While on this subject, I may mention that progress in the provision of water supplies for domestic and stock requirements of tenants and allottees continued during the year ended 31st March last. In all, 123 wells were provided in the course of the year, compared with an output of 106 wells in the previous year, either through the operation of the Land Commission's well-boring machines or by contractors employed by them to augment the output of their own machinery.
The necessary funds for the purpose of making grants for the preservation and improvement of game resources are provided under Subhead L. Grants are provided, with the funds available, to assist approved game development schemes formulated by local organisations representative of all appropriate interests. In this connection, I have repeatedly stated that I prefer to deal with one representative body at county level. I have also made it clear that grants from Subhead L would be confined to assisting locally organised direct improvement schemes which hold promise of worthwhile practical results and which are backed by efficient local organisation and initiative. These schemes, in the main, relate to vermin destruction, that is the control of predators, other than foxes; grants are also made available for game-farms and for general restocking purposes.
Provision under the subhead last year originally stood at £10,000 but it became necessary, for the reasons mentioned on the occasion of the supplementary estimate in March last, to augment this sum by £3,000, thereby bringing the total provision for 1962-63 to £13,000. During the past year, 20 schemes involving an aggregate expenditure of £25,000, were approved. To assist these schemes, grants amounting to £16,777 were sanctioned, on the basis of payment pro rata with vouched expenditure by the Regional Game Councils concerned. By 31st March, 1963, the financial provision for the year had been fully expended. the remaining approved grants, together with any supplementary grants, which may arise, will fall to be paid in the current year.
In order to meet outstanding commitments and in anticipation of a greater volume of game development schemes, provision this year has been increased to £25,000. Regional game councils, which have now been established in 24 counties, will shortly be asked to submit their proposals for the current year to my Department for consideration. Having now entered on the third year of active State participation in this sphere, it gives me particular satisfaction to know that the financial assistance provided through my Department has contributed to the advancement of the game movement. In most counties a spirit of co-operation and mutual understanding prevails and I look to the various regional game councils to press ahead with the practical side of the work.
The game movement is primarily for the benefit of our own people but should ultimately result in the development of an important national asset. Game councils should I think, recognise the importance and urgency of making our farmers more game conscious and also of inculcating, in farming and sporting interests, a spirit of community effort for the development of local game resources. Grants by my Department are allocated equitably, having regard to the special conditions and problems in the various counties, but it must be clearly understood that these grants are intended merely as an incentive to local initiative and that the major part of the expenditure must be provided by the local organisations themselves.
My repeated appeals for unity in the game movement at national level, have not so far met with a satisfactory response. I am determined, however, that the planning of game development on a national basis must not be held up indefinitely by a spirit of faction and mutual suspicion on the part of some interests. The question of the most appropriate and effective measures to be taken, in the prevailing circumstances, is at present under examination in my Department.
Having explained the major features of the Estimate at some length, I do not propose to elaborate on the remaining subheads which are largely unchanged from last year or else represent self-explanatory token provisions. I shall continue, therefore, by reviewing the principal activities of the Land Commission during the year ended 31st March last. Though some of the statistics are still provisional, no significant variation is expected when final returns become available. The overall results are very satisfactory.
I shall deal with progress on the tenanted land side first. During the year, approximately 800 tenanted holdings were revested in tenant purchasers. The scope for activity in this sphere is regularly diminishing as the disposal of the outstanding core of difficult cases continues. By 31st March last, tenanted holdings pending for vesting aggregated only about 8,000, comprising some 6,000 holdings on estates purchased under the Land Acts 1923 to 1954, and about 2,000 holdings on acutely congested estates of the former Congested Districts Board.
The true significance of what has been achieved to date in the sphere of tenanted land purchase is best appreciated when the extent of these residual cases is measured against the original commitments of some 400,000 State-conducted sale transactions. In the whole 12 counties of Leinster there are now only 200 holdings outstanding for vesting. The relatively small number of properties for which land purchase proceedings have yet to be concluded is situated mainly in congested counties. These residual holdings, however, in no way represent a survival of landlordism: the tenants thereof enjoy all the benefits of land purchase, the mere act of final vesting being but the ultimate and conclusive symbol of ownership. They are being disposed of as rapidly as possible, consistent with their need for enlargement, rearrangement and general improvement prior to vesting.
