I move:—
That a sum not exceeding £1,147,410 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1959, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Offices of the Minister for Lands and of the Irish Land Commission (44 & 45 Vict., c. 49, sec. 46, and c. 71, sec. 4; 48 & 49 Vict., c. 73, secs. 17, 18 and 20; 54 & 55 Vict., c. 48; 3 Edw. 7, c. 37; 7 Edw. 7, c. 38 and c. 56; 9 Edw. 7, c. 42; Nos 27 and 42 of 1923; No. 25 of 1925; No. 11 of 1926; No. 19 of 1927; No. 31 of 1929; No. 11 of 1931; Nos. 33 and 38 of 1933; No. 11 of 1934; No. 41 of 1936; No. 26 of 1939; No. 12 of 1946; No. 25 of 1949; No. 16 of 1950; No. 18 of 1953; and No. 21 of 1954).
In opening the debate I shall commence with some references to the major sub-heads which are very familiar to Deputies from rural constituencies. I shall then give an account of the progress made last year and, after that, I shall go on to deal with the main aspects of administration connected with this important Vote.
The net total of £2,009,380 for 1958-59 shows a decrease of £26,890 on the corresponding figure last year.
The provision in sub-head A for salaries, wages and allowances shows a decrease of £11,088. Normal incremental increases for staff are more than offset by a welcome reduction of 33 in personnel which has been achieved since last Estimate through improved methods and the general progress made in the vesting of lands in tenant purchasers. Incidentally, staff reductions totalling 189 have been effected since 1950, notwithstanding the fact that the overall volume of current land division has remained substantially the same.
Having regard to the rate of expenditure in recent years, a reduction of £1,500 in sub-head E, for legal expenses, is considered feasible this year.
Sub-head G, for collection of warrant fees, was raised last year by £3,000 to provide against an anticipated increase in the scale of these lodgment fees for county registrars' and sheriffs' services. The increase has not materialised and it is expected that a provision of £6,500 will be sufficient this year.
The group of sub-heads, H (1) to H (4), represents the large annual recurring liability of the taxpayer towards service of land purchase debt, incurred by Land Bond issues since 1923. The total of the group comes to £855,050, representing almost 43 per cent. of the net total of the Estimate. The group includes—£720,000 for halving of annuities; £88,400 for Price Bonus to Vendors of Tenanted Land; £28,800 for Costs Fund; £17,200 for resale losses on Land Bank and analogous estates dealt with in the 1920s.
The increase of £14,500 is entirely attributable to the halving of annuities on current allotments on lands taken over under Land Acts, 1923-54. The current Land Bond interest rate is 6 per cent. and the current annuity rate is 6¼ per cent. per annum.
Sub-head I provides the funds required for improvement works on estates taken over in the course of land settlement. These works include the equipment of new holdings with buildings and the construction of roads, fences, drains, etc., which are essential for satisfactory land settlement schemes. Over 30 per cent. of the net total of the Estimate is chargeable to this sub-head. The expenditure under sub-head I last year amounted to £623,761. The Estimate provision for this year is £605,105, which is £18,656 less than the amount expended last year.
With improved arrangements and insistence on reasonable contributions of self-help from allottees who stand to benefit greatly and permanently, it is envisaged that at least as much effective work will be secured from the slightly reduced Estimate provision for this year as was forthcoming heretofore. If it should become clear during the year that additional funds are desirable to facilitate the early disposal of acquired lands, then I shall have no hesitation in putting forward revised proposals.
Sub-head Q which shows an increase of £1,400 is another accumulating statutory commitment. Its purpose is to make good to the Land Bond Fund and Local Loans Fund certain deficiencies which continue to arise under Land Act, 1950. Formerly, where the Land Commission acquired a large vested holding for division, the existing purchase annuity was redeemed out of the owner's purchase money and the Land Bond Fund or Local Loans Fund was recouped if that annuity had been payable to either of these funds. Since 1950, existing annuities are no longer recoverable out of owners' purchase moneys. Instead, the existing annuities are formally terminated, being replaced by the new comprehensive annuities payable by the allottees. Cesser of such existing annuities has to be made good to the Land Bond Fund and Local Loans Fund to keep them in balance.
Sub-head R provides a limited amount of cash to enable the Land Commission to purchase lands in the open market for migrants and rundale purposes. Operations under this sub-head were at a standstill as an economy measure between July, 1956, and March, 1958. I have recently authorised a reopening of this business and it will be given a further trial at about the same level of funds formerly provided.
