I move:—
That a sum not exceeding £1,121,970 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, 1956, for the salaries and expenses of the Offices of the Minister for Lands and of the Irish Land Commission (44 and 45 Vict., c.49, sec. 46, and c.71, sec. 4; 48 and 49 Vict., c.73, secs. 17, 18 and 20; 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; 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; No. 26 of 1939; No. 12 of 1946; No. 25 of 1949; No. 16 of 1950; No. 18 of 1953 and No. 21 of 1954).
The gross Estimate of £2,118,275 for Lands for the current year shows a slight increase (£1,465) over the gross total for last year.
Under sub-head A, for salaries, wages and allowances, there is a decrease of £5,027 due mainly to reductions in the number of indoor staff. In recent years considerable progress has been achieved in the vesting of holdings and allotments. This fact, together with some improvements in organisation and working methods, has resulted in the elimination of 40 posts.
In July, 1954, a decision of the Supreme Court obliged the Land Commission to adopt a more formal and lengthier procedure for the hearing of objections to acquisition. That litigation caused a partial hold-up in acquisition proceedings last year but the accumulation of this work is being rapidly disposed of. It is expected therefore that the incidental expenses of the solicitor's branch will be greater this year than last year and an additional amount of £1,200 has accordingly been provided under sub-head E.
A considerable proportion of the entire Estimate is allocated to sub-heads H (1), H (2) and H (3) for making good deficiencies in the Land Bond Fund arising from the statutory halving of annuities—which alone accounts for £682,000—and other aids to land purchase. As the land settlement programme proceeds, new annuities are set up which call for additional provision under sub-heads H (1) for costs fund and H (3) for halving of annuities. This year, it is expected that the halving of annuities will result in an increase of £7,000 under sub-head H (3), which, together with an estimated increase of £400 under sub-head H (1), gives a total increase of £7,400 under this group of sub-heads.
Under sub-head I, funds are provided for the improvement of estates including the erection and repair of buildings, the construction of roads, fences, drains, and other works. Expenditure under this sub-head last year amounted to £588,439 and was about 6 per cent. short of the original estimate of £625,105. In the early part of the year 1954-55, there was a partial interruption in the work of land acquisition due to the changes in procedure to which I have already referred and this resulted in some delays in obtaining possession of new estates—with a consequent curtailment of the improvement works programme. Since the new machinery of acquisition is now operating satisfactorily it is anticipated that a full works programme will be carried out in the current year and the provision under this sub-head is therefore maintained at the same figure as for last year.
Incidentally, while on the subject of improvement works, I may mention that it has recently been decided to alter the standard type of Land Commission fence. In the past there has been a certain amount of criticism of the wire-topped sod-fence which up to now has been generally used. The change is now being made to a new type of concrete post and wire fence which will be erected in future in all cases except where special local conditions may call for the use of other types such as stone-wall or sod fence.
Under sub-head S provision is made for the payment of gratuities to persons displaced from employment by reason of the acquisition of lands on which they were employed. It is expected that during the current year there will be an increase in the number of new estates acquired and that this will lead directly to the payment of more gratuities to employees. The estimate under the sub-head has therefore been increased by £1,250 to £4,000.
I do not think that detailed comments on the other sub-heads of the Vote are necessary at this stage, as they show little variation from previous Estimates.
As regards the general work of the Land Commission I should like first to mention that the drive towards completion of tenanted land purchase is continuing to show good returns. Of approximately 110,000 tenanted holdings which vested in the Land Commission since 1923, there remain only 16,000 holdings outstanding for vesting in the tenants. In each of the Counties of Carlow, Cavan, Kildare, Kilkenny, Laois, Longford, Louth, Meath, Monaghan and Wexford the number of cases still awaiting attention is less than 50, so we may say that for all practical purposes this important branch of the work is virtually finished in the counties I have named.
Deputies will have noticed, of course, that these counties all lie in Leinster and South Ulster. In the western counties, there are still very many unvested estates which the Land Commission cannot finally resell until they have done their best to increase the size of individual holdings and to eliminate intermixed plots and rundale conditions. In many cases, too, the problem of unsatisfactory housing clamours for attention but cannot be dealt with until rearrangement has first been carried out.
