I move:
That a sum not exceeding £4,447,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1973, for the salaries and expenses of the Offices of the Minister for Lands and of the Irish Land Commission.
In line with the agreed procedure adopted for the last few years, I propose to take the Votes for Lands and Forestry together this year also. Accordingly, in my opening remarks I shall refer to Votes 34 and 35 and at the conclusion of the debate the motion in respect of Vote 34 will be put to the House. Vote 35 will then be formally moved.
The Lands Vote this year shows a net increase of £251,000 compared with last year. I shall commence by explaining the salient features of this Estimate, especially those items which reflect a significant change from last year's provision, and continue with a review of the principal activities of the Land Commission during the year ended 31st March, last.
Provision for salaries, wages and allowances is made under subhead A. The amount provided for this year represents an increase of £250,000 on last year's provision. This figure, in fact, is about £100,000 in excess of the actual amount required, because of over-estimation due to uncertainty in relation to the extent of salary increases then under negotiation. It has been arranged that £100,000 of this amount will be applied to the purposes of subhead G.
Subhead B1 relates for the most part to travelling and subsistence expenses incurred in connection with the inspection, survey and allotment of lands under the Land Acts. The increase of £20,720 is due to an increase granted in the rates for subsistence and travelling expenses, increased costs in connection with the computer and anticipated heavier outlay on miscellaneous items and advertisements.
Subhead B2 provides for direct payment to the Department of Posts and Telegraphs for all services rendered by that Department; this has now become standard procedure. The total amount required this year is £111,500.
The moneys required under subhead D are in the nature of statutory commitments. In the main they represent the taxpayers' contribution in the current year towards the service of land purchase debt accumulated, since 1923, on both tenanted and untenanted land. The total contribution this year, viz. £1,459,500, constitutes one of the biggest items in the Vote and represents nearly one-third of the entire net Estimate. Of the total subhead provision, some £1,287,000 will be utilised to make good deficiencies in the land bond fund arising from the statutory halving of annuities under the Land Act, 1933. Indeed, the overall increase of £86,000 in the subhead this year is attributable mainly to the halving of purchase instalments payable by new allottees as land settlement proceeds. All allottees in congested areas, together with migrants and displaced employees getting holdings in non-congested areas, get the benefit of the halving of annuities.
Subhead G is in four separate parts. I think I can best deal with it by referring to each part individually. The funds being provided this year under subheads G.1 and G.2 amount in all to £135,000. This represents a reduction of £40,000 on last year's provision which is attributable to the prevailing pressure on Exchequer funds.
Subhead G.1 involves two items, viz., the purchase of land by the Land Commission for cash in the open market and the provision of life annuities under section 6 of the Land Act, 1965. Section 6 of the Land Act, 1965, provided basic authority for the scheme of life annuities for elderly, incapacitated or blind persons who voluntarily sell their interest in land to the Land Commission. This scheme and the scheme for self-migration loans to which I shall refer later on were brought into operation early in 1967. The objective of the life annuity scheme was to facilitate land structure reform by encouraging elderly, incapacitated or blind farmers to retire so that their lands might become available for active farming by younger able-bodied persons. This scheme has had but little success and just now the position is that we have 35 persons on the life annuity payroll following the sale of their lands to the Land Commission.
Subhead G (2) stems from section 5 of the Land Act, 1965, in which resides authority for the scheme enabling the Land Commission to make loans to progressive farmers in congested areas for the purchase of viable farms of their choice, subject to making their existing lands available to the Land Commission for land settlement purposes. This, in fact, is really a banking or credit service, with an overall limit of £10,000 in each case, including the price paid for the owner's old holding, and is intended to augment existing land settlement schemes. The primary objective of the scheme is to facilitate the Land Commission programme of land structure reform in the scheduled congested areas, as defined in the 1965 Act— Counties Donegal, Galway, Kerry, Leitrim, Mayo, Roscommon, Sligo, and parts of Clare and West Cork. The scheme is intended to encourage initiative by providing necessary capital, through the Land Commission, to enable progressive smallholders in the scheduled congested areas to improve their status by purchase in the open market of viable farms suitable to individual requirements, subject to making their existing lands available to the Land Commission as part of the loan arrangements.
Under the scheme, a total of 158 applications has been received to a recent date. Of these, 155 have been investigated and, perhaps not surprisingly, a high proportion failed at an early stage—chiefly because the applicants and/or their lands were considered unsuitable for purposes of the scheme. In all, 61 applications progressed to the price negotiation stage and, in 11 of these case, agreement on price was, in fact, reached.
