Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Friday, 15 Nov 1946

Vol. 103 No. 7

Private Deputies' Business. - Turf Bogs—Valuation Increases—Motion (Resumed).

When I was speaking to this motion on Wednesday night I had reached the point where I said that soldiers are soon forgotten. It is only a few years ago since the eyes of the nation were turned to the bogs and the bogmen were asked to take off their coats to save the nation by producing fuel, so that the people would not be cold during the winter months. The bogmen responded to the call in no uncertain way. Now that the emergency is easing off, and conditions are coming back to normal, we find that the bogmen are not being applauded for what they did but they are to be penalised, notwithstanding all the good work they did for the Irish nation.

So far as I see, the actions of the Government are little different from the actions of the old Irish landlords. If a man improved his place they slapped on new taxation and the position with many people in the country was that their last state was worse than the first. The Minister starts by pin-pricking in various parts of the country to see how this business of increasing valuations will be taken. He started in Tipperary and then in Mayo and increased valuations here and there. I am not sure whether he has yet come to my county, but there is one thing certain, that if this is allowed now there will soon be a general revaluation and I do not think the Irish people will be prepared to stand for that.

One would think the bogmen made huge profits, that their pockets are bulging with money. So far as my county is concerned, that is a fallacy. It is unjust to suggest that about the bogmen because those of them who reside in Meath got a raw, cruel deal. It may be that bogmen did well in other counties where the bogs are vast, but there is not a vast area of bogland in Meath. There is one part with a fair amount of bog, but I should like the Minister to realise that fully 75 per cent. of the bog areas in Meath are, as a result of the Government's operations, now completely wiped out. They are now a wilderness. In the past there were men in Meath who had little bogs which they regarded as private concerns for themselves and their friends. When the emergency came the State stepped in and trampled on the rights of these private individuals and gave them practically no compensation. State agents cut the turf and allowed others to cut it until the little bogs were wiped out. Now the men who formerly had those bogs have to travel outside their areas to get fuel.

We are told that the bogmen are well off and the Government are about to increase their valuations. That is very unfair. Most of the bogmen that I know regret that there ever was an emergency because it did them an immense amount of harm and it has left them without fuel for the future. This action on the part of the Government is mean, niggardly and un-Irish. Who are the bogmen? They are the most unfortunate people in the country. They represent the remnants of the old Irish race, the people who had to go to Hell or Connaught. They went to the bogs and they survived, but always it has been a desperate life, a hard, pitiful life. Would the Minister live for 24 hours in any of these bogs, let alone for 24 years? I do not think he would. He might have passed through them at one time while he was on the run, but I do not think he would stay a night there now.

These areas are bleak and miserable. For the people living there it is damp, sour and dour. Most families are afflicted with tuberculosis, pains or rheumatism. All the afflictions common to man reach the bogmen. Most of them die young. You can see many of them moving around on crutches; they are nearly always lame from the dampness. The Government now tell us that the people on the bogs have had a good time and a higher valuation must be imposed on them. Cromwell is not dead yet. I have had a letter from one of those new-rich, as the Government describe them, those famous bogmen. When I read that letter the House will see how these unfortunate men are placed. It is only right that I should read this letter. The writer seems to be an honest, straightforward man who just wants a fair crack of the whip. Here is what he wrote to me:

"I beg to ask you to do a little favour for me. The Meath County Council has a spread ground for turf taken from me under the emergency Order for the past six years. The council had it the first two years and Mr. Geraghty has had it now for four years. Now Mr. McKiterian, the district surveyor, says I was paid £2 the first two years. I definitely got no money for the first two years. Now they want to put me away with £2 for four years, 10/- a year. I measured the area under turf covered by Mr. Geraghty and the area was 1 acre 1 rood and 28¼ square yards, Irish measure. An auctioneer has valued the spread ground at £5 per Irish acre per season. Under the emergency Order it was read out for me at an arbitration meeting held at the courthouse in Ballivor recently. The arbitrator was Mr. A. J. Malone, solicitor, Trim. Mr. Noonan and Mr. McKiterian were also there. It was read out that the county council of each county would pay full compensation for any damage done. I cannot go to law under the Order. I have returned the cheque for £2 to Mr. Ward, solicitor, Edenderry. What I want to ask you is, will you ask a question in the Dáil or put one to the Minister over this business, or bring this matter up at a county council meeting? I will have your answer published. Another thing, Mr. A.J. Malone never saw the bog, he was not there, and Mr. McKiterian would not let Mr. Murphy, ex-teacher from Trim, survey the area under turf. I am a poor man trying hard to eke out a living. Do not let them best me. I am entitled to full compensation.—MICHAEL COMMONS."

