When this debate was adjourned last week I had been dealing with the matter of the size of a viable holding and eligibility for land. I had queried the policy that has obtained to date under which landless people are not entitled to land. This is giving rise to considerable hardship in certain areas of agricultural activity. In my constituency there are a great many people who have been virtual farmers for very many years and who have carried on their farming activities by taking lettings of land, in some instances quite substantial lettings. I am talking about people who rent approximately 50 acres per annum. These people have shown themselves competent farmers in practical terms. They carry stock over the winter. They carry on farming activities for the full 12 months each year. They have invested in machinery. They do not limit their activities merely to the taking of grass. Where circumstances permit, these people should be brought into the category of those who are eligible for an allocation of land when land is being divided by the Land Commission. As matters stand, they can be regarded as a section of society somewhat discriminated against. I am, of course, fully aware that the demand for land far exceeds the supply. There are instances in local areas where estates are being divided of farmers of the kind I am talking about who have reared their families on their agricultural activities, who have, in fact, derived their livelihoods from farming. They have proved themselves competent managers of viable farms. Because of the ever-escalating price of land they are now finding themselves in a difficult position.
Deputy Allen commented adversely on the slow progress in the determination of retirement applications. I am in disagreement with his view in this regard. Sometimes a title may be very complex and may require straightening out before land can be vested. This naturally gives rise to delay. The title is not always too clear despite the operations of the Land Registry. People sometimes do not observe all the requirements. They do not take the steps necessary to put the title right on each fall of a life or change of generation in ownership. This can give rise to considerable delay.
I should like now to refer to a comment made by the Minister in his introductory statement. Dealing with the sum of £28,000 for legal expenses in relation to the costs involved by the Land Commission in the acquisition of land, the Minister said at column 568 of Volume 275 of the Official Report:
It reflects the increase in the number of cases that are being contested in the Land Commission at acquisition stage and before the Appeal Tribunal on the question of price.
It is only natural that this situation should arise. It will probably continue to arise in a more aggravated form because the Land Commission is now acquiring land from Irish nationals. Previously the preponderance of land acquired was acquired from foreign landowners. We are dealing now with a somewhat different set-up and with a different attitude of mind. It is very important that every effort should be made where lands are being acquired to deal with the matter on a cash basis. Enough has been said about the history of land bonds. All of us are aware of the high depreciation in land bonds. One has only to look at the financial pages of the daily papers to see where land bonds originally issued at £100 now stand. It is only natural that people who are having land acquired compulsorily will fight against having their land taken from them in return for land bonds.
There is, too, a tradition in regard to land. Land is almost as sacred to us as our religion and our national aspirations. The tendency is to hold on to land as long as one possibly can. No matter how poor the holding is the owner finds it very hard to part with it. There is always the hope that things will improve, that the holding will be improved and the farmer can better himself, perhaps by adding to the holding or in some other way. The tendency is to hold on to the family holding.
The Minister is dealing with the question of the purchase of land for cash. There appears to be a slight suspicion of some difficulty in that regard. Possibly, because of inflation, the price given for land in the private sector has made it difficult for the Land Commission to acquire land at anything near what the Land Commission would regard as a realistic price. I appreciate the difficulties because, if the Land Commission pays a high price per acre, that high price will be reflected in the amount of the annuity to be paid by the person to whom the land is allotted. Since this is in the nature of a national investment the Land Commission should have another look at the basis on which the annuity is assessed. I have commented already, somewhat adversely, on the inflationary effect of the rents obtained by the Land Commission for lands they let on the actual price of land. If one puts up the rent one ultimately puts up the capital value because there is a relationship between income derived from land and the capital price.
The Minister referred to buildings erected by the Land Commission. Costs have greatly increased in the building sector and these are reflected in the costs which have to be met by the Land Commission. In the not too distant past there was an inclination on the part of farmers in general to over-invest in expensive buildings. This is bound to be reflected in the type of buildings the Land Commission erect on holdings prepared for new owners. The Land Commission should carefully scrutinise the amount invested in farm buildings. This is a matter that should be kept under constant review to avoid unnecessary costs being visited on the new tenant. I believe fewer farm buildings should be erected in the first instance, confined to fundamentals and necessities. Once the new owner had become established the Land Commission could possibly come in again at a later stage and erect more buildings. Erecting buildings in the first instance is to some extent prejudging the type of farming that will be carried on. We are in an age of specialisation. In one year a farmer may specialise in one particular type of farm and in the following year he may switch to another type of farming because of rapid changes and market movements.
A great deal has been said repeatedly about the delays that occur in the acquisition and subsequent allocation of land. The Minister told us the total area of land in the acquisition machine at 31st March this year was 79,500 acres. Allotments for the year amounted to 35,600 acres, approximately half what was in the acquisition machine. What really concerns farmers is the fact that the Land Commission seem to acquire land and then hold on to it for an undue length of time. The Minister has done his best to speed up this matter. While it is no reflection on him or his Department, I feel a pair of spurs could be taken out again and a further impetus given to the speed of allocation of land. It is terrible to see a farmer badly in need of extra land having to pay inordinately high rents in order to keep his holding viable while large areas of land available for allocation are in the possession of the Land Commission. I am unable to understand why there has been this delay.
In other areas where there is compulsory acquisition once the acquisition order has been made there is nothing to prevent the acquiring authority moving in and dealing with the land. Matters of compensation can follow later. That principle has been clearly established under the compulsory acquisition code here and in England. I do not see why one must wait interminably for all matters to be clear before the land is subsequently allocated.
This is a continuous gripe which has been voiced to me and I am sure to every other rural Deputy by constituents. We have no satisfactory reply to give to them. They have our sympathy. This is giving the Land Commission a very bad image. They should be seen as being on the side of the smallholder who requires extra land. Farmers have got the idea that the Land Commission are not with them. This image must be destroyed if the commission is to make progress. One gets the impression that the Land Commission feel that if they quickly allocate their land the commission might become redundant. It is open to that interpretation. I have heard farmers say that and it is time the commission realised this and did something about it.
I will deal with the purchase of land by non-nationals another day. I now wish to refer to another activity of the Department of Lands and Forestry, wildlife. I am very glad to see that the slobs outside Wexford are being improved and that access facilities have been made for the interested public. This is a wonderful project which will help to give a very good return in relation to the tourist industry. The younger members of our society are taking a very keen interest in the conservation of wildlife.
The 1972-73 report referred to the question of an atlas of breeding birds. This is very essential work. We know there have been changes in the breeding habits and location of wildlife. This has become a matter of concern. Up to now, the conservation of wildlife has been largely a voluntary activity. It is very gratifying to see the Department taking a very serious interest in this matter. I hope this activity will be greatly enlarged.
I mentioned previously that there was a very good programme on RTE, Amuigh Faoin Spéir, in which the younger generation took a very keen interest. It is to be commended for its bilingual approach. It opened certain parts of the country to people living in cities and urban areas who did not know such areas existed. The younger generation are getting very interested in the conservation of wildlife.
I should like to see the Department of Lands becoming more interested in ecology and conservation. Interest should be taken in insect life and in the natural and wild flora. Work in these areas so far has been done by voluntary workers. A considerable amount of work has also been done to our natural and wild flora.
The Department should take a very serious interest in the area known as the Burren, County Clare. I have heard very disturbing reports that unique specimens of flora have been collected, parcelled and sold out of the country. As I understand it, this is a continuous strain on our unique resources. People interested in unique wild flora have always tried to ensure that these plants did not get into the wrong hands. The Burren is suffering from predatory acts. The Department of Lands is the only Department which could do something about this. If they cannot, it is about time new machinery was created for that purpose.