This is a vital stage in the procedure as price agreement is an essential prerequisite to acceptance of an applicant and to making him an advance under the scheme. It is only when agreement on price has been reached with a landowner, that he knows the extent of financial assistance which he may expect from the Land Commission, thus enabling him to shop around for a suitable new farm, on the basis of what he will receive for his own holding, plus the amount of loan available to him.
Of the 11 cases in which price agreement was reached nine have been provided with self migration advances and have now gone into possession of their new holdings; in one other case the necessary legal formalities are being completed and in the remaining case the Land Commission are awaiting proposals from the approved applicant regarding the new farm selected by him and the amount of loan he will require.
The nine completed cases—for which advances and free grants totalling approximately £40,038 were made by the Land Commission—have provided an area of 373 acres for land settlement. The holdings purchased by these nine successful applicants contain in aggregate 980 acres. The other two cases involve the Land Commission in a potential maximum commitment of some £18,476 by way of advances and free grants and, if these transactions can be successfully concluded, they will release a further aggregate area of about 82 acres for the land reform programme.
The results from this scheme to date are not impressive, even allowing for the fact that the scheme is restricted to landowners in the scheduled congested areas and that approved applicants are allowed a period of 12 months in which to shop around for new holdings.
The intention had been to review this scheme to see how its attractiveness might be improved. In any event, a maximum of £10,000 is no longer realistic; in the current period of escalating land prices it just could not buy a viable holding. In the event the proposed review has been overtaken by developments in relation to the EEC and now falls to be considered in that context. I shall have more to say on the life annuity scheme and the self-migration loans scheme when I come to deal with the policy of the Land Commission under EEC conditions.
Subhead G (3) provides £6,000 for payment in cash of compensation for tenancy interests resumed on the small outstanding residue of Congested Districts Board estates.
The fourth and final part of the subhead relates to the payment by the Land Commission of auctioneers' commission on relevant purchases of land for cash and land bonds. Perhaps I should explain here that up to 1963 the practice was to pay auctioneers' commission only in respect of lands purchased by the Land Commission for cash under section 27 of the Land Act, 1950. This was extended in 1963 to properties purchased on a voluntary basis for land bonds and to uncontested compulsory cases where the auctioneer renders positive service towards agreement. The extension of payment of commission on the lines indicated proved a decided incentive to auctioneers to offer lands on their books to the Land Commission thus facilitating an acceleration in land acquisition.
Subhead H provides the funds for payment of gratuities pursuant to section 29 of the Land Act, 1950, to persons displaced from employment on estates taken over by the Land Commission for distribution. Last year gratuities totalling £12,270 were paid to 25 ex-employees—and average of £490 each. Perhaps I should emphasise that displaced employees who are deemed competent to work land are automatically considered for allotments—indeed, this is only right and proper—but, where they are not found to be suitable for allotments, they are considered by the Land Commission for a cash gratuity, depending on such factors as length of service, personal and family circumstances, availability of alternative employment and so on. It is difficult to make an accurate forecast of commitments under the subhead in any particular year because this depends on the level of acquisition activity and the extent to which estate workers become displaced from employment through these activities. A figure of £12,000 is provided for the current year.
Subhead I provides the funds required to meet the cost of the various estate improvement works which are such an important feature of land settlement. These works include the erection of dwellinghouses and out-offices; the provision of access roads; fencing and drainage; provision of water supply for domestic and stock requirements; turbary development; repair and maintenance of embankments. These are all costly works and expenditure for last year totalled £917,427 including £520,810 on building works.
Some 273 men were employed on the various improvements works and their wage bill amounted to almost £295,000. For the current financial year the amount proposed under subhead I is £954,905.
Reference has previously been made to an important development which has been undertaken by the Land Commission in relation to lands earmarked for migrants and also lands intended for distribution to tenants whose holdings are being rearranged. All such lands are now being rehabilitated prior to allotment—the rehabilitation consisting of lime and fertiliser application. In addition, the Land Commission are also doing the preliminary reclamation work on these lands—such as drainage, removal of scrub, eradication of rushes and so on. The aim is to give these allottees the best possible start on their holdings. The major portion of the cost involved is being borne direct by the Land Commission —a small proportion being charged to the allottee by means of an addition to his annuity.