That is the type of man on whom the Government want to increase the valuation. He is a Meath bogman with a few acres. There is a spread bank which he could let to his neighbours at £2, £3, or £5 an acre, but the Government would not let him do that. They took over the spread bank and offered him 10/- a year for one and a half Irish acres when he could have got £2, £3 or £5 an acre from his neighbours or could use it for grazing.

If the Minister for Finance knows of people who have made huge profits out of turf, he will not find any of them in my county or in Westmeath East either. This thing is going too far. It is bringing contempt on the Irish Government and on this House. These unfortunate men got a chance—the one chance in a lifetime. When did the bogman get a chance before? Did he get a chance in the last 50 or 100 years? He did not. In the last few years the men on the bogs got a chance to make a little money by hard work and now the Government begrudge them the little they made and want to take it off them. Such action is mean, dirty, un-Irish. It brings us back to the days of Cromwell. And all this is not being done under our own laws. The Government have to resurrect the Victorian laws, old British laws, the laws which the Minister said he had such contempt for. I am afraid he has not very much contempt for them now because he is using them to penalise a down-trodden people.

The Government should drop this idea of increasing the valuation and give these poor people a chance of living. We ought to be proud of them for the way they stood by the nation in a time of need. The Forces man cannot even get a house built for him. The houses are all mud cabins, with no foundations, sitting in quagmires. Then an Irish Government must have money to make new Ministries, to give the officials a better time and squeeze the down-and-outs. I want the Minister for Finance now present to realise that those who were prepared to shelter Irishmen in their struggle for freedom did do it and Irish nationalism ran in the blood of everyone. Let him stop this dirty, mean work and let him be as Irish as he was 15 years ago. If he does not do that, the Irish people will live to regret the actions of this Government.

I represent a constituency where there is a vast area of bog and I remember the time, some 14 years ago, when thousands of acres of that bog in Kildare had no access to it at all. It was undrained and large areas were owned by big land owners. The Government here, 12 or 14 years ago—and not just at the beginning of the emergency—decided to expend vast sums of money on bog drainage, to bring those bogs into production. That was long before the war. In 1933 and 1934, officials inspected those bogs and I know cases where thousands of pounds were spent on 500 or 600 acres of bog. The poor people of the district were amazed at first at such amounts being allocated. Protests were made by people who did not agree with the Government on this wastage of public money and protests were made by Opposition members here against the extravagance of Fianna Fáil in wasting millions of pounds, in 1933 and 1934, on such useless work. Many people throughout the country asked why the Government should spend such an amount of money to improve the property of individuals and said it was unfair to the taxpayer to do so.

On a point of order, I suggest that Deputy Harris is out of order. We are discussing why valuations were raised in County Tipperary and none were raised in County Kildare.

I am coming to that now. This motion does not affect Tipperary only, but Kildare also. I submit that I am in order—and I may be a little too much in order for Deputy Mulcahy's point of view.

I hope to hear it.

If the Deputy will allow me to continue, he will hear it. I do not speak very often and I am sure that an experienced debater like Deputy Mulcahy would not like to put me off my track.

I hope the Deputy will appreciate what I am suggesting.

Many supporters of Deputy Mulcahy in my constituency were opposed to that large expenditure of public money on the improvement of what they called swamp and waste. The Government continued and developed those large areas, which up to then were swamps, utilised only for game, an odd grouse drive, for snipe and duck shooting. Up to then, the poor bogmen Deputy Giles talks about were in a bad way. Having decided to foster turf, a guaranteed price was arranged by the Government and it was decided that the fuel to be used in the Government services was turf. As a result, those areas of swamp became of value. The owners decided to put on a rent and they were getting a handsome income out of them. That is not since the emergency started, but 14 or 15 years ago.

I do not like to interrupt the Deputy again, but on a point of order, this is a motion for which there is very little time available. It deals with the emergency and with the discrimination during the emergency between counties such as Kildare and Tipperary.

