Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 26 May 1955

Vol. 151 No. 2

Committee on Finance. - Vote 47—Lands.

Minister for Lands (Mr. Blowick)

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.

Tomás Ó Deirg

Molaim-se go gcuirfear on Meastacan so thar nais chun a aithbhreithnithe. As regards the sub-heads of the Estimate, there is not very much to be said. Since last year there is a net decrease of £1,000 in the cost of the Department of Lands. Of course, there have been substantial increases in recent years. Since 1945-46 there has been an increase in all, I calculate, of about £700,000. In that time, of course, the Land Commission had been proceeding with the acquisition and allotment of land—the side, of course, in which Deputies are mainly, if not solely, interested. But that work had reached a much lower level than before the war and particularly the middle 1930's, when the work was at its peak. The output was reduced and it was not possible, due to war circumstances, to keep up the level of 1938. Activities recommenced on a larger scale after the war period with the result that since 1950-51 the Land Commission are spending nearly £500,000 more than previously.

In 1951-52 there was an increase in the Estimate of £192,000; in 1952-53 there was a further increase of £159,000. As I have pointed out frequently, apart from the sub-heads dealing with staff and improvements there is very little that we can do in this House in regard to the other sub-heads. Some of them, as the Minister has pointed out, are for very substantial sums, for example, sub-head H (3) —payments under Section 27 (2) of the Land Act, 1933—£682,000, that is, for the halving of the annuities.

With regard to the question of staff, the Minister has mentioned in his statement that during recent years some reduction in staff has been made possible by virtue of the progress in the vesting of holdings and allotments and that there has been some reorganisation. I, of course, am in a somewhat special position, having regard to the knowledge I acquired as Minister for Lands about the difficulties of mechanisation and adoption of modern methods of labour saving and expedition in office routine in regard to the Land Commission, so much of the work there being concerned with matters of a legal or quasi-legal nature, which means that, instead of dealing with cases en bloc, in the case of the vesting of holdings, individual cases have to be examined.

It is a matter of satisfaction to the tenant landholders under the Land Commission that where these holdings are finally vested in the proprietors very rarely does any difficulty arise with regard to boundaries or the legal position, the title to the holding. That is due to the care and trouble that has been taken in the Land Commission in dealing with these holdings very often on an individual basis.

In this Assembly, of course, we have to have special regard to the cost of these large Departments. I would like the Minister to indicate, when he is replying, what the possibilities may be when the vesting of the non-congested counties is completed of releasing further staff by virtue of the termination of that work and whether it has been possible, by reorganisation of the remainder of the indoor or outdoor staff, to effect any economies by zoning or amalgamating areas, for example, or combining activities that had been distributed or decentralised.

With regard to the question of land acquisition, the Minister has assured us that the new machinery of acquisition is operating satisfactorily. Those of us who are interested in the progress of land settlement, and particularly in the work of relieving congestion in the West, were rather anxious about the possible results on acquisition procedure and on the general work of the Land Commission of the case in the Supreme Court to which reference has been made. I am glad to know from the Minister that, as I understand it, it has been possible to get over whatever difficulties have arisen and to get back into full working of the machine on the acquisition side.

While the new machinery of acquisition is operating satisfactorily, if it is disclosed that a burden has been placed upon the Land Commissioners which makes it more difficult for them to operate efficiently and satisfactorily and if legislation should be considered necessary in order to ease any of these difficulties, as far as we are considered, should it be the Minister's intention to introduce such legislation, it will, I hope, receive favourable consideration on this side of the House.

The Minister has assured us that he is satisfied that things are now working satisfactorily. It simply goes to illustrate the difficulties that the commissioners are faced with and the legal obstacles that are superimposed upon all the other physical, financial and administrative difficulties that go with land resettlement.

With regard to the vesting of tenanted land, the Minister has stated that there are 16,000 cases outstanding. I understood last year that there were about 19,000 cases which, I take it, have now been reduced to 16,000 and that, in addition, we had some 7,500 on Congested Districts Board estates, apart from the fact that most of the 16,000 outstanding were, I take it, also in the congested areas. I wonder would the Minister be able, when replying, to let us know in regard to this 16,000 what number is in the congested areas. Are we to take it that they are practically all from the congested areas?

Mr. Blowick

The 16,000 of the tenanted holdings are practically all in the congested areas.