Improvements in designs for houses and out-offices being built by the Land Commission are being sought constantly. As Deputies are, no doubt, aware dwellinghouses provided by the Land Commission are fully serviced as to water supply and electricity, where practicable. The new designs for dwellinghouses to which I referred in my opening statement last year are now well established and in general use. They have been well tried and have won general approval. Many progressive features have been added to fit in with modern needs and trends. Improvements include greatly increased storage space and a utility room which can be used as a fourth bedroom to provide extra accommodation as the family expands and, all in all, the houses lack none of the amenities of urban dwellings.
In addition, yard areas have also been increased and black topping of yards, approach roads and access roads is now being undertaken as a standard feature of improvement works associated with the provision of buildings on new holdings. Changes in farming methods involving more intensive stocking rates and self-feed lay-outs have necessitated new basic designs of out-offices which will give greater freedom of adaptation to individual users. In the siting of out-offices increased emphasis is being placed on the necessity to reduce pollution hazards. Experimental examples of the new types are in course of construction.
The sub-item entitled "Housing Loans" refers to the scheme under which advances are made to farmers to supplement grants from the Departments of Local Government for the erection of new houses and for reconstruction work on existing houses. During the year ended 31st March, 1972, the total amount sanctioned by way of loans for this purpose was £31,000 to some 70 applicants. In this connection Deputies will be already aware that in July of this year following an examination of the scheme under which these loans are made, I decided to increase the maximum loan towards the erection of a new dwellinghouse or the reconstruction of an existing one from £500 to £750. I feel sure that this substantial increase in the amount of loan which the Land Commission may provide will be welcomed by Deputies. The management services unit continue to produce significant savings. The work study section of the unit, through method improvements and the incentive bonus scheme, contributed to maintaining a very high level of productivity on outdoor works.
I have dealt in some detail with the more important sub-heads of the Lands Vote. The remaining items do not seem to call for specific comment, but I shall, of course, be pleased to supply further information on any matter in which Deputies are especially interested. I propose now to continue by reviewing the principal activities of the Land Commission during the year ended 31st March last. In some instances the statistics are still provisional but they are unlikely to vary to any significant extent from the final returns. The overall results are quite satisfactory.
On the acquisition side, the aggregate area inspected during the year was 33,000 acres while the total intake of land amounted to about 23,000 acres. The total area in the acquisition machine at 31st March, 1972, amounted to some 73,000 acres.
As regards land settlement for the year the total area allotted amongst 1,700 allottees was 25,000 acres. The acreage distributed included the provision of 47 fully-equipped holdings for migrants and the re-arrangement of 390 fragmented holdings. In all, 69 new dwellinghouses and 67 new out-offices were provided for tenants and allottees during the year. The vesting of holdings and allotments was continued and about 3,450 holdings, parcels and rights of turbay were dealt with. Tenanted land—including residues of CDB estates—outstanding for vesting at 31st March, 1972, comprised approximately 3,200 holdings. These residual holdings, situated for the most part in western congested counties, now represent the remaining hard core of difficult tenanted land cases and their release for vesting is at present getting special attention.
The position as regards collection of land annuities continues satisfactory. Out of a collectable total of £2,871,822 for the year, the amount actually collected by 31st March, 1972, was £2,757,483.
I should like to refer here to a campaign which was initiated by the Land Commission in the year under review for the redemption of quit rents, tithe rent charges and some other charges payable to the Church Temporalities Branch. Very generous terms of redemption were offered. In the case of the quit rents the number of years' purchase was reduced for 12 years to five years and this latter figure also applied to tithe rent charges, et cetera, the redemption prices of which were previously calculated variously at 22, 24 and 25 years' purchase. Eighty per cent of these rents have been redeemed to date, and there are now only 851 accounts remaining out of a total of 4,498 accounts at the beginning of the campaign. The rental has been reduced from £10,012 to £1,977. I believe that the remaining payers should avail themselves of the very advantageous terms offered to cease payments which would otherwise continue to be paid in perpetuity.
In regard to group farming, the Land Commission are continuing to keep the Grennanstown project, which was inaugurated last year, under close study and, in addition, two other such projects—one in County Cork and one in County Kildare—are at the planning stage.
