I must say that what Deputy Norton said in connection with this Bill requires to be borne in mind. It is a fact that with the introduction of the Petroleum and other Minerals Development Bill, a wholly false impression could easily be given unwittingly in the country. So far as we are concerned, we are quite satisfied that a Bill of this character should be enacted but we do not want to make its enactment the occasion for suggesting to the public that we or anybody else in this House expect gushers to break forth all over the country.
There are, however, one or two points made by Deputy Mulcahy and Deputy Esmonde which I wish to underline. The whole question of petroleum and mineral royalties is a very complex one and this is a highly technical Bill with which the Minister was good enough to furnish an explanatory memorandum to assist us in following its provisions.
I should like to refer to two minor matters, though really there are three. The first is the question of royalties, and I want to speak rather as the representative of the ordinary country people amongst whom I live and have my living. Owing to the particular form of land tenure in this country, the mineral rights have been in many cases—50 per cent. of all cases according to the Minister for Industry and Commerce—reserved to the Land Commission, and remain in respect of the other 50 per cent. in the owners of the land. I should like to support what Deputy Mulcahy has said, that consideration might be given, when compensation is being determined in the event of oil being found on anybody's land, to allowing that compensation to take the form, in part at least, of some royalties on the continuing produce of any oil deposit that might be found under the land owner's holding.
I think it would be hard if any citizen of this State were fortunate enough to discover his land contained an oil deposit that the only result, as far as he was concerned, would be that he would get an eviction notice and a lump sum of money. I think he ought to have the right to feel that, as is the case in most countries, such a development would redound to his advantage so long as the company conducting the exploration, and the State, were deriving advantage from the oil deposit which had been disclosed.
The second point I want to mention is that in the Minerals Bill, that is the existing minerals legislation, there is provision that the Minister can give a man a prospecting licence, and that man has a right to produce that prospecting licence to me, or to any other citizen, and on foot of it can enter my land and carry out certain works there. In the course of carrying out those works he naturally does a good deal of damage. Let us say that the amount of damage done is agreed to be £1,000. He walks out and simply says, "I have no money." As I understand the position at the present time, the landholder applies to the Mining Board but, in the last analysis, the Mining Board will tell the landowner his remedy is against the man who did the damage.
If that man has no property, if he has gone bankrupt, then the landholder has recourse to nobody, and nobody seems to remember that, in the first instance, the landholder was compelled to admit the explorer by the fiat of the Minister for Industry and Commerce, given under the mining code. It seems to me an obvious injustice that any man should be put in the position that he is required by statute to let someone in on his land to do damage, and then be left in the position that the man he was forced to admit on his land has now no property, and he has nobody to turn to to compensate him for the damage done.
I would suggest to the Minister that that be investigated and some kind of security fund established to provide against such a contingency. In the particular case which came to my notice, fortunately I believe that though at first there was a difficulty in recovering the compensation, subsequently agreement was arrived at and the licensee produced the money and the case was equitably settled. It struck me at the time I was investigating the matter, if we had not been able to arrange it, the fate of the unfortunate land owner would be very unjust.
The last minor matter to which I want to refer is one mentioned by the Minister. He said he proposed in the Bill to amend the law—that under existing law when he issued a licence, every individual landholder in the area in respect of which the licence was issued shall be notified by registered post—but now he proposes to substitute for that a notice in the paper which would contain a declaration that there was a map available for examination in the Geological Survey Office. Does the Minister think that is sufficient notification? Is it enough to tell a small farmer in Bangor-Erris, by a notice in the Western People, that a large area has been scheduled, and that if he wants to find out if his holding is upon it, he can go to the Geological Survey Office in Hume Street? I doubt if that is sufficient notification.
I think there ought to be accessible in the Garda barracks in the area, or in some readily available place, copies of the map to which the landholder might refer. I think we are taking a good deal away from him when we take away his right to be notified by registered post, and I am doubtful if we should take that right away. I admit it is a nuisance to have to do it, but people whose rights are being interfered with are entitled to serious consideration. But, if we do decide to take away this existing right I urge upon the Minister that we have an obligation to make the relevant information available in a more convenient form than is suggested in this Bill.
I could imagine a map being deposited in each Garda station. I could even imagine a map being deposited with the secretary of a county council, but I should like to see it available at a place to which a country person would have access, and in the custody of the kind of person to whom country people can talk, so that if a man went in there and said he wanted to find out if his farm was affected— that is if he went into a county council office or a Garda station—he would meet there the kind of people who would understand what his anxiety was, and would be able to give him an answer.
I yield to none in my admiration of the staff in the Geological Survey Office in Hume Street, but I could imagine a neighbour of mine from Ballaghaderreen, by the time he gets to the brass plate on the office door in Hume Street, would be so alarmed by the dignity of the surroundings that he would find it extremely difficult to formulate his inquiry in a way to extract the information that would satisfy him and, if that information were vouched in such surroundings, in nine cases out of ten he would come back to Ballaghaderreen and say he did not know what the man said to him. Therefore, I suggest that some more careful way of notifying these people should be adopted if we decide to suspend the existing arrangement.
I am glad, and I am sure every Deputy in the House is glad, that this company is coming forward to bore for oil in Ireland. I am sure we all hope they will find oil to our mutual prosperity but, at the same time, I am sure the Minister will join with myself and Deputy Norton in sounding a note of prudent caution that while hope is a legitimate virtue, prudence is also a virtue which should be observed.