asked the Minister for Lands if he will consider paying cash for land bought by the Land Commission as many farmers would sell their farms to the Land Commission rather than to private individuals if cash were paid instead of land bonds.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Land Purchase Payments.
23.
The Land Commission are empowered to pay cash for land purchased by them, pursuant to the provisions of section 27 of the Land Act, 1950, as extended by section 44 of the Land Act, 1965.
However, Land Bonds remain the principal medium of payment available to the Land Commission and an early departure from this is not envisaged.
Is the Minister not aware that as long as land bonds are the principal medium of payment it will be almost impossible for the Land Commission to acquire the desired amount of land? Also, since there is approximately only £1 million spent each year out of the budget of about £540 million, would it not be possible for the Minister to pay the £1 million in cash? The only people who are given bonds of any type in payment are the farmers.
As the Deputy knows, I would much prefer to be dealing in cash rather than bonds. However, I might mention a matter to which I referred here before, that is, that as a result of the bank rate and interest position at present, recent bonds are standing very well. They have been steady at about 99 or 99.7 for a considerable time so that there is no reason why people should have any objection at this stage to accepting land bonds.
At the same time I accept what the Deputy says, that in spite of the fact that this is so statistically, there is reluctance on the part of land owners to settle other than for cash. I would prefer to have a situation where I could use a great deal more cash than I have.
Can the Minister tell the House why the Government continue to operate what he admits is a completely unsatisfactory arrangement? People continue to be paid in bonds while even the banks, who operated the system for years for the Government, will not accept bonds at par for the settlement of debt so that the present system means partial confiscation of a man's property.
Land bonds are bad news.
We have discussed these in the House many times and I do not think any good would be achieved by going over their disabilities. I can only reiterate that I shall try to get more cash.
Is it not a fact that less than £2 million would meet the required amount to buy in cash instead of in bonds in any one year?
It may well be that land bonds are quoted at 99.9 or whatever figure the Minister used, but a willing buyer is an absolute rarity on the stock market. You cannot sell these bonds; all you can do is sit on them and wait for inflation to rob you.
Would the Minister not agree that in 1969, shortly after his appointment as Minister for Lands, he asked us in this House to give him a year to rectify this or, if he did not, he said he would resign from the position?
It proved impossible to do what I wanted to do, that was, to try to give par to people who had been paid in bonds some years ago and who still held on to them. This is a matter of regret, but it proved to be legally impossible to do this. We have, in the meantime, been able to make some improvements through discussions with the Department of Finance with regard to land bonds to remove certain disabilities, particularly the fact that they were not acceptable at par for estate duty purposes. Some improvements of value to the community have been made but not all I would like to make; some of them proved to be legally impossible to achieve.