As Deputies know, a system of direct control by the Land Commission over the purchase of rural land by persons who are not "qualified persons"—principally non-nationals— has been in operation since 1965. The position generally is that no interest in non-urban land can vest in a person who does not come within the categories of "qualified person" as defined in section 45 (1) of the Act except with the written consent of the Land Commission. In general, permission is not granted to non-nationals to purchase land in order to engage simply in those forms or lines of production commonly practised by our farmers; "white-elephant" properties unable or unlikely to attract Irish purchasers in the market could be entertained for sale to outsiders. A non-national who could illustrate that he was going in for some special line with expertise and capital to back it up, and with export possibilities could very well be acceptable. During the past year—apart from what might be called unobjectionable transactions, for example, those (a) arising solely from mortgage interests, (b) involving areas not exceeding five acres, and (c) representing transfers between one non-citizen, individual or company, and another— the total acreage in respect of which the consent of the Land Commission, pursuant to section 45 of the Act, was given to the vesting of interests in land in non-qualified persons as individuals, or companies controlled by non-citizens, was 3,086 acres. A substantial proportion of the acreage involved consisted of the types of property which could hold no attraction for the ordinary Irish purchaser.
As the House will recall, the question of the right of nationals of one member state of the EEC to purchase land in another member state was discussed exhaustively last March in the debate on the motion on EEC membership. It is most unlikely that the draft directive granting full right of establishment on land which is now before the Council since 1969 will be adopted before our accession. Accordingly, its adoption will be the subject of examination by the enlarged Council in which case we will have a full vote as a member of the Community. In this event our ministerial representative can be relied upon to ensure that our special interests are taken fully into account having regard to our need to maintain sufficient control over the disposal of land in Ireland to enable us to pursue policies to deal with our structural problem.
And now I come to the implications of EEC membership in so far as the land structural reform programme is concerned. In April last the Council of Ministers of the EEC adopted a series of measures of agricultural structural refrom which will apply to the Community as a whole and to the applicant countries when they become members. Schemes are at present in course of formulation by my Department in conjunction with the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for the implementation of these measures in this country.
There are three dominant features in these proposed measures. First, their ultimate purpose in relation to those farmers who intend to continue as farmers is to ensure that for the future their conditions both as to income and quality of life will be comparable with the conditions in non-agricultural employment in the same area. The second important feature to note is that the proposed measures are entirely voluntary; it will be for each individual farmer to make up his own mind as to whether or not he wants to participate in any of these agricultural structural reform schemes. The final matter for special notice is that measures are now being provided to ensure that those farmers who wish to give up farming can do so under the best possible conditions.
The measures with which my Department will be chiefly concerned relate to the provision of such additional land as is required for those small farmers who adopt development plans and to implementing the scheme providing cash benefits for those small farmers, particularly the elderly, who for one reason or another wish to give up farming. The farmer with the development plan will be able to get substantial reductions on the interest on investments needed to execute the plan; he will get assistance to keep accounts while the plan is being carried through and he will have priority in the allocation of lands becoming available for distribution if he requires more land. Rural Deputies will know, of course, that progressive small farmers do at present get priority from the Land Commission in the allocation of land in their localities. The new system will simply copper-fasten this since in the new dispensation the progressive farmer will have the evidence of his development plan to put before the Land Commission. Clearly, the successful implementation of this scheme will require the closest possible co-ordination of effort on the part of the Land Commission and the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries.
The proposed aids to those who wish to leave farming and give up their lands for the benefit of those with development plans comprise the price of the land, or the annual rent if they wish to lease, a bonus and, if they are between 55 and 65, an annual indemnity. I will have some further words to say about this indemnity later. Provision is also made for the payment of an annual indemnity to permanent hired workers and family helpers aged between 55 and 65 who are employed on farms sold or leased under this scheme. I have already said that our pension scheme for elderly farmers authorised by section 6 of the 1965 Land Act has had but little success. This may be due, in part anyway, to the fact that the inducements offered were inadequate, but I suspect that a very significant contributory cause is the exceptional attachment to land that exists in our countryside and my personal view is that this will not change overnight. The inducements offered under the EEC scheme represent a very big advance on our terms and may be sufficiently generous to ensure a considerable measure of success.
The full cost of these structural measures will not have to be borne by the State as substantial refunds towards the cost will be made available from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund. These refunds will cover part of the rebates on interest given to farmers for investment, part of the cost of keeping accounts and part of the cost of land consolidation schemes. Under the criteria laid down by the EEC it appears that the major portion of the country will qualify for a 65 per cent refund of the cost of the indemnity.