Sub-head S provides the money to pay gratuities to persons displaced from their employment on estates as a result of acquisition by the Land Commission. There has been a downward trend in the size of acquired estates and the number losing employment has fallen. A total of £14,643 has been paid by the Land Commission by way of gratuities to 137 persons since the system was introduced in 1950.
The other sub-heads are mostly self-explanatory and unchanged from last year.
I now turn to the general work of the Land Commission in the course of the past year. On the tenanted land side, the process of completing land purchase, that is, the conversion of tenants into proprietors of their holdings, is continuing at a satisfactory rate. Of 112,000 tenanted holdings which vested in the Land Commission since 1923, only about 12,000 now await revesting in the tenants. In other words, 90 per cent. of all tenanted holdings which vested in the Land Commission under the Land Acts, 1923-54, have been resold to the occupying tenants for advances being repaid by long-term purchase annuities, leaving an outstanding residue of 10 per cent., comprising exceptionally difficult cases, mostly in the western congested districts. As far as 1923 Act tenanted land is concerned, the work has been virtually completed in the 14 counties of Carlow, Cavan, Kildare, Kilkenny, Laois, Leitrim, Limerick, Longford, Louth, Meath, Monaghan, Westmeath, Wexford and Wicklow. The outstanding residue of tenanted land is made up of 12,000 holdings under the 1923 Act and an ultimate residue of 4,000 holdings on estates of the former Congested Districts Board. These outstanding 16,000 tenanted holdings represent the pending residual hard core of over 400,000 State-conducted sale transactions. Completion of the outstanding 16,000 cases is not an easy or inexpensive task. About one-half of them are in rundale. They are all affected in some way by projected acquisitions, migrations, rearrangement negotiations or other improvement schemes. Their completion is being pushed ahead as rapidly as the available resources in land and staff permit.
As regards land settlement, the provisional returns are that, in the year ended 31st March last, an area of 27,813 acres was acquired, resumed, or taken over by the Land Commission, and an area of 29,604 acres was distributed amongst 1,686 allottees. The corresponding figures for the year ended 31st March, 1957, were 28,756 acres taken over and 30,510 acres distributed amongst 1,452 allottees. Taking account of late seasonal weather, the allotment programme extended into April and May this year, and the total area allotted in the 14 months, 1st April, 1957, to 31st May, 1958, inclusive, was, in round figures, 41,000 acres. The total allotment in the previous corresponding 14-month period, viz. 1st April, 1956, to 31st May, 1957, was 36,000 acres.
There were 438 holdings in rundale or intermixed plots rearranged during the year with the co-operation of the tenants, this result being quite satisfactory. The number of holdings which can be rearranged is largely beyond the control of the Land Commission, as the work depends on voluntary co-operation of the tenants themselves. Rearrangement is very delicately-poised work calling for much patience, tact and resourcefulness on the part of the inspectorate. Difficulties and delays are inevitable and lack of co-operation on the part of an individual tenant can often result in the postponement or revision of an entire scheme.
As the work of rearrangement proceeds and as the hard core of intermixed holdings is being reached, the problem of dealing with outstanding cases inevitably becomes more difficult. My investigations have revealed that the precise reasons for this vary from one district to another. Generally speaking, however, the main factors impeding progress are the scarcity of suitable land, in the rundale districts, with which to enlarge the small holdings and reluctance on the part of suitable rundale holders to migrate to other districts, as well as sometimes a want of full co-operation on the part of the tenants. Nevertheless, over the past eight years, a total of almost 3,500 rundale holdings has been rearranged by the Land Commission, the vast bulk being substantially enlarged in size and equipped with necessary buildings and other improvements, in the process of rearrangement.
Deputies will be aware, of course, that the great bulk of land settlement is centred around the nine congested counties, viz. the five counties of Connacht and Donegal, Cork, Clare and Kerry. Of the total area of 29,604 acres allotted in the year ended 31st March last, about 21,000 acres were distributed in the nine congested counties.
During the past year, 40 long-distance and 35 short-distance migrations were effected. Migration is inseparable from rearrangement of rundale, it being absolutely essential to take out a few migrants from almost any group of intermixed holdings before a satisfactory rearrangement scheme can be formulated for them. As far as practicable, the Land Commission endeavour to find migrants who are already proficient farmers above the average, but, to deal at all with rundale villages, the field of selection of the migrants is rather limited. Migration is completely voluntary and it is not always the best farmers who are prepared to move. I am confident that the number of migrants during the current year will show a substantial increase on last year.
More than 1,100 turbary rights were provided by the Land Commission. Some 6,500 properties—comprising holdings, parcels and rights of turbary —were vested in tenant-purchasers during the year.
There were 212 new dwellinghouses and 