The provisional totals of work done last year under the main headings of land purchase and resettlement are most satisfactory. Under the normal land division programme almost 27,000 acres were allotted among some 1,900 allottees and in addition about 19,000 acres of mountain lands handed down by the former Congested Districts Board were disposed of among small sheep farmers in the West, making the unusually high total of 46,000 acres divided. An area of 29,224 acres was acquired, resumed or taken over in exchange and 9,397 holdings, parcels and rights of turbary were vested in tenants or allottees.
I have already referred to a Supreme Court judgment which necessitated a review of acquisition procedure and which caused a temporary check in the inflow of new lands. This check had a most unfortunate effect on the year's migration programme because, of course, it is vitally necessary that lands intended for migrants should be acquired very early in the year so as to allow time for the erection of new dwellings and outoffices before the migration season begins. Nevertheless, the general programme of migration was pushed forward as rapidly as possible and 85 families in all were migrated from congested areas to new holdings elsewhere.
On a few occasions recently I have thought that the publicity given to long-distance migration into eastern counties may have given the impression that Leinster bears the entire burden of providing the necessary untenanted land for the relief of congestion by this method. The facts, however, completely contradict any such impression. In the last seven years, for instance, holdings to the number of 255 have been provided for migrants in the Counties of Meath, Kildare and Westmeath. In the same years, Galway provided 68 holdings and Mayo 78. It will be seen, therefore, that the Land Commission do not neglect any opportunity that arises to relieve western congestion by using such lands as may be available for that purpose in the West itself. If they are obliged to move a fair proportion of the migrants eastward across the Shannon it is solely because the resources of the counties in which the congested districts lie are quite inadequate to enable the Land Commission to deal locally with the relief of congestion.
I am anxious also to dispel any idea that the migrants to Leinster take up all the available land to the detriment of local needs. The fact is that of all the land divided in Meath since 1923, persons from outside the county have only been allotted 20 per cent.; in Kildare, the persons from outside the county were allotted 10 per cent., and in Westmeath 5 per cent. That is to say that in these three counties about 86 per cent. of all land divided has been used to meet local needs. Even in recent years, with the special emphasis on migration, allottees from other counties were allotted less than 8,000 acres of the 10,090 acres divided in those three counties.
For several years past, building and other activities of local authorities have thrown a big increase of work on the Land Commission in relation to the subdivision of holdings. Indeed, this subdivision work also proved burdensome to the local authorities. I am pleased to be able to say that a solution has recently been found to overcome this difficulty. In future, when local authorities come to register subdivisions of this kind in the Land Registry, they will receive automatic approval of the subdivision provided they have complied with certain mere routine requirements regarding the apportionment and redemption of annuities.
It is customary to inform the House of the general position regarding the collection of annuities—although, in fact, this branch of the work has not caused any great trouble in recent years. The amount outstanding at 31st March, 1955, was £142,847—which is about £2,400 greater than at the same time last year. This small increase is not significant. The total arrear at the end of the last financial year was only 2.28 per cent. of the total annuities collectable since the revision of annuities under Land Act, 1933.
As regards the future work of the commission, I may say that it is confidently anticipated that in a very few years' time the purchase and resale of tenanted land will be completed in all but the nine congested districts counties and even in these counties the problem of the unsold estates will have been brought down to more manageable proportions.
The revision of the procedure for the acquisition of untenanted lands has been accomplished satisfactorily and I think it likely that the intake of land for the relief of congestion will remain steady for some years to come. As before, the programme for the relief of congestion will include a considerable amount of migration from the most severely congested areas coupled with the rearrangement and enlargement of the holdings of those tenants who are not migrated.
I feel sure that the Land Commission, in its time, always had, and always will have, plenty of critics. The supply of land is limited but the demands on the Land Commission are almost unlimited. It is not strange, therefore, that there is some dissatisfaction as the Land Commission cannot work miracles. Deputies have only to listen to the string of Land Commission questions in this House at any Question Time, to find out how contentious the work of the Land Commission can be and how much interest it evokes.