Before I finish with this I feel it is essential for me to controvert publicly and decisively two serious misconceptions about this EEC scheme which are fairly widespread in this country and which are trotted out regularly by commentators in the Press and on Radio and TV. The first one relates to the indemnity payable to elderly farmers who surrender their lands under the EEC scheme. It is being said frequently that the EEC stipulate a minimum indemnity of about £250 for a single man and of about £375 for a married man. This is not so. The directive does not lay down any specific amount for the indemnity. All they say is that the chargeability of the indemnity to EEC funds will be limited to a figure of about £250 in the case of a single man and about £375 for a married man. It has also been said that the EEC will subvent this indemnity to the tune of £250 for a single man and £375 for a married man. This, too, is entirely incorrect. What the EEC will do is to refund 25 per cent or up to 65 per cent in handicapped areas of a maximum of £250 in the case of a single man and £375 in the case of a married man. Here are some examples to illustrate precisely what the EEC subvention will be. Suppose a member State gives an indemnity of £200 a year for a married man, in that case the EEC will give 25 per cent or 65 per cent as the case may be of that £200. Suppose the member State's indemnity is £375, then, again, the EEC will give similar percentages of that amount. But suppose the member State gives an indemnity of £600, then all the EEC will give is 25 per cent or 65 per cent of £375 which is the maximum amount to which they will subvent. I hope everyone will understand this and I trust that commentators will adopt this correct version forthwith. I assure them that what I have said is authoritative.
The second misconception is that a father who transfers his farm to his son will be eligible for the benefits, bonus, indemnity, et cetera, available under the EEC scheme. Quite definitely this is not so. Lands surrendered by a farmer under the scheme must be allocated to a farmer with an approved development plan or for general purposes of structural reform. The farmer merely transferring his lands to his son is not fulfilling the basic conditions of the scheme. Quite categorically I say that he does not come under the scheme. The only instance where such a transaction would come under the scheme is where the son was a farmer in his own right and had adopted a development plan which, for its successful implementation, needed the provision of additional land. I hope I have made the position quite clear in this matter also.
These and other aspects of the proposed measures involve a fairly drastic reappraisal of the current operation and policy of the Land Commission; this work is being pressed forward urgently at the present time. At the same time, one has to be realistic and say straight that land alone will not solve the difficulties of problem rural areas; it would be quite unrealistic to depend upon land to do so. For that reason I personally welcome the regional development fund proposed at the October summit meeting in Paris in so far as it is aimed at the correction of the main regional imbalances and particularly those resulting from the preponderance of agriculture.
I am also pleased to note that in this afternoon's paper further direct proposals in this regard have been made and published. I welcome them.
Turning to the Forestry Vote I am happy to inform the House that after a lapse of six years the planting programme in the State forests was restored in 1971-72 to 25,000 acres or 10,000 hectares. It is proposed to plant a further 25,000 acres in the current planting season and to continue at that rate in future years. The completion of this season's programme will extend the area of State plantations to 592,130 acres or 239,632 hectares.
The total net provision for forestry for 1972-73 is £7,499,000, an increase of £882,000 over the 1971-72 provision. The original Forestry Estimate for 1971-72 at £6,387,000 was increased by a grant of £230,000 from the Vote for Remuneration. Any further references which I shall make to the 1971-72 Estimate are on this basis. The increase of £882,000 stems from increased provision for wages and salaries of some £550,000 arising mainly from the impact of pay increases and additional provision of £260,000 for land acquisition. The balance arises from provision for additional materials and increased costs of services partly offset by £120,000 expected increase in income from sales of timber.
The following is the position regarding the individual subheads:—
Subhead A—Salaries, wages and allowances—at £1,873,000 shows an increase of £109,750 over the provision for 1971-72. The increase is mainly due to the effect of pay increases and some increase in staff numbers.
Subhead B.1—Travelling and Incidental Expenses—at £385,000 shows an increase of £94,500 over the 1971-72 provision due mainly to increased travelling and subsistence rates and computer rental.
Subhead B.2—Post Office Services —at £69,000 shows a decrease of £47,100 on the 1971-72 Estimate. The reduction is due to decreased Post Office charges for handling of stores, partly offset by an increase in the cost of postage and the extension of forest telephone services.
Subhead C.1—This is the grant-in-aid for acquisition of land. The balance remaining in the fund at the 1st April, 1972, was £231,992. I am providing in this estimate a sum of £720,000 so that the total sum available for land acquisition in the current year is £951,992.
The gross areas acquired in 1970-71 and 1971-72 were 34,436 acres and 37,471 acres respectively. Deputies will be aware that there has been a very steep rise in agricultural land values and this, to some extent, reflects the prices which must be paid for land for forestry. Price agreement for the purchase of land for forestry is becoming increasingly difficult to achieve and a trend towards a slower rate of closing sales has also developed. In these circumstances it is very difficult to predict future acquisition prospects but the problems involved are being kept under constant review. Incidentally, the gross area acquired in 1971-72 is the largest achieved in any year to date.