I am coming back to the emergency. The bogs that were worthless immediately became of value and there was competition for them. Other people saw there was money in turf and those who had tried to live on them during the period when they were undrained and undeveloped found that competitors with more money were coming in and giving big prices. I am coming to the emergency now, but even before the emergency there was a great volume of opinion against the Government spending that money to the advantage of individuals. A good case could have been made then for the Government if, before spending those millions, they had taken over those bogs in the national interest, at the very low price which they were worth, and then developed them so that the community might have the advantage instead of letting it go to individuals.

With the coming of the emergency, the position became more acute. Those areas were put up for public auction and what was not worth 10/- or even 5/- a square perch previous to their development by the expenditure of Government money went up to £10 a perch and more. As a result of that— and Deputy Norton knows all about this, as he had to step in along with me to seek some control over the prices —the Minister for Supplies was compelled to make an Emergency Powers Order, restricting the price of turf banks to what they were at the beginning of the emergency and putting an end to public auctions altogether, as the local people, the bogmen Deputy Giles talks about, were being put completely out of the picture. I believe that, instead of the motion which Deputy Mulcahy put down, he should have taken action on directly opposite lines. He should have taken up the attitude that the valuation authorities have been lax in their duty and that, 12 or 14 years ago, they should have dealt with this matter and tried to save the taxpayers and ratepayers, who had to finance this bog development, some of the burdens they had to bear.

You will want their votes again.

Deputy Mulcahy wants them to get £1,600 per acre.

I know what the people of Kildare want. Deputy Norton knows the position there as well as I do. Deputy Keyes spoke about "crushing burdens" and "inequitable charges". I am satisfied from listening to Deputy Keyes, that he was foolishly rushed into the matter. If he had consulted his leader about the position and about the implications of this motion, he would, I think, have taken a completely different line. I do not mind Deputy Blowick talking about "nasty tricks" and "viciousness" and all that. I do not know what the mentality of the people of Mayo is.

You should have a fair idea. Your memory is bad.

I think that Deputy Mulcahy should withdraw this motion. It clearly indicates that he is out of touch with the rural community. If he understood country conditions and if he had looked into the matter, he would never have put down this motion.

Why did no increase in valuation take place in Kildare during the emergency?

I have never listened to a more feeble case for the defence of any Government plan or any form of taxation than I have listened to in respect of this attempt by the Minister for Finance to take money out of the pockets of the bog owners. I know nothing about Kildare and still less about Tipperary so far as the bogs and their owners there are concerned. But I do know something about Mayo. The percentage of bog in Mayo is not as great as one would imagine. The county is densely populated and a great portion of the bog is divided in two and three acre plots amongst small farmers. As I stated here, in the form of a supplementary question on a question addressed to the Minister by another Deputy, the Taoiseach and other responsible citizens at the beginning of the emergency appealed to the small farmer and to the small farmer's son to go out into their little piece of turbary and increase production. They were asked to make even a second cutting. They were told to cut early and to cut again, the second cutting to go towards providing fuel for the people in the towns and cities. The farmers' sons did that. The Minister for Industry and Commerce made sure that they would have to do it. Prior to the emergency, the small farmer's son went to England to earn a livelihood. He had to stay at home during the emergency and, if he did not go into the bog and endeavour to earn a pittance there by hard labour from early morning until sunset, he would have to starve. Whether he did that from patriotic motives, or as a matter of public duty or to save himself from starvation, at all events he cut the turf.

What do we find to-day? We find the Minister for Finance sending out notices asking these small tenants with an acre, or from two to four acres, of bog—some of them have less than an acre—to fill in a form stating what profits they made during such and such a year. Nobody who knew Fianna Fáil as I knew them and who was familiar with their history would think that a Fianna Fáil Minister and Fianna Fáil Deputies would be rising here to-day to defend that type of taxation. Who would have thought that the day would come when we should find a Minister for Finance representing that Party defending such a proceeding as this? They gave us to understand many years back that they stood for the poor, that they were out to reduce taxation and that taxation was far in excess of what it should be. Who would have thought that the day would come when, having put taxation to the very limit on every other section of the community and on every possible commodity, they would turn to the bog owner, to the man in Mayo, who, during the emergency did as I have said? We find that this gentleman, Mr. Aiken——

The Minister for Finance, please.

