asked the Minister for Agriculture why provision of additional moneys to the extent of only £10 has been made for general land purchases by the Land Commission under subhead H.2 of the Estimate for Lands; if he has given any instruction or suggestion, orally or in writing, personally or through his agents to the Land Commission to reduce or moderate in any way their land acquisition activities; and, if so, if he will give details.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Land Acquisition.
11.
As I told the Deputy in reply to a question last March, the amount provided under subhead H.2 of the Vote for Lands is paid to a grant-in aid fund used for financing certain purchases of land for cash. A token amount is being provided again this year because the balance in the fund is considered adequate to meet the expected requirements. The bulk of the lands acquired by the Land Commission are, of course, paid for in Land Bonds.
As to the second part of the question, the Deputy will be aware that a new and radical approach to land structural problems is contemplated. One of the main criticisms levelled at the Land Commission in the past has related to the policy in the allotment of acquired lands. At present the Land Commission have some 28,000 hectares of land on hands and a further 21,000 hectares in course of acquisition. With a new policy in the offing I have indicated to the Land Commission that for the present the major emphasis must be on the early disposal of acquired lands. However, new acquisition proceedings will continue to be initiated where circumstances so warrant.
Would the Minister agree that, if the Land Commission—as he seems to have instructed them—slow down their land acquisition activity, this means that until such time as the new controls are introduced there is almost open season for people wishing to buy land to get in before the trap falls, so to speak?
There are no grounds at all for assuming the running down of Land Commission activities. Surely the holding by the Land Commission of 28,000 hectares of land, that they actually own, and the fact that they are negotiating for another 21,000 hectares is sufficient warranty of that. The condition I am anxious to achieve is that the Land Commission will not remain in possession of these lands themselves a minute longer than is necessary, that they will be allotted to the farmers for whom they were originally purchased. I do not think there is any substance in the Deputy's objection.
Would the Minister not agree that he has indicated already in the House that he does not expect his new land legislation to be law before the end of the current year; that land coming on the market in the meantime will not be subject to as much Land Commission attention as it would have been in the past because the Minister has said the Land Commission should devote their attention to the disposal of land they have already?
It was always my intention on our return to Government to restrain the undisciplined purchase of land, especially in the case of people who could be deemed to have sufficient land already. My announcement that it was my intention, in collaboration with the other members of the Government, to formulate a law to give effect to this intention is not news to anybody who knows the record of myself or of my party.
What does the Minister mean by the undisciplined purchase of land? Did he not think it a good idea for previous Ministers for Agriculture and Lands to purchase land when it was going rather cheaply at half the price it is today? I should like him to explain what he means by the undisciplined purchase of land.
I was referring to the payment of totally unrealistic and uneconomic prices for land. That is the situation that is all too common today. The payment of £3,000 or even £4,000 per acre for farm land is economic nonsense. The Deputy knows that. It is being paid by people who have ready credit and cash available. The people who are being affected most are the smaller people who have not such ready cash.
Is the Minister accusing the Irish Land Commission officials of giving more than the value for land, or does he not believe that the people who sell land are entitled to a fair price for it?
The Land Commission are required by the provisions of the 1950 Act to pay the market value for land. As the Deputy will understand, the price is dictated by the market. That market price is totally unrelated to the economic value of that land as farmland. If the Deputy had been in the House he would have heard us talking about an estate in County Kildare where the economic rent would be £400 a year on the prospective allotee.
I was in the House at the time the Minister was answering Deputy Clinton.