Mr. Derrig

That means that we have up to about 23,500 congested holdings to deal with. I have put down a number of questions. I did not anticipate that the Estimate would come up this week. One of the questions is, with regard to the operation of Section 27 of the 1950 Act, whether the Minister is still satisfied that this section is giving results that are worth while or whether he would consider the possibility of strengthening its hand in that regard. The case has been made from this side of the House, and probably will be made again during this debate, that some change is necessary.

As regards acquisition for the past year, I understood the Minister to say that some 27,000 acres had been allotted, apart from 19,000 acres of mountain land. I am not quite clear. I think the Minister has not stated the number of allottees.

Mr. Blowick

I have, yes—1,900 approximately.

Mr. Derrig

27,000 acres were allotted amongst some 1,900 allottees and, in addition, about 19,000 acres of mountain land, handed down by the former Congested Districts Board, were disposed of among small sheep farmers. I am not quite clear what the position is in relation to these 19,000 acres of mountain land. Are they lands that have been in the possession of the Land Commission? Apparently they are because according to a statement they were formerly Congested Districts Board lands and, therefore, the figures which we are in the habit of getting in answer to questions here in the Dáil at conacre times as to the residue of land in the possession of the Land Commission will be decreased by that 19,000 acres; and, instead of some 40,000 acres, as we have been accustomed to, we will have less than that.

Mr. Blowick

That is correct.

Mr. Derrig

At the risk of getting rid of a figure which appears to add a certain amount of importance to our statistics, I think it would be well if the other 20,000 acres could be vested in the mountain land holders, or utilised for afforestation or for some other purpose. That would be an excellent ending to what has already been achieved.

Mr. Blowick

I have not included now the 19,000 acres of land amongst the 1,900 allottees because they were mostly the remains of old estates that were disposed of this year and I suppose the number of allottees would not be any more than 30 or 40.

Mr. Derrig

With regard to the position generally, one of the objects in putting down this motion to have the Estimate reconsidered is to give Deputies an opportunity of reviewing the work of the Land Commission. As the Minister indicated in his opening speech there are different points of view about the work of the Land Commission. There is no doubt whatever about its importance in the congested areas and the interest the people in these counties have in its operation. As the Minister indicated, the outlook may be rather different in other areas.

Even if the Land Commission were not acquiring land for the purpose of relieving congestion, which the Minister says, and I agree with him, is the main task of the Land Commission, nevertheless, we have to bear in mind that this problem has been receiving attention for a very long period of time. The old Congested Districts Board handed over to the Irish Land Commission and that body was not in a position to handle the western problem in quite the same way because it did not have the intimate knowledge or the experienced staff that the old Congested Districts Board had when it began operations.

There was a feeling of optimism after the passage of the 1923 Land Act that the land problem, even in County Mayo, was well on the way to being solved. It has not, of course, been solved but we must all agree, if we are acquainted with the work of the Land Commission, that great advances have been made. There have been tremendous improvements in the standard of living and the general conditions of the people since the Congested Districts Board started. I think Deputies will probably like to know from the Minister in somewhat more detail—and this was the object of a question which was addressed to him by Deputy Blaney—what the actual nature and extent of the problem of congestion is at the moment?

We have, I think, about 24,000 holdings and the question is: is it possible, having reached this hard core of the problem, to segregate the very bad cases, what may still be described as the rural slums since there are isolated residues worthy of that title in certain parts of the West? Is it possible to segregate the very bad cases which, it is felt, can benefit substantially in time from rearrangement from those other cases where there does not seem to be any reserves of land available locally, but where the number of tenants is so great that, as far as our present knowledge goes, it would take very many years before we could even scratch the surface of the problem?

That is the position with regard to some of the estates in Donegal and in Mayo as far as my knowledge goes. The question will naturally be asked then as to how long the work of acquisition and distribution of land for the relief of congestion is likely to continue? Prior to the war there was an opinion often expressed—I cannot say whether it was founded on close knowledge of the work of the Land Commission or whether it was rather a hope or an expectation—that the work would be completed in another five years. Leaving aside what may have been the opinion in pre-war days, we have now been working pretty steadily since 1947 or 1948 and I would like the Minister to give some indication as to how long he thinks it will take before the Land Commission can see themselves coming to the end of this particular problem; or are we to take it that the problem will be a permanent one?

It will, I am sure, be pointed out in the course of this debate that progress is rather slow in spite of the fact that 85 migrant holdings have been set up, which involves an amount of work and preparation that Deputies unfamiliar with the Land Commission may not easily appreciate. Nevertheless, even with the total figure of 255 in the past seven years as compared with the 23,000 or 24,000 holdings, it is obvious that we will not be able to ameliorate the position of more than a certain fraction of the number of these holders that are still on hands or on the books, so to speak.