Subhead C.2—Forest Development and Management—this is the main expenditure subhead in this Vote. The major provisions in the subhead relate to the raising of nursery stock in the State forest nurseries, the establishment costs of all new plantations including ground preparation and fencing, road and bridge construction, the development of facilities for public recreation in our forests, the purchase and maintenance of all forest machinery and the hire of suitable machinery from outside sources, the general cost of maintaining and protecting all our existing acreage of forest plantations, and finally the cost of such timber felling and conversion as we undertake by direct labour in our forests.
The estimate of £5,289,000 shows an overall increase of £587,500 on the provision for 1971-72 and this arises largely from the cost of wage increases. Despite the extension of the planting programme to 25,000 acres and the fact that in the course of the last year the working week of forest workers has been reduced by one and a half hours, it has been found possible, as a result of more economic use of the forest labour, to fulfil our programmes within the limits of the existing forest work force. I should stress that the rapid rise in wage and other costs has made it essential, if timber is to be produced economically in our forests, that efforts be continued to secure reductions in the cost of State forest operations.
Under the heading of new roads and buildings provision is being made for some increase in the level of activity provided for last year. Provision is also being made for the replacement and maintenance of mechanical equipment for forest development and management. Increased charges under the heading of general forest management arise from the annual increase in the planted area which must be maintained. That area on 31st March, 1972, was 567,420 acres.
The timber conversion head provides for our own activities in direct felling of thinnings and other material as well as our normal requirements of timber for Departmental purposes and the maintenance of our production programme of transmission poles for the ESB and Department of Posts and Telegraphs.
The provision for amenity and recreation at £128,000 shows an increase of £32,000 on the 1971-72 provision and under this head Deputies will be fully aware that the "open forest" policy has had a most enthusiastic welcome from the public and from public representatives. Some 300 forests in all parts of the country are now open to the public and in almost half of these basic amenities such as car parking and picnicking facilities have been provided. There is only one condition that I have attached to this— that entry will be, for the most part, on foot only—vehicular traffic being restricted to the car parks or entrance lay-bys. I think Deputies will agree that there should be no apology for this, and indeed all evidence points to the fact that the public at large appreciate the embargo.
Among the Forest Park projects the most ambitious has been that at Lough key, County Roscommon, a joint development between my Department and Bord Fáilte, where visitor count has already reached 150,000 per annum. The final stage of development work will be concluded this year with the completion of the lakeshore building complex, and Deputies will be interested to know that the demands for berthage at the harbour area have been such as to necessitate an extension of the harbour facilities.
Currently the caravan/camping area, the shop and the launch service for visitors are each operated on a concession basis, and I expect that the restaurant and a boat-hire concession will be in operation next season. A park booklet has recently been produced to add to the growing number of publications by the Forest and Wildlife Service so, all in all, Lough Key is fully measuring up to expectations and has already a focal point for day visitor and holiday maker alike.
Before moving on from the amenity aspect of the forests, I should like to mention that among the major developments currently in hand are Ards, County Donegal and Avondale, County Wicklow, both of which will be in the forest park category. Other areas scheduled for similar development are Currahchase, County Limerick and Rossmore, County Monaghan.
Subhead C.3 — Sawmilling — at £68,000 shows an increase of £8,450 on the 1971-72 Estimate due to wage increases which are partly offset by a saving on replacement costs under the heading of running expenses.
Subhead D—In introducing the Forestry Estimate for 1971-72, I indicated that there was general agreement that this subhead D, which provides for grants for planting carried out by private persons, was in need of revision and that I hoped we would complete the review of the whole scheme before coming to the House with this year's Estimate. This review was carried out within the last 12 months and I am happy to take this opportunity of informing the House of a revised and improved scheme of grants for private planting.
The main features of the revised scheme are as follows:—First, the grant for private planting has been raised from £20 per acre to £35 per acre. The sum will be payable in two instalments—the first instalment of £20 on establishment of the plantation and a second instalment of £15 after a period of seven years, subject to satisfactory maintenance.
Secondly, it has been represented to me that there are throughout the country fairly substantial areas of land eminently suitable for the growth of high quality timber but which the owners are reluctant to plant because it is covered with scrub, the clearance cost of which would be very substantial. Scrub, by the way, may be defined as brushwood or woody vegetation such as rhododendron, laurel or stunted hardwood tree species incapable of producing a satisfactory tree crop.