The Minister for Finance must now turn to the bogs and bog owners in County Mayo. The Minister is aware that we have a land agitation in County Mayo. Does he want to start a bog agitation?

And more Communism.

I never went to Moscow but there are men on the Deputy's benches who went there. There are men there who did their damnedest to destroy this institution by armed force and who murdered people on this side of the House. Do not mention Communism. If there is any Communism, it is on your benches but the Communists turned into little capitalists when they got into power.

Better come back to the bogs.

Communism is a decent thing as compared with murder and that can be pointed to over there.

The Deputy must not make such charges even in a general way.

I think that this talk about murder should not be indulged in. That should be forgotten.

Let the Deputy conduct himself and it will be forgotten.

The Minister is aware that there is a land agitation in County Mayo. We shall have a bog agitation there and I want to assure the Minister that he can send out forms and send down officials to value the bogs and estimate the amount of money supposed to be made in these bogs; he can endeavour to gather that money in in the form of an increase in the rates or an increase in taxation, but he will be foolish and mistaken. We shall do everything in our power to prevent that and stop it and we shall have the backing of the small tenant farmer in County Mayo. The small farmer in Mayo looked at that piece of bog as his property. It is his property and, in making a second cutting to provide fuel for the cities and towns, he felt he was reducing the amount of turbary he had at his disposal. He considered that he was reducing the life of that turbary by half because of making a second cutting. He had no guarantee that, when that fuel would have gone, he would have anything to take its place in the form of coal or electricity. Nevertheless, he was good enough to make his contribution. His son, instead of going to England, went into the bog and worked from 8 o'clock in the morning until sunset. In and around Ballyhaunis, papers have been sent to small bog owners asking them for a return of the profits they made. How can they give a return of their profits? They cannot give an exact return. The Minister has acted stupidly and the sooner he realises that the better. He has "put his foot in it". I do not know if there are landlords in Kildare or Tipperary with 1,000 acres of bog but, if he thinks he is going to tax the small bog owner in Mayo, he is hitting his head against a concrete wall. The small bog owner will have the support of all Deputies, whether of the Clann na Talmhan Party or the Fianna Fáil Party. If they have not the support of Fianna Fáil Deputies, they will not be worthy of being called Deputies. If the Minister tries to enforce that type of taxation, the small tenant farmer will have the support of all Parties. I have made my protest and let the Minister take the consequences.

Deputies Allen, O'Donnell and Commons rose.

I am prepared to give way to somebody who has a complaint to make but I am not prepared to give way to Deputy Allen who represents a county where the people did not cut one sod of turf. We have already had ten minutes wasted by Deputy Harris who has left the House. Deputy Allen has come in now to waste further time although he comes from a county where the valuation was not increased during the emergency.

I also wish to protest——

Does Deputy Mulcahy wish to conclude?

I am prepared to give way to any Deputy who has a complaint to make but, as I say, I am not prepared to give way to a Deputy coming from a county where no turf was cut.

Deputy Mulcahy was to be allowed 20 minutes to conclude and five minutes of that have already been taken up.

I am not going to allow a Deputy representing a county where not one sod of turf was cut, to waste time here in discussing my motion. There are a number of people here who have a serious grievance.

I belong to a county where the valuation has been increased most and I want to remind Deputy Allen——

I am calling on Deputy Allen.

I would ask you, Sir, to call on me then, if you cannot understand my point. I am prepared to give portion of the short time left to me to any Deputy from a county which has a grievance but I am not prepared to give way to a member of the Government Party who is simply getting up here to waste time.

Then I call on Deputy Mulcahy to conclude.

The Deputy has made a mistake in stating that no turf was produced in Wexford. Turf was produced on Mount Leinster.

Deputy Mulcahy to conclude.

I think that we have been very unfairly dealt with. We had the main contribution on the Government side from the Minister. Then we had a contribution from Deputy Colley who indicated that while increased valuation is coming very slowly, it will come all in good time. Later we had a contribution from Deputy Harris. No one is going to argue here that the people of Kildare did not make a little bit of money out of turf during the emergency but when we are told by the Minister that the valuation goes up by one-third of the average annual income that may be expected from the property, it becomes useful for us to know why Deputy Harris thinks that the scheme is a grand one and that it should be operated long ago. In County Kildare during the emergency not a single additional halfpenny went on turf valuation for the whole period.