One might say that, while progress has been stepped up in relation to the 600 cases of rearrangement, that would equally mean that at that rate it would take a long period of years before all the cases due for rearrangement could be attended to. It could possibly be argued by Deputies, if they were familiar with this work of rearrangement and local circumstances, that even having regard to the obstacles and difficulties to which the Minister has referred—often difficulties arising from the character of the people with whom the inspectors have to deal—that rearrangement could be stepped up substantially by dealing more rapidly with these large estates and trying to get them off the books. Some might feel that it could be stepped up to possibly 1,000 with the experience that the younger men have of rearrangement and the knowledge that they will have gained in the next year or two; if they were brought together and asked for their views as to how the matter might be stepped up perhaps greater advances could be made.

If Deputies were acquainted with the nature of these holdings that are still on the books, I feel that the figure of 1,000 per annum for rearrangement would not satisfy them. They would expect that we ought to try, if we are to complete the work within a reasonable period of years, to deal with up to about 2,000, or, otherwise, devise some means by segregating the cases where we think we can do something from those others where, with the best will in the world, owing to circumstances and the scarcity of land and the feelings of the people themselves, migration is not possible or rearrangement is not possible because in fact they have made up their minds that they are not going to find a living there in any case and they are either clearing out or have cleared out to other countries.

Progress is slow and there is disappointment which is constantly expressed and I think it would be necessary to meet the criticisms of the slowness of the procedure and of the results, valuable and all as they are— their seeming inadequacy in comparison with the size of the problem—by going into the matter in more detail and letting the House know what exactly these areas of rundale are, and what it is hoped can be achieved in improving them during the coming year.

I know that there are certain areas where it was believed, when I first became acquainted with the work of the Land Commission, that there was no possibility of doing very much. The holdings were so bad, the patches were so small that the commissioners were even reluctant to advance the money for housing assistance. They did not even feel apparently, that as a pied-áterre for agricultural labourers who spend some part of their time away, they could undertake the building of houses for them because the patches were so wretched and the possibilities of improvement seemed to be so remote. Therefore, it seems that only a limited amount can be done and when the Minister tells us that he is expecting that during the coming years the intake of land will remain steady for some years to come, I think there again it would be necessary to have a picture of what the situation is likely to be at the end of another three years.

The belief pre-war—again this is a rather vague figure containing a large amount of anticipation without perhaps any real basis of information—was that there might be possibly 500,000 acres of land available. I would like the Minister to tell us—I have put down a question—as to the total amount of land which is in the machine at the present time. In the last year for which figures are available, in 1952-53, there seemed to be about 72,000 acres for acquisition and another 18,000 acres for resumption, say, 90,000 acres, and the probability as to what is likely to come in eventually is that not half of it or perhaps not more than half will come in.

The pool of possible available land is, of course, very much smaller now than it used to be. I wonder would the Minister consider that we would have 150,000 or 200,000 acres inside the next three years because even if the machine takes cognisance of such a pool of land there is the enormous difficulty of acquiring it. What struck me very forcibly during my recent period in charge of the Department was that the natural economic forces were operating very strongly against the work of the Land Commission—the increase in the value of land, the enormous development that has been taking place in agriculture, the fact that you have companies going into agricultural production and, of course, mechanisation going on apace. All these things have been operating against the work of the Land Commission, not to speak of the legal difficulties with which the commissioners have to contend. I often wonder if we were setting up the Commission now would the Oireachtas give them under the present-day Administration far-reaching powers to acquire land for the relief of congestion.

Certainly as regards the West the case for relief of congestion on social and humanitarian grounds is a very strong one. Anyone who visits a place like Tráigh Bháin in Connemara will wonder how the people could ever have lived there, how they exist and how the place they inhabit could be described as land. It is not merely that the force in regard to the occupation of land and the difficulty of acquiring it, the increasing appreciation of land as an asset and an investment, and so on, are operating against the Land Commission, but you have the other side of the picture.

I am informed—and I know from my own experience and from whatever contacts I may have met with the West —that there is a large number of derelict holdings and you have the position that even in relatively well-off areas, as far as the West is concerned, you have whole households emigrating, leaving their holdings more or less derelict and letting them. These people are creating a new type of absentee. We used to hear about absentee landlords long ago. Now we have absentee tenants, and I have asked the Minister in a question whether any survey has been made of this problem.