It is proposed to seek to bring these lands into production by offering an additional grant, which will be payable on a scaled basis of up to a maximum of £20 per acre in any one case, as a contribution to the net cost of such clearance. By the net cost I mean the cost of clearance of the scrub less any sums received by the grantee in respect of the material cleared from them. It is not my intention that this grant should be available indefinitely; my hope is that all such areas will be brought into production fairly soon and for this reason I propose to limit this grant to the next five planting seasons beginning with the current season, 1972-73.
Thirdly, by way of encouraging the planting of more hardwoods it is proposed to pay an additional grant of £5 per acre with the second instalment of planting grant if it is clear that a hardwood crop of acceptable species is intended by the grower and is feasible also. I should make it clear that, in effect, this proposal does not mean that, in order to qualify for the additional grant, a planter would have to plant an entire hardwood crop. It will be quite satisfactory from the Department's point of view if the number of hardwood trees established on such areas is sufficient to form the ultimate crop and there will be no objection to the initial crop being a mixture of hardwoods and conifers.
Finally, the grant for the block planting of poplar is being increased from £15 to £25 per acre payable as to £15 on establishment and £10 after seven years, subject to satisfactory maintenance. In this connection I should say that a grant for line planting of poplar which has been in operation for a number of years and which just did not "take on" is being discontinued
These revised grants will be paid in respect of any planting undertaken in the current season, that is, 1972-73. Provision under this head of £25,000 is the same as for last year but the estimate was made prior to completion of study on the need for revised grants. In fact, in recent years the provision under this head has not been fully expended and it is expected that this sum will be sufficient to meet any increased costs arising in the present year. While the revisions proposed are substantial, I think it only fair to repeat that revision of the grant was overdue and that, in my view, adjustments of this order were needed to give impetus to planting by private persons. It is my hope that the improvements now settled, coupled with the novel features of grants for a scrub clearance and for the planting of hardwoods will have the desired effect on activities in this sector.
With regard to subhead E, Forestry Education, a chronic shortage of foresters over the past decade or so has been largely eliminated and the training programme for foresters has been gradually moved down from an output of 27 last year to 21 this year and 16 next year. An intake of the order of 12 to 15 per annum is likely to meet our requirements for the future. A full examination has been carried out of our arrangements for training our foresters and of the curriculum in our schools. As a result new training arrangements have been provided. The new arrangements provide for an 18 month period in Kinnitty, a year on field training in selected forests and six months revision in Avondale during the winter period. These developments made Shelton Abbey surplus to our requirements and, as Deputies will be aware, the premises have been transferred to the Department of Justice and are now in fact occupied and in use by that Department. While some savings will accrue from the reduction of trainee numbers, these are largely offset by salary and allowance increases and increasing food costs and the sum of £54,000 provided for this subhead shows little change.
Subhead F, John F. Kennedy Park, at £46,000 shows an increase of £14,000 on the provision for 1971-72, due to wage increases and an increase in development costs. Arrangements are being made for the extension of the arboretum over the area within the park formerly reserved for a horticultural college.
Subhead G, £94,000, relates to game development and management. This year's provision represents an increase of some £13,000, mainly to meet rising costs. Grants made to regional game councils towards their game development schemes are the major element of the subhead. These schemes are formulated and implemented in consultation with the Department's advisory staff and include such items as re-stocking programmes, habitat improvement, predator control and so on. The subhead also includes some financial assistance for tourist projects, that is, shoot facilities for visiting sportsmen, sponsored jointly by my Department and Bord Fáilte. In addition, expenditure incurred on the development of game resources within State forests and some other minor expenses are defrayed from this subhead.
The past year also saw some badly-needed improvements in connection with the game development programme generally. In particular, a significant improvement was made in the time-schedule for the handling of the regional game councils' schemes, thereby giving councils early notice of the nature and extent of the financial assistance which would be available to them. More recently, the advisory staff has been strengthened with a view to giving councils a better service.
Another step forward has been the earlier appearance of the Game Birds Protection Orders prescribing the open seasons for game shooting and defining sanctuary areas.
As I have already indicated, my Department and Bord Fáilte cooperate in stimulating the provision of shooting facilities for visiting sportsmen, with of course, due regard for the interests of our own people. Grants are provided to support projects catering for out-of-State "guns" and every effort is made to ensure that the highest standards of sportsmanship are maintained. I am very conscious of the necessity for adequate system of control in this sector, not merely in the interests of harmony with our own sportsmen but also to ensure that the efforts being put into game development and conservation generally are not impaired by indiscriminate shooting on the part of visitors.