For untenanted land activities which, of course, nowadays constitute the more spectacular sphere of land settlement, the year ended 31st March last was one of solid achievement. To function effectively, the acquisition machine must be geared to a high level of inspection to allow for the many cases where the lands involved are finally not considered suitable for land settlement purposes. It is very gratifying to find, therefore, that for the third successive year, the total area inspected by the Land Commission, as a preliminary to considering the institution of proceedings, exceeded 70,000 acres. The area for which proceedings actually materialised in the course of the year aggregated 31,000 acres. At 31st March last, there were some 48,600 acres which were the subject of proceedings in the acquisition machine.
The fact that activity is continuing at this satisfactory level is due largely to the substantially increased funds, both in cash and in land bonds, made available to the Land Commission by the Government in recent years for the purpose of land acquisition. I have already dealt with the cash outlay for land purchase last year. Here I should add that bond issues for land acquisition in the same period were just short of the £1 million mark. Since the volume of land settlement depends on the amount of land taken over by the Land Commission for distribution, it is imperative, especially having regard to the revised concept of the size of a viable holding, that the tempo of acquisition be maintained and, if possible, accelerated.
As regards land settlement generally during the year ended 31st March last, the overall outcome can be summarised by recording that the aggregate area distributed amongst some 1,850 allottees exceeded 32,000 acres, in addition to the provision of over 1,000 turbary rights.
The Land Commission are, of course, now working to the new standard whereby holdings and enlargements are planned as far as practicable in all areas so as to provide family farms of 40 to 45 acres of good land or the equivalent in land of varied quality. It goes without saying that all applicants below that level are now eligible for consideration for enlargements.
To comply with the revision in the size of holding which took place during the year, it was necessary to review and recast resale schemes in respect of a number of estates for which allotment proposals had previously been formulated to the former standard. For a while it seemed that a temporary curtailment in land settlement for the year could scarcely be avoided but, as the impressive results which I have just mentioned clearly demonstrate, the industry and enthusiasm of the staff eliminated such a possibility. Before passing on, therefore, to comment in more detail on some specific aspects of land settlement during the year, I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to compliment the officials of the Land Commission, both indoor and outdoor, on this splendid output for the year as a whole.
I would like now to refer specifically to the progress made last year under the twin processes of migration and rearrangement. Taking rearrangement first, the number of holdings dealt with in the course of the year was 467. This was a very praiseworthy achievement indeed. In all, since 1950, a total of over 6,200 fragmented holdings has been rearranged, the vast bulk of them being enlarged and otherwise improved, in the process. Rural Deputies, in particular, will be well aware of the difficulties confronting the Land Commission in the delicately-poised work of rearrangement and they will, no doubt, appreciate the degree of tact and patience required on the part of the Inspectorate in the successful formulation of proposals acceptable to the tenants concerned.
As rearrangement schemes are carried out on a voluntary basis, the results naturally depend largely on the extent of co-operation afforded by the participating tenants. It is a matter for regret, however, that in some isolated cases obstructive tactics occur—mainly through excessive demands by individuals—thereby placing the prospects of improvement for groups of tenants in jeopardy. Such a situation, even if relatively rare, obviously cannot be permitted to continue. I would, therefore, urge all tenants of intermixed holdings to recognise that the proposals put forward by the Land Commission are intended for the betterment of their conditions and I would earnestly appeal to them to refrain from adopting an attitude which, if persisted in, may lead to changes in the existing voluntary nature of the rearrangement programme.
The migration of landowners from congested areas is inevitably associated with rearrangement of intermixed conditions, inasmuch as the additional land required to enable fragmented holdings to be consolidated and enlarged is frequently obtainable only as a result of the transfer of a number of tenants from the particular townland being dealt with. During the year ended 31st March last, a total of 102 migrants was installed in fully-equipped new holdings in non-congested areas. These results reflect a marked improvement as compared with the number of migrations, that is 67, in the previous financial year, even when allowance is made for difficulties resulting from the cement strike which affected building work generally in that year.
It is recognised, of course, that enlarged holdings must be reasonably compact having regard to modern trends. Towards this objective, I have authorised the Land Commission to engage in local migrations, that is to say full transfers, even within the one mile stipulated distance, where the resulting overall advantage, in terms of a really superior settlement, may be deemed to counterbalance the extra cost.