When I was over in the Land Commission I was told it was not the fact that the occupant of the holding was a bachelor who clearly was not going to undertake matrimonial responsibilities at his time of life or an old age pensioner who had nobody except a son or daughter in the fifties or sixties, that was the consideration. It was not the conjugal condition or the family or the individual circumstances: it was the holding itself. But surely we must have regard to this question of population. Will it not strike a person looking at it objectively that it would be better to have a young man and his wife on the holding and to take it from those people who are not utilising it or who are gone away completely, and try to build up a new community? Unfortunately a great deal of the work of the Land Commission is being carried on I am afraid in communities where many people have emigrated. They have left the country and we have the old people there.

If we are going to incur these heavy expenditures and if we are to be in earnest about relieving congestion we must surely see that we will have young families on these holdings which we are improving or rearranging. While it is quite certain that in Kilvine, for example—I take it that was the case the Minister referred to— according to figures I have, there were 73 holdings rearranged at an estimated cost of £35,000. The Minister says there were 84 holdings at a cost of £45,000, which is all to the good——

Mr. Blowick

That includes three townlands, as well as Kilvine.

Mr. Derrig

——if we can deal with a whole community with a comparatively large number of families like that. Of course, that is a very exceptional case. We have other cases like Cuiltybo, which the Minister knows better than I do, and the people are not satisfied, apparently, with what was being done and what could be attempted, having regard to the circumstances of the area, was not as great as the commissioners would have wished. But they were doing their best and I was told here in this House it was simply a waste of time. I wondered whether in the native county of the Minister they had lost their interest in land altogether because certainly in former days the desire for land, their patches being so wretched and the quality being so inferior, was so great that on these small holdings of less than £5 valuation people were able to rear splendid families giving sons and daughters to the church and to the professions.

If they had to emigrate they certainly gave a good account of themselves whereever they went. Apparently, now their eyes are to a very large extent on other countries and I think that we must answer the question whether this emigration, this leaving holdings uninhabited is not undoing to an extent the work of the Land Commission and whether something drastic should not be done about it. There is the attraction of the regular wage. Any experience I have had of the areas from which migrants go shows it is the regular wage that is the attraction and high wages are now available. I can see that the pull will be from Great Britain upon those remaining once a certain number of the younger population leave an area. The pull will be similar to the pull that was exercised from Boston or Philadelphia before the first world war.

There is no use in talking about the flight from the land so far as these wretched holdings are concerned. They did not give more than a subsistence with hard work. I fear that with the experience the emigrants are getting now in Britain it will be very difficult to counter the desire to better themselves, if we put it that way, which is so evident unless there is a change of heart, unless we can set about creating new communities. If we are to revitalise these communities which are on the verge of extinction in some places, we must give the young people more hope. I think that the work of our Land Commission should be ancillary or complementary to the general work of increasing production from the land.

I remember in the early war days being told by one of the commissioners that land reclamation did not pay. "Why should we have land reclamation," he said, "when we could get good land for what reclamation costs?" Of course the situation has entirely changed. The Land Commission used carry on land reclamation on a limited scale, it is true, but I wonder whether having regard to the fact that there is not nearly enough land to satisfy urgent needs of congested areas, the congests themselves in very many cases will not be pleased with what is being done for them unless they can be assured that they are going to get a few more acres of reasonably good land. Their thoughts are on a land where they feel they can get regular employment and good wages.

If we are to counter that, I think we must have a more active, more constructive policy and one that is more in line with the ideas and circumstances of the present day. It has been shown that land reclamation can be carried out in the West and crops—grass or others—can be obtained and a profit secured when the capital charges have been met and labour has been paid. One therefore wonders whether there should not be a greater orientation in the Land Commission. I take it the commissioners have power to do this work as a solution or partial solution of the problem, an additional means of trying to stem emigration and help the congested areas. When we were in office we were very interested in the proposal to have pilot schemes of reclamation on high bog in the West.

I think there should be several of these schemes. We know that if the Cloosh reclamation work were being undertaken at the present time it would probably be done at comparatively less cost and there would have been better prospects of its being an economic proposition. Whether it would have been possible to get a number of the local congests, a number of those people with whom we were dealing in other ways—trying to migrate them or rearrange holdings—to settle on these lands is a question that can only be determined by actual experience, by actually undertaking such work.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.

The Dáil adjourned at 5 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 31st May, 1955.