asked the Minister for Lands if he will give urgent consideration to ensure that the Land Commission give equal priority to con-acre farmers in the allotting of land which those farmers have been renting for years.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Land Settlement.
43.
(Cavan): The primary objective of land settlement policy at present is the structural reform of uneconomic holdings throughout the State. Nevertheless, the Land Commission have, for long, been aware of the claims of men, especially in East Donegal, who can be described as farmers without land.
However, where land division is concerned, the demand invariably exceeds the supply and in that situation the Land Commission have to weigh the merits of one individual or category against the other. In particular, they may not disregard their principal obligation, as stated already, to enlarge as many as possible of the great number of existing non-viable holdings whose owners will not be able to survive in farming unless they can secure extra land.
Despite this, the Land Commission have always taken into account the position of the conacre farmer in East Donegal and, of the 23 new farms allotted there in the period since 1964, 14 were given to conacre farmers.
While this position is peculiar to East Donegal, are these conacre farmers regarded as third priority re-settlement cases and do migrant holdings come under the third category?
(Cavan): They are not regarded as a top priority. The bringing up of the uneconomic holder to an economic standard is first priority. Long distance migration is practically a thing of the past.
Could the Minister have a further look at this matter in very special cases? In regard to peculiar circumstances whereby truly landless men are very good farmers could these people not be regarded as farmers for the purposes of the Act to bring them into the top priority category? Once and estate is divided for all these other laudable purposes those who have been working on it have nothing left.
(Cavan): The Deputy may take it that each case will be considered on its merits.
Sir, my remaining questions will take a brief period. Perhaps I could continue with the consent of the House?
Agreed.
44.
asked the Minister for Lands if he is satisfied that Land Commission policy on re-settlement is suitable to present-day needs.
(Cavan): While recognising the substantial—if unacclaimed—work done by the Land Commission over the years, I have recently expressed the view that the time is ripe for taking a new look at our land settlement programme and procedures. Membership of the EEC has brought dramatic changes in our farming needs and prospects and the way ahead is indicated by the Community's structural directives. More and more farms are becoming highly developed and intensified and the establishment of rural industry highlights the position of the part-time farmer and his role in the emerging rural community. It is appropriate, therefore, to review our present land policy in the light of requirements of these changing circumstances and the Deputy may rest assured that I am giving the matter close thought just now.
Could I ask the Minister to have regard to the attitude of the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries particularly in this matter? Contradictions are beginning to appear in regard to grant assistance and the aims and objectives in regard to land resettlement, that is, size of farms and so on.
(Cavan): In the review which I have in mind there will be close liaison between the Minister for Agriculture and me.
Would the Minister consider introducing changes in the Land Commission whereby preference will be given to farmers to enable them to enter the development class? Could the Minister ensure that there would not be a clash in the allocation of land between people who have been encouraged to surrender land under the retirement scheme? I have received a number of complaints regarding land being allocated to people over 70 years of age or people who are not working on the land.
(Cavan): I would be surprised if the information given by the Deputy is accurate. If the Deputy has any particular cases in mind, I would be glad to have them brought to my attention. In regard to what may emerge from the study which I propose making, I would prefer to deal with it when I have received a full report.
Could I ask that Question No. 47 be postponed? Deputy Tunney left the House in the belief that it would not be reached.
(Cavan): That is all right.