I move the motion standing in my name on the Order Paper, which reads:
That the Seanad is of opinion that the Government should introduce legislation at once which would extend to non-urbanised towns the benefits of the provisions of the Acquisition of Land (Allotments) Acts, 1926 and 1934.
I hope the Government regards this motion in the spirit in which it is submitted for discussion, that is the spirit of sincere helpfulness to avert or overcome the crisis which we are told might come upon us. That is the spirit in which it is offered. Ministers have definite information in regard to the matter of the supplies of human food in the country, and they have issued warnings. These have been issued by the Minister for Agriculture, the Minister for Supplies, the Minister for the Co-Ordination of Defensive Measures and last night the Taoiseach also made a very definite statement regarding the dangers that might come upon us. Compulsory tillage has been put into operation, and, side by side with it. appeals have been made by Ministers to the patriotism and sense of civic spirit of the farmers to help to avert or overcome what may come upon us in the autumn. Nobody can blame the Ministers for issuing that warning. They are doing their duty towards the community, and everybody hopes that their efforts will be fruitful.
Every person with any sense of civic responsibility and duty towards the community is prepared to help the Government to the fullest extent. But there is a section of the community whose position is always precarious, whose numbers are, unfortunately, likely to increase, and whose position in the coming months is likely to be more precarious. These people have households to maintain and they are anxious to discharge their duties towards their households. One cannot blame them if they feel that they would be much better prepared and safeguarded, and much more independent, if they could have a supply of foodstuff which they could call their own and which was brought into existence by their own efforts. Ministers and other public men are calling out from the house-tops that something should be done in the director of securing such a supply. One must regard these people as being up against a stone wall of circumstances. They have not land, seed, manures and, indeed, no means by which they can go into production in order to discharge their duties towards their households. I do not think that will be denied by anybody.
I am sure the Government and the members of the House are sympathetic but, whatever of sympathy, it cannot be denied that in any crisis that may arise the poor and necessitous are likely to suffer the most. At the recent meeting of the Dáil the Taoiseach said:—
"The poor are in a particularly difficult position. They, as a rule, have few alternative foods...."
Realising that, I put down this motion. We are now faced with a problem. What are we going to do to help to solve it? I am urging the Government to do something at once. I underline "at once" for obvious reasons, because if something is not done in the way of preparing the land for cultivation very soon, all our efforts to encourage increased production will not be very effective, and that is putting it very mildly.
The present Government and the previous Government have encouraged the policy of plot-holding and there are two Acts which make provision in that respect. The first is the Act of 1926 and in it the word "allotment" means a piece of land containing not more than one quarter of a statute acre let or intended to be let for cultivation by an individual for the production of vegetables mainly for consumption by himself and his family. The expresion "local authority" in the same Act mean and includes the council of a county borough or other borough or an urban district or the commissioner of a town to which the Towns Improvement (Ireland) Act, 1854, or any part of that Act applies. The present Government introduced an amending Act and, fortunately or unfortunately, designedly, wilfully or otherwise, this paragraph occurs:
"Every word and expression to which a particular meaning is given by the Principal Act for the purposes of that Act has in this Act the meaning so given to it."
Section 7 of the amending Act says:
"The Minister for Agriculture with the sanction of the Minister for Finance may, as and when he shall think proper, make out of moneys provided by the Oireachtas a grant of such amount as he shall think proper",
and then, in paragraph (c), the section sets out:
"to any corporate body or unincorporated association approved of by the Minister for Agriculture which provides, otherwise than under the Principal Act, allotments for unemployed persons, for the purpose of enabling such body or association to supply, free of cost, to such unemployed persons, seeds, manures, and potato spraying materials for use in such allotments and to provide agricultural implements for use by such unemployed persons free of cost for the cultivation of such allotments."
No doubt, that was intended to be an improvement on the Act of 1926, and it certainly did give wide powers to the Minister for Agriculture. It gave him an opportunity of allowing associations to acquire land and, by giving manures, seeds, spraying materials and implements, he was in a position to help these people who were endeavouring to help themselves. Therefore, the policy of the Government has been to encourage plot-holding. Of course, Section 7 (1) (c) releases the Government from the responsibility of making up the difference in the rent between what the plot-holder pays to the local authority and what the local authority pays to the landowner. That is my opinion, but I may be wrong. It seems to me that it saves the Government from the responsibility of doing that.
