Department will take and which they are unable to get rid of. I am glad the Minister for Finance has found parliamentary time to get this Bill brought forward: he says it has been on the stocks for quite a long time. I feel the measure will certainly have good results not only in easing the work of Government Departments but also in giving the State the right to sell property which they do not want to people who might make better use of it. There are odd bits of such land throughout the country: we hear of them from time to time.

In my view, the Minister is very wise in getting rid of the necessity to come to the Dáil before exercising his waiver in respect of State lands or property. He is wise, also, in insisting that there should be a six-monthly publication of such transactions.

Section 12 relates to "Waiver and release of rent and arrears of rent and mense rates in respect of State land". It might be advisable for the Minister to look into the point as to whether or not there should be a publication of the list of waivers.

This Bill is a Committee Stage Bill. I feel that it will be welcomed as long overdue by the majority of the people of the country and I am glad it has been brought forward.

I, too, would like to congratulate the Minister for introducing this Bill. It was long overdue. There is just one matter I should like the Minister to look into. It concerns Section 19, which relates to priority of moneys due in respect of former Crown rents, and so forth. I have not had an opportunity of looking into the provisions of Section 38 (2) of the Finance Act, 1924 (No. 27 of 1924), but I have come across a number of cases in respect of debts collectable by the State either in the case of deceased persons or in the case of bankruptcy. Very often, such a claim might involve an injustice either on the family or on other relatives. Possibly the Minister might look into the question of whether or not the provisions of Section 19 are essential in this case.

As a member of a public authority, I should like to welcome this Bill. From time to time, as has been pointed out, public authorities are faced with difficulties in providing suitable lands for housing near villages so that the houses may be built for a community and serviced as modern requirements now demand. On occasion, we have come up against problems of that kind where, if we could get a lease or transfer of such land to the housing authorities, many of our difficulties would be solved. I am sure the people generally also see that there is a good deal of waste in allowing these lands to continue unused, as is often the case, with high walls around them. These lands, which were used by garrisons in former days, will now be for the public service. When we come to the Committee Stage, there may be some aspects of that problem which would need to be straightened out in one way or another so that the assurance could be there that these lands could be donated or transferred or leased to public authorities who may need them as well as to citizens who may wish to acquire them.

I should like to welcome this Bill. It appears to be a constructive approach to a problem which has existed here since 1922 when this State became the caretaker of such lands and interests in British properties which are in this country. Apart from the fact that the existence of that situation is there and causes difficulties such as those mentioned by Deputy MacCarthy in the matter of the acquisition of land for housing purposes and other matters where the public interest could be served, we have a situation where there are large tracts of land in respect of which this State is acting as caretaker for the British Government. Apparently, this Bill will enable us to acquire these lands and make them available, if necessary, to the Irish Land Commission so that they can be divided in the ordinary way and made available to deserving applicants for these lands which would, in many cases, make good agricultural holdings.

I can appreciate that this matter must have been a very thorny problem when it took so many Ministers for Finance to try and iron out the many difficulties involved by reason of the situation which has existed. I feel that this Bill will solve many of the anomalies which have existed as a result of the circumstances under which this State became the caretaker of this type of property.

As Deputy Aiken said, this is really a Committee Bill, and it is one, therefore, which we can consider far more easily on the next stage than to-day.

Deputy Aiken raised a point as regards Section 12. Certainly, I will approach that with my mind running in the general direction and unless there is some very excellent reason that such a return should not be made it will be made. It was wrong, as was the previous arrangement in respect of leases, that we had to await the document supplied for the information of the House but it is equally wrong, from the other point of view, that we should not give by way of return to the House any information that is required by members of the House acting in a reasonable manner.

Question put and agreed to.
Committee Stage ordered for Wednesday, 3rd of November, 1954.
Top
Share