asked the Minister for Lands if he will state (1) the amount paid for the Courtown Estate, (2) the period of time in which the estate was in the possession of his Department, (3) the number of small-holders in the area who applied for a subdivision, and (4) the amount for which the estate was subsequently sold.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Courtown Estate.
35.
The Courtown Estate, containing in all 308 acres, was acquired by the Forestry Division of my Department in April, 1956. In 1957 the Land Commission, at the request of the Forestry Division, considered the question of taking over the arable or semi-arable parts of the Estate, containing approximately 89 acres, for division among local small-holders but decided to take no action towards acquisition. Applications for parts of this Land were received by the Land Commission from three small-holders.
In November, 1958, the Forestry Division offered 78½ acres of this land for sale by public tender in two lots. Tenders have been accepted for both lots and the sales are in course of completion. The balance of the estate is being retained for afforestation.
It would be contrary to established practice to disclose either the price paid by the Forestry Division for the Estate or the prices obtained by the Division for the parts subsequently sold.
Can I take it that the conduct of the Department of Lands in regard to this estate is an indication of the future policy of the Land Commission?
Each case is examined on its own merits. If the Land Commission think that the land is suitable for distribution among uneconomic holders, they will take over the land.
Surely the Minister must realise that some of this land was arable land?
I am aware the Deputy disagreed with the Land Commission on this subject. I am afraid the Land Commission's decision was that it was not suitable for division.
Is arable land not suitable for division?
The Land Commission disagreed with the Deputy in regard to the arable character of the land.