I suggest that the policy of the Government in encouraging plot-holding is justified. Figures that are available how that in Vote 41 of the Appropriation Accounts for 1939-40 there was a grant, in connection with the Local Government Department, of £3,900. I take it that was to pay the difference between what the allottee paid in rent to the local authority and what the local authority paid to the landowner. The total amount spent was £3,947, so that there was a slight excess over what was voted. The figure in the Appropriation Accounts in regard to the Vote for the Department of Agriculture in 1939-40 was £8,667. That sum was voted and the amount spent was £7,805. Turning to the Estimates for 1940-41, it will be noted that in Vote 30, relating to agriculture, the total amount estimated under the sub-head for plots is £20,092, as against £10,422 in 1939-40. That shows there was practically twice as much voted in 1940-41 and, therefore, one is safe in assuming that the Government considered there was a demand for the extension of these plots and they provided money in order to see that that demand was supplied. Salaries, wages, allowances, and travelling expenses were £1,820, thus giving £18,272, for seeds, manures and the use of implements. In the Local Government Vote, to make up the loss in rent on allotments, a sum of £7,279 was voted, as against £3,800 in the previous year.
The report of the Department of Local Government and Public Health for 1938-39 sets out, on page 67, that during the year 4,555 allotments were provided for unemployed persons in 67 districts. There were 3,196 plots tilled by persons in receipt of unemployment assistance; 221 by persons in receipt of home assistance; 285 by persons employed on relief works, and 853 by persons in casual employment and with limited means. The 67 districts I have referred to do not represent all the local authorities entitled to avail of the provisions of the 1926 Act. There are between 70 and 80 authorities, urban and borough councils and town commissioners, that would be entitled to avail of the provisions of the Act. Sixty-seven of them availed of the provisions of the Act.
Now let us turn to what Dr. Ryan, the Minister for Agriculture, through his Department has to say. In 1939-40 his report, making reference to the Act of 1926 and the amending Act of 1934, states that allotments were operated at 76 centres, so you see that the number was increasing progressively. Unemployed allotment holders to the number of 4,846 as compared with 4,681 in the previous year were provided, free of cost, with seeds and manures and with the use of implements. There was, therefore, an increase of nearly 200 in the number of allotment holders in one year. At page 149 of the report of the Minister for Agriculture the following appears:—
Allotment schemes under these Acts were operated at each of the 76 centres shown in the tabular statement hereunder during the year under review and 4,846 unemployed allotment holders, as compared with 4,681 in the previous year, were provided, free of cost, with seeds and manures and with the use of implements. The number of centres showed an increase of three on the figure for the previous year.
In Cork there were 512 working, in Dublin 566, Athy 105, in Bray 147, in Carrick-on-Suir 130, in Tipperary 114, and in Tralee 134. That list, I might say in passing, is not at all complete because I know of urban councils who are availing of the provisions of the Act, whose names do not appear in the list. I am not blaming the compiler of the list because, possibly, the information was not available at the time the list was compiled. I do know that in Ennis there are 60 plot-holders. Speaking with the Chairman of the Ennis Urban Council yesterday, Senator Honan, he informed me that owing to the great increase in the number of applicants for plots the council would have to acquire more land this year. I am merely making the argument that there is a constantly increasing demand for plots and that can only express itself where there is provision made for the allocation of these plots.
In the Minister's own report, it is definitely stated that there is an ever-increasing demand for these plots. Why then does the Government stop at urban districts, at the county boroughs and at towns that have adopted the provisions of the Towns Improvements Act of 1854? Surely the Government knows as well as I do, and has far more information at its disposal than I have to show them, that there are scores, one might say hundreds, of non-urbanised towns, towns which have not even town commissioners, which stand just as much in need of the benefits provided by these Acts as urban districts and county boroughs? I find it very difficult in the case of non-urbanised towns to find a figure to show what is the real population of these towns. The Minister understands thoroughly that there are so many varying units that it is impossible almost to ascertain what is the population of any particular district. You have the dispensary district, the rural district and the superintendent registrar's district, none of which is coterminous with another. When I was endeavouring to find out what was the population in our non-urbanised districts I, therefore, found it impossible to obtain the exact figure.