My motion protests in the first place against the discrimination that has occurred by which persons in North Tipperary who provided turf during the emergency had their valuations increased by a kind of after-thought, while none of their neighbours either in South Tipperary, Waterford, Clare or Galway had any increase put on their valuation. I am not saying that it would not have been wrong to increase the valuations in South Tipperary, Clare, Mayo or Galway by reason of turf produced for emergency purposes. The Minister has indicated that it is a matter for the ratepayers and the whole history of this question throughout the country has shown how common-sense and fair-minded the ratepayers of the country were, because outside Monaghan and Tipperary, the people in whose power it was to move in their own interests that an increased valuation should be put on turf bogs, did not so move. That fact is an interpretation of the people's mentality and outlook. The Minister for Finance indicated, as against that, that the Minister for Local Government addressed a communication to county managers some years ago calling their attention to the fact that there was increased turf production and that, as there was an increased income from bogs, the valuations should go up.

It is a mistake to say that that communication went to county managers some years ago. It was only this spring it was sent out.

This spring, after the emergency was over, the managers were apparently asked to go back and try to estimate how much turf was produced in each of the last three years so that they might be in a position to advise the valuation officials that an increased valuation should be put upon such property, property which as many Deputies have pointed out, had been destroyed utterly from the point of view of its grazing possibilities and property from which a substantial amount of turf, which the owners would ordinarily conserve for their own household purposes, was used up because of the national emergency. The value of such property as a result of the removal of excessive quantities of turf from it, was depreciated rather than increased.

Yet Deputy Harris was able to tell us of a bog which fetched £1,600 an acre that was not formerly worth 2d. an acre.

These are only isolated instances.

I ask the Deputy to address himself to this question: is it fair to ask the ratepayers of a county to pay £1,600 an acre for a bog and to pay rates for that property as well?

The residents of County Kildare during the whole five years of the war did not ask that the valuation of any property in that county should be increased by one penny in spite of the increased production of turf and the increased earnings of certain people. Why did the Minister not address himself to that question or ask Deputy Harris to address himself to it?

I have no control over the ratepayers of Kildare. If they wish to continue to pay rates for the people who have received £1,600 an acre for their bog, that is their affair. It will save me an amount of expense.

They are not paying rates for them.

Some people must be paying the rates for them in County Kildare.

Does the Minister suggest that because of increased turf production the ratepayers who were paying a particular rate should be relieved of these rates and that the rates should be transferred to the turf producers? Why was that not stated in the emergency Order?

Whom they had already paid for the turf.

Does the Minister suggest that the valuation in a particular county should be revised so that portions of the rates that normally fell on particular people should be transferred to the turf producers?

To whom these people paid £1,600 an acre for the right to cut turf.

Why did these ratepayers not ask to have the valuation of the turf producers increased?

Because they were very foolish.

Because of their common sense and they are living in the county.

They should do it.

My complaint is that the valuations of some 50 persons in North Tipperary are to go up and that an Act of 1852 is dug up out of God knows where to increase the valuation of these people.

The Act was there when the Deputy was Minister.

The Act was there for Mayo, for Galway, for Donegal and for all the places the Minister can think of. It is very hard to know how it would have acted, but I will give the House an example. Not all the turf produced in the country was sold through Fuel Importers, Limited, but if the valuation in, say, County Mayo had been raised in relation to the turf sold from Mayo through the local authority to Fuel Importers, Limited, taking into consideration that about 60,000 tons a year for the years 1943, 1944, 1945, were supplied and assuming that the producer got even £1 per ton, on the Minister's figures, the valuation in Mayo should have gone up by £20,000.

He will not put it up; let the Deputy not worry.

In North Tipperary, on an average, 11,000 tons were sold for the three years, and if the valuation had gone up in relation to that amount, it ought to have gone up by something like £4,000. It went up by £1,000, so that, in so far as one can judge the situation by the turf provided for Fuel Importers, Limited, three-quarters of the people in North Tipperary were relieved of a burden which one-quarter had to pay. In Deputy O'Donnell's part of the county, they were quite happy because some queer wall divided north from south.