The Land Commission are sometimes criticised—not always with justification—for holding lands on hands for extensive periods prior to allotment. In addition, Parliamentary Questions affecting properties in the possession of the Land Commission in specified counties or districts are frequently addressed to me. It will, I daresay, be conceded that the Land Commission must continue to have in their possession a substantial area of land for use as a working pool for land settlement in each county. I must deny, however, that it is their practice to retain lands on hands for longer periods than necessary for the sole purpose of deriving profits from them. On the contrary, there are standing instructions to the effect that acquired lands—and especially arable lands— be put into the possession of the approved allottees as quickly as possible. Where delay occurs, there are invariably justifiable and compelling reasons for it. The allotment of an estate has sometimes to be deferred pending the acquisition of further lands in a particular district in the interests of a comprehensive and better-balanced scheme of resettlement for the locality as a whole. Here let me quote from the Inter-Departmental Committee which reported on the problems of small western farms: the concluding portion of Paragraph 10 of their Report says:
The Committee understands that there is a system prevalent in Holland where the State Agency responsible for acquiring land holds it until a sufficient area is available to create an economic holding. The Committee is aware that the Land Commission act likewise and it is considered that they should intensify this policy in the interests of a comprehensive scheme for a district, in spite of local pressures for earlier division.
For the information of Deputies, I can state that at 31st March last, the Land Commission had in their possession, apart from substantial areas of mountain and rough grazing, turbary and other inferior quality land, some 48,000 acres of arable land. That such an acreage, however, is not unreasonable can be gauged from the fact that the average annual allotment, involving all classes of land, during the past five years was about 41,000 acres.
I am glad to say that, despite the abnormally severe weather in the period January to March, there was a pronounced improvement in Land Commission housing activities during the year ended 31st March last. In all, 183 new dwellinghouses and 324 new outoffices were provided by or with financial assistance from the Land Commission in the course of the year while a further 12 dwellinghouses were reconstructed. The corresponding output for the previous year was 139 dwellinghouses, 213 outoffices and 17 reconstructions.
I referred last year to progress on the preparation of a range of new building plans of modern design for Land Commission operations. Deputies who attended the recent Spring Show at Ballsbridge will doubtless be aware of the interest aroused by the model of a fully-serviced Land Commission house which was placed on display there. For the benefit of those Deputies who may not already have seen it, the model is on exhibition near the Library of Leinster House for the duration of this debate. During the past year a number of dwellinghouses to this plan were built by the Land Commission on migrants' holdings throughout the country. Deputies will, I feel sure, regard this new design as marking a further step forward in the improvement of Land Commission building standards.
In addition to giving grants and making advances for dwellinghouses and outoffices on estates in the course of land settlement, the Land Commission make advances to tenant-purchasers to supplement grants for new houses from the Department of Local Government. Since April, 1961, advances up to £200—irrespective of the amount of the annuity payable by the applicant—have been available in these cases. During the past year, 39 such advances—the bulk of which represented the maximum amount payable—were made by the Land Commission. I feel, however, that having regard to increased building costs generally and in order to assist small farmers in providing themselves with new dwellinghouses, the current level of the advance needs to be reviewed. I am, therefore, having the whole matter fully examined, in consultation with the other Departments concerned, with a view to further increasing the amount of the Land Commission advance and I hope to be in a position to make an announcement in the matter in the near future.
I have already dealt with the position regarding the revesting of tenanted land during the year ended 31st March last. The vesting of untenanted land allotments was also an important feature of the year's work. The aggregate number of properties, comprising holdings, parcels and rights of turbary, vested in tenants and allottees in the course of the year was 3,750.
The position regarding payment of land annuities continues satisfactory. Out of a total collectible amount of over £73¼ million, since 1933, the arrear at 31st March last amounted to £141,288, which represents a 99.8 per cent successful collection. This record of promptitude in honouring their annuity obligations reflects the utmost credit on the agricultural community and I unhesitatingly avail myself of this opportunity to compliment them on it.