I did, however, get some figures in the census list although the population is a good deal in excess of that given in the census as many of these towns have overflowed to a very large extent. I only went through the figures for some towns in the county in which I live, and I shall give the Minister the benefit of the figures I got. Let me say that people have written to me from many of these towns asking me to impress upon the Government the necessity of doing something to provide allotments in these areas. The populations of the various non-urbanised towns in the county are given as follows: Ennistymon, 1,202; Killaloe, 904; Miltown-Malbay, 788; Clarecastle, 580; Tulla, 544; Newmarket on Fergus, 450; Kildysart, 416; Scariff, 387; Corofin, 372; Sixmilebridge, 303; Lahinch, 261; Lisdoonvarna, 220; Liscannor, 217; Kilmihil, 215; and Kilfenora, 205. That list does not exhaust all the towns in Clare, but it is fairly representative. I want to impress upon the Minister, however, that these figures do not fully represent the population of these districts.
Again, when I endeavoured to find out the measure of unemployment in these towns I found myself up against a great difficulty because even where there are exchanges operating, the number of unemployed is not made out in respect of the towns. It is made out in respect of the exchange area. You have the Limerick exchange area, the Ennis exchange area and the Kilrush exchange area. Therefore, it is impossible for me to say with any degree of accurancy what the extent of unemployment in these towns really is. The only thing I can say is that I am quite certain it is extensive. There is an exchange operating in Ennistymon and another in Tulla but these, I take it, are sub-branches. In the statistics supplied by the Department of Industry and Commerce for the 30th December, 1940, the number of unemployed in Ennistymon is given as 797. I think that that number is clearly a misprint and that it should be 197. In Tulla the number is given as 169.
I pointed out earlier that the Minister for Agriculture has power under sub-section (1) (c) of Section 7 of the Amendment Act of 1934 to make grants to certain corporate bodies or unincorporated associations who acquired land, for the purpose of enabling them to supply unemployed persons free of cost with manures, seeds and implements. Some of us throughout the country thought that if there was any work at which a parish council might suitably try its prentice hand, here was work for it. Several people in various towns approached me in connection with this matter. I might mention one town in particular in which representations were made by the parish priest, the chairman of the local parish council. That is the town of Clarecastle, a small parish outside Ennis, where there is a little port into which coal, meal and flour came. There the main source of employment is carting these commodities to the town of Ennis. Now, I put this because it is, I think, a strong point in the case I am making. That port has been badly hit and is going to be hit most seriously in the future. Boats to that port are like angels— their visits are few and far between. The parish council made an application that the provisions of the amending Act, or of the original Act, be applied to that town, where there are 30 carters unemployed, each one of them having a horse and each one of them able to plough. The chairman of the parish council, the local parish priest, told me definitely that land would be made available. I got into touch with the Department of Agriculture and put the case as strongly as I could. I quoted the relevant sections of the Act of Parliament. And what do I get? I am not anxious to make a case against any Department or score any points whatever. I am only anxious to get the Government to act and, if the Government acts, I will be quite satisfied. I get this letter from the Department of Agriculture:—
21adh Mí Na Nodlag, 1940.
A Chara,
I am directed by the Minister for Agriculture to refer to your letter of 14th instant with enclosed copy of a resolution passed at a special meeting of Clarecastle Parish Council regarding the provision of seeds, manures, implements, etc., under the allotments scheme for rural districts in County Clare, and to state that grants could not be made under the Acquisition of Land (Allotments) Acts, 1926 and 1934 towards the cost incurred in providing land for allotments in any town which has not municipal government. In towns which, although they have not municipal government, have a considerable urban population, grants from State funds may be made under the Act of 1934 for the provision of seeds, manures, spraying materials and implements for allotments let to "unemployed persons" where suitable land has been made available for the allotments by local associations at their own expense and the question of making a grant in each such case has to be considered on its merits, regard being had to the number of "unemployed persons" in the town who have not any land of their own suitable for cultivation. I am to add that the Act is not intended to apply to unemployed persons in small towns or villages such as Clarecastle and that arrangements for the provision of allotments in such places could not be made.