Subhead H is a grant-in-aid to finance a comprehensive national programme for conservation. A further £100,000 is being put into the subhead this year, compared with £150,000 last year. Deputies will be aware from the Book of Estimates that expenditure under this subhead is not confined to the Forest and Wildlife Service and indeed, as I have previously indicated, a substantial allocation from it will be available for the establishment by the Department of Education of a field study centre in County Donegal.
Activity by my Department in the field of wildlife conservation during the past year centred to a large extent on wetlands of significance to wildfowl and waders. Under the Game Birds Protection Order, 1972, eight new sanctuaries were declared during the year, bringing the total number of such places to 26, which represents a significant advance on this front in the recent past. Some of these sanctuaries are on properties owned by my Department and, in these cases, for example, at Portumna Forest, County Galway and Lissadell, County Sligo, development works which will exploit their potential for public amenity, education and enjoyment are already in progress.
Work continued during the past year on our major national wildfowl refuge at the North Slob, Wexford, where the main emphasis is on conservation of the very high population of Greenland whitefronted geese which winter there. However, unexpected difficulties have arisen regarding the provision of some essential buildings and it will be some time before the refuge can be enjoyed to its fullest potential.
The research and educational aspects of wildlife conservation are being developed as rapidly as circumstances permit. Some research projects, for example, on woodlands, deer, et cetera, are carried out direct by Forest and Wildlife Service personnel; other aspects—for example, grouse, mallard, peregrine falcon, et cetera—are commissioned from a number of outside agencies. On the educational front, a mobile exhibit of forests and wildlife items is displayed at schools and various shows; weekend courses for youth leaders are held at Avondale; and efforts are being made to disseminate information to the public by means of handouts, brochures and other suitable literature.
Subhead I, Agency, Advisory and Special Services, at £46,000 shows an increase of £11,480 on the 1971-72 provision arising mainly from increased salary costs and the enlargement of the timber technology research programme being undertaken by the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards on behalf of the Forest and Wildlife Service.
Subhead J, Appropriations-in-Aid, at a figure of £1,270,000 shows an increase of £120,000 in estimated revenue over the estimate for 1971-72.
Sales of timber at a figure of £1,188,000 account for most of the increase anticipated. The sawlog market continues buoyant and we are arranging to advance the marketing programme for sawlog slightly to meet an increasing demand.
While supplies of thinnings are increasing and demand remains strong, it is more difficult to maintain price levels for standing timber, mainly because of external price factors and increasing harvesting costs. Thinnings supplies are generally in balance with present production requirements of the main processing plants, and various plans by these factories to increase their output could absorb expected increases in availability of pulpwood in State forests over the next few years.
In common with other Government Departments, the Forest and Wildlife Service is developing a programme budgeting system under which expenditure is related to defined objectives and measures of output are determined for measuring progress towards the achievement of these objectives. The programme budget is structured under four programme areas, namely: Forest development; State forest management; conservation and support services.
A computer based management information system is being developed to provide the information on costs, cash expenditure and outputs which will be needed for satisfactory operation of the programme budgeting system.
I would stress that the new procedures will take a number of years to establish and, in the meantime, a considerable amount of experimentation and modification will be required. The benefits of the system are, however, already becoming apparent in so far as more data is becoming available for evaluating the costs and benefits of alternative ways of achieving objectives. Tentative five-year projections are made of cash requirements and eventually the assurance of availability of funds will make it possible to plan with confidence for the future and to improve further the economics of forestry operations.
The one great factor which is now dominating our economic thinking as a nation is our imminent entry into the European Economic Community and as far as forestry is concerned accession will not necessitate any change in existing policy. The current planting programme of 25,000 acres per annum is in line with the general objectives of the Community and the scheme of grants to encourage private planting which I have already announced is not in conflict with any of the council's directives. Increased productivity from afforestation is one of the main objectives of the Community and this is understandable against the impressive total deficit in wood production in the Six of some 1,636 million hoppus feet, a deficit which, in the existing Community, is expected to reach 2,770 million hoppus feet by 1980.
Another objective to which our future partners in Europe are dedicated is the concept of multiple use of the forests for amenity, recreation, and conservation and here, again, is an objective to which we are very happy to subscribe and, in fact, have been pursuing for a number of years past.
The House may be assured, therefore, that in so far as the State forest operations are concerned we are in good shape to meet the challenge of entry to the EEC.