When the Land Commission take up land there is criticism. When they allot land there is criticism too. Some say the Land Commission are going too slow. Others say, though perhaps more discreetly, that the Land Commission are going to fast. It is really too easy to be critical in this contentious work. We rarely hear the other side of the story. In this connection it gives me great satisfaction to state that last year the Land Commission effected the rearrangement of over 600 uneconomic intermixed holdings, the highest total yet achieved in this essential work. Deputies who are familiar with conditions in the rundale districts will appreciate that the striping of so many holdings—all carried out with the tenants' consent—calls for a great deal of skilful planning and indeed the exercise of great tact and energy on the part of the Land Commission inspectors.
For the benefit of Deputies who are not familiar with such rural conditions perhaps I should say that throughout the congested districts there still exist thousands of cases of the worst possible type of congestion, namely intermixed and rundale holdings. These cases are the rural equivalent of the city slums. Because there are great difficulties in relieving these acutely congested areas they have been left over for attention until recent times. But the Land Commission are now tackling them energetically to the limit of their resources. In these acutely congested districts each small holding usually consists of several detached plots, often unfenced, and to make matters worse the housing conditions are extremely bad.
Last year the Land Commission rearranged over 600 of these intermixed smallholdings and in this way they lifted the 600 smallholders and their families out of a condition of extreme poverty and placed them on economic holdings, where these smallholders and their successors can be assured of the opportunity to provide a decent living for themselves and their families, by their own industry and initiative. I venture to say that no other body in the State is concerned with work which is more enduring in its benefits than this resettlement work of the Land Commission.
To give Deputies a clear picture I have placed in the main hall of the House two maps showing the position before and after rearrangement, in one typical district out of the many districts of this kind. By various proceedings, including acquisition, resumption, migration, turbary development, housing, fencing and other improvement works, the Land Commission, in rearranging the four town-lands concerned, raised the 84 small-holdings from an average of £5 rateable valuation to an average of £10 and made available £45,000 for expenditure on improvement works. They improved beyond description the lay-out of the individual holdings, reducing the number of detached plots from 486 to 120, thus eliminating for all time the fragmentation of these holdings. In the result the Land Commission raised very substantially the production prospects of the lands, and the general standard of living of the smallholders and their families.
Unfortunately, I find it necessary to refer to a few cases in which the Land Commission have met with unreasonable opposition to rearrangement schemes of this type. I am well aware that a small farmer who is asked to exchange part of his lands for part of his neighbour's lands will approach the suggestion with the utmost caution and will be on his guard against any possible disadvantage it may contain. I think it the most natural thing that he should drive a shrewd bargain so as to ensure that he gets proportionately as much benefit as the next man. But when these conditions have been met and the inspector has evolved a scheme which offers a fair deal to all the parties concerned, I think it is unreasonable that one man, by refusing to co-operate, should deprive all his neighbours of the benefits of that scheme without showing good cause. Reluctantly, therefore, I am compelled to issue warning that in any case where an obstructor takes an irresponsible attitude, I have asked the commissioners to consider the use of their compulsory powers to resume part or all of the holding concerned.
The relief of congestion is the main objective of the Land Commission— even this policy has its critics—but that objective has been fixed by the laws of the Oireachtas—very wisely fixed in my opinion and there are many Deputies whose own experience can bear me out in this. The Land Commission are working consistently and energetically towards that objective. They are taking up suitable land which is not producing sufficient agricultural products, wherever they can get such land. They are paying full market value to the dispossessed owners. They are allotting the land to those whose needs are greatest and who have shown, beyond doubt, the capacity to put the land to better use.
It would be too much to expect that any human organisation could operate without occasional failures. I am glad, however, to be able to say that the proportion of failures among allottees is now virtually nil. This is good news and very important, too, because in the work of land division, mistakes cannot easily be rectified. Deputies who call for top-speed seem not to realise that in this line of business, failures and undue haste go hand-in-hand together. I am all for speed but I will not go beyond a certain limit which would certainly, as proved by past experience, produce bad work. These remarks should go to show that the Land Commission are doing much sound work throughout the country, quietly, without any blare of publicity. The people who have benefited by recent Land Acts rarely have occasion to make public announcement of that fact. But the evidence is plain to be seen in every county by any impartial observer. Let us give even a little credit, where much credit is due.