The Minister regrets, therefore, that, after careful consideration the scope of the Acts cannot be extended, as suggested, to unemployed persons in rural areas.
That clearly cuts out a town of the size of Clarecastlc, with 30 unemployed persons, each of them able to plough his own piece of land and that land available. I do not know whether there has been a change of policy or not and, on looking up the report of the Minister for Agriculture I find that, on page 149, it says:—
"In the centres Dunmanway, Roanmore (Waterford), Dingle, Castleisland, Castlerea, Mountrath, Bailieboro' and Dublin (Mount Street Club) the land for allotments was provided by certain associations approved by the Minister under Section 7 (1) (c) of the Acquisition of Land (Allotments) (Amendment) Act, 1934. In each of the other centres mentioned the land for the allotments was made available by the respective local authorities."
That is, in each of the centres in the table, but in those towns I have mentioned — Dunmanway, Roanmore, etc.—they were provided by local associations and the Minister gave the necessary grants for the seeds and manures.
I read this letter from the Minister for Agriculture in which he says that due consideration is given to the number of unemployed and that he did not think in Clarecastle the number of unemployed was sufficient. I have looked up the table, in which is given the number of unemployed persons to whom seeds, etc., were provided, free of charge, and it says:—
"Dunmanway, 13; Roanmore, 17; Castlerea, 8; Bailieboro', 25."
When I contrast that with the 30 men in Clarecastle prepared to till their plots and pay for them, I ask why it is they are withheld from these benefits. I certainly cannot reconcile the attitude of the Minister on the two occasions.
The Minister probably will ask me how he is going to administer these grants, if he agrees to the provisions and agrees that there is necessity and demand for plots. Well, it ought to be within the ability of the Government Departments to find a way by which these grants may be administered. Of course, the county council is the statutory body, but it has subsidiary bodies. There are the county committees of agriculture and boards of health. These bodies certainly might be asked to do something in the matter. There are the agricultural instructors employed by each committee, and the home assistance officers employed by each board of health. Those may be asked to lend a hand. On the representations of a few ratepayers you build a cottage value for a few hundred pounds. In the same way, you might have a specific number of ratepayers in an area make an application and there may be somebody responsible whom the Minister could ask to administer this grant. There is plenty of legislation by which the land may be acquired—there is the Emergency Powers Act and the recent Act which the Minister put through here, the Relief of Unemployment Act. If parish councils, which have been boosted so much throughout the country, are to be in any way effective, here is an opportunity for them and an opportunity for the Minister to try their effectiveness and put them to do this work under their supervision.
I hope the Minister has disabused his mind of the idea that the times are normal. They are not normal: the abnormal has become the normal. I ask the Minister not to allow legal conservation or Civil Service conservatism to hold him up in dealing with this problem. The necessity of the people is fundamental, I suggest; and I also suggest that there is a big demand for these plots and that the Minister ought to take immediate action to meet that demand. As to its administration, I see no reason why the Minister for Agriculture and the Minister for Local Government could not issue an advertisement saying that the committees of agriculture would be prepared, say, on the 12th February or on any other day in February the Minister may mention, as early as possible, to consider applications for plots in the committee's area and also to consider proposals for the acquisition of land, having at the back all the time compulsory powers of acquisition and fixing, if you like, the price of land in those particular areas. There is no reason why that cannot be done, and there is no reason why means should not be provided by which these things may be done.
There is no use in trying to get away with a statement that the administrative side would be very difficult. Unless the Government throws its heart and soul into this and gives it full material and moral support, nothing will come of it. Therefore, I am asking the Government to give it that complete moral and material support to-day. January has gone; St. Brigid's Day is on us, and most of the land to be got will be old lea land which will have to be looked after immediately, and those taking it will have to go out and turn it immediately and get something done. I put it to the Minister that these people feel—and feel rightly —that if there is in July, August and September a shortage, or a danger of a shortage, they will be far more independent, if they are able to have at the back of their houses a pit of potatoes, some turnips, cabbage and other vegetables to tide them over the crisis, if it comes. These people are anxious to help and have a right to be afforded an opportunity to help, not only in their own interests, but in the interests of the community Therefore, I ask the Minister to give this sympathetic consideration to-day and to make provision to meet the urgent demand of these people.