We have the turf on the mountains there and not on the plains.

You did your job in producing turf because the overdraft of the South Tipperary County Council at 31st March, 1946, was £54,045, while, in North Tipperary, it was only £50,000.

And most of the turf people concerned in North Tipperary are in the mountains of North Tipperary.

I am concerned with the interests of people who are being salted in a very small number of cases in a way which apparently would outrage the rest of the country, because, outside North Tipperary and Monaghan, the attitude of the people generally was that this Act, even if it were remembered, would be an iniquitous Act to put into operation during the emergency, and they acted as if the emergency Orders dealing with turf production contained a clause that during the emergency Section 12 of the Act of 1852 would not be put into operation.

And they paid the extra rates.

There were no extra rates involved arising out of the production of turf.

And he has not yet grasped that.

Of course there were.

The extra cost arising out of the production of turf was paid by the turf users in Dublin and by the subsidy which had to be given by the Government, but surely the Minister is not telling us now that some of the cost of producing turf in various counties is to be left as a burden on the ratepayers through the county council machinery? Are we to understand that the Minister does not propose to relieve the county council machinery and the rates of any excessive cost arising out of turf production during the emergency?

I want to point out that if, in north Tipperary, £4,000 of rates which should have been collected from the people who got the money for the turf is not being collected, the rest of the ratepayers in north Tipperary must be paying it, over and above what they would have had to pay if it had been taken from the proper people.

The Minister does not understand what I am saying, but what he now implies is that, when turf cutting started throughout the country, a certain amount of rates normally payable by the country should have been taken from the other ratepayers and put on the turf cutters. The country did not believe that was reasonable or sensible and refused to do it, except in two isolated instances. I protest against that, and I suggest that the necessary legislation should be introduced to relieve that small number of people of the injustice done to them.

Question put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 28; Níl, 42.

  • Bennett, George C.
  • Blowick, Joseph.
  • Byrne, Alfred.
  • Cafferky, Dominick.
  • Cogan, Patrick.
  • Commons, Bernard.
  • Coogan, Eamonn.
  • Corish, Brendan.
  • Dillon, James M.
  • Donnellan, Michael.
  • Doyle, Peadar S.
  • Everett, James.
  • Finucane, Patrick.
  • Flanagan, Oliver J.
  • Giles, Patrick.
  • McMenamin, Daniel.
  • Mongan, Joseph W.
  • Morrissey, Daniel.
  • Mulcahy, Richard.
  • Norton, William.
  • O'Donnell, William F.
  • O'Driscoll, Patrick F.
  • O'Leary, John.
  • O'Reilly, Thomas.
  • Pattison, James P.
  • Redmond, Bridget M.
  • Reidy, James.
  • Roddy, Martin.

Níl

  • Aiken, Frank.
  • Allen, Denis.
  • Bartley, Gerald.
  • Beegan, Patrick.
  • Boland, Gerald.
  • Brady, Seán.
  • Breathnach, Cormac.
  • Brennan, Martin.
  • Crowley, Honor Mary.
  • Derrig, Thomas.
  • De Valera, Eamon.
  • De Valera, Vivion.
  • Flynn, Stephen.
  • Gorry, Patrick J.
  • Harris, Thomas.
  • Killilea, Mark.
  • Kilroy, James.
  • Kissane, Eamon.
  • Lemass, Seán F.
  • Little, Patrick J.
  • Loughman, Frank.
  • Brennan, Thomas.
  • Briscoe, Robert.
  • Burke, Patrick (Co. Dublin).
  • Butler, Bernard.
  • Carter, Thomas.
  • Childers, Erskine H.
  • Colbert, Michael.
  • Colley, Harry.
  • Lydon, Michael F.
  • McCarthy, Seán.
  • MacEntee, Seán.
  • Moran, Michael.
  • Moylan, Seán.
  • O'Briain, Donnchadh.
  • O'Grady, Seán.
  • O'Rourke, Daniel.
  • Rice, Bridget M.
  • Ryan, James.
  • Ryan, Marry B.
  • Ryan, Robert.
  • Walsh, Richard.
Tellers:—Tá: Deputies Doyle and Bennett; Níl: Deputies O Ciosáin and O Briain.
Motion declared negatived.
Barr
Roinn