The Land Commission scheme of resettlements out of the areas of high flood risk in the Shannon Valley is now in the final stages. As Deputies know, this is not a scheme of flood control; rather is it aimed at affording relief, as far as practicable, from the hazards of flooding by the erection of new buildings on higher sites, the reconstruction of existing buildings in suitable cases and the provision, where necessary, of dry stands for stock in times of abnormal flooding.
Progress under the scheme up to a recent date may be summarised as follows:— Work on 49 dwellinghouses and 53 outoffices has been completed and a further 11 dwellinghouses and 10 outoffices are at present under construction. In all, 32 dry stands for stock have been allotted, necessitating the migration of 6 landowners and their resettlement on new holdings elsewhere. Efforts are continuing to acquire a further area of land to provide sites for buildings for 5 other participants.
The cost of the scheme is being borne by the National Development Fund and, up to a recent date, total expenditure amounted to approximately £113,000.
My remarks on this Estimate in recent years have included a reference to the purchase of land in this country by non-nationals and also to the measures taken by the Government to ensure that such property transfers would not hamper the land settlement programme. As Deputies know, particulars of land purchases and leases by non-nationals—apart from transactions relating to urban properties or non-urban properties with less than 5 acres of land—have, since 1st August, 1961, been recorded in a register kept by the Land Commission under the procedure authorised by Sections 33, 34 and 35 of the Finance Act, 1961. The position up to a recent date is that since 1st August, 1961, a total of 142 properties—many of them small units—aggregating 11,200 acres have been purchased or leased by non-nationals subject to payment of stamp duty at the 25 per cent rate. In addition, 2,242 acres, involving 179 transactions, were purchased for purposes of industry other than agriculture and 62 other properties totalling 4,566 acres were acquired for other purposes but exempted from stamp duty under the relevant provisions of the Finance Act.
I fail to see in these authoritatively compiled figures any concrete evidence of the big "sell-out" of Ireland which is alleged in some quarters to be taking place. It is remarkable that allegations made from time to time in relation to this highly sensitive subject are never supported by statistics, despite the fact that the true position is made known periodically by way of reply to Parliamentary questions and otherwise. Indeed, it is hard to resist the suspicion that there is a tendency to make sweeping generalisations in this matter on the basis of isolated transactions.
I can state categorically that, insofar as the land settlement programme is concerned, the acquisition of land by non-nationals has not impeded progress to date. As I have often stated, many of the properties acquired by non-national interests may be described as "white elephants" and would not be at all suitable for land settlement purposes. It is also worth repeating, perhaps, that the transfer of land to new ownership—whether native or foreign—in no way impairs the Land Commission's powers to move for acquisition of the property for relief of congestion if circumstances should warrant such a course.
The funds provided in this Estimate will be used, in the main, to advance the land settlement programme. Land settlement is by no means an easy task: the extent to which the human element is involved in the work ensures that. Perhaps one of its most difficult aspects is the realisation that, with the demand for land far exceeding the supply, it is virtually impossible to formulate a scheme of division for any particular estate which will satisfy everybody; there will invariably be disappointment for some aspirants. I do not know what the formula for success is but I do know that the formula for failure is to try to please everybody. It is only too true to say that few sectors of the public service give rise to such high feelings as land settlement.
As Minister for Lands I have received, and no doubt will continue to receive, my share of criticism. It was, therefore, a very rewarding experience for me to receive only last week a letter expressing appreciation at the fair and equitable manner in which a particular estate—and one far removed from my own county, at that—had been distributed by the Land Commission amongst seven allottees. But more gratifying still was the fact that this gesture of appreciation was accompanied by a genuine sincerity expressed in these words: "We feel deeply indebted for sanctioning what is to us a wonderful gift. In return for this expenditure of public money on our behalf, we promise that we shall farm this land well and produce maximum yields". This, I suggest, is the farming spirit which is needed so badly to-day: at any rate, it is the standard which every allottee of Land Commission land must set himself, if the heavy outlay on land settlement is to be justified.
This concludes my opening remarks on the Lands Estimate. If there are any points on which Deputies require further details I shall endeavour to supply them.
I have, however, deliberately refrained from commenting at this stage on some aspects of land policy which are at present under examination in my Department. I feel that the new Land Bill, which I hope to introduce later in the year, will provide the House with a more suitable occasion for a full-scale debate on those items. I confidently recommend the Estimate and will be glad to hear the views of Deputies on all sides of the House.
