asked the Minister for Lands if he will state (a) the number of applications for exchange holdings which have been received from the Rosmuck district of Connemara and which are awaiting attention, and (b) the number of such applications which are likely to be granted this year.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Connemara Applicants for Exchange Holdings.
Though applications for exchanges are not recorded according to particular districts I understand that seven such applications have been received from tenants in the Rosmuck district. The Deputy will, of course, realise that such arrangements for migration as are in train are still tentative. Final decisions as regards migration each year are based on a number of factors including the circumstances of the various applicants, the suitability of their lands for use in effecting rearrangement and the number of new holdings which are available for disposal. Some migrants have been taken from the district in the past and this has made possible the rearrangement and improvement of many of the remaining holdings; in fact 21 holdings were rearranged last spring.
Could the Minister say whether any communication will be sent to these applicants before the end of the year?
Oh, no. That is not the practice.
How will the applicants be notified as to how they have fared?
They probably will not be notified. As I pointed out in my reply, the applicants whose lands are suitable and needed by the commission will be asked to migrate. The unsuccessful applicants will not be notified, because the procedure is that when the successful applicants are given an exchange of holdings that is an indication to the people who applied how they fared. I do not see how it would serve any purpose to notify applicants that they have been unsuccessful. The moment the tenants in a townland are asked to migrate word goes round and the unsuccessful applicants then know their lands are not suitable.
Would the Minister not agree that one good purpose would be served by notifying the unsuccessful applicants—namely, that they could then go ahead with whatever improvements their holdings needed? Is the Minister not aware that a number of these applicants desist from improving their holdings pending a decision on their applications, and does he not think he would be serving a good purpose by notifying them, one way or the other, what is being done?
The Deputy should be aware that it is not those alone who have applied for an exchange of holdings who desist from improving their holdings. When it becomes known in a townland that the townland is to be rearranged, everybody desists from improving because, in the course of rearrangement, they do not know whether they will be migrated or not or that any improvements they carried out might not pass on to neighbours the following spring, such as new houses or out-houses. It is not true to say that only applicants desist from improving their holdings.
Do not the Minister's remarks strengthen what I have said?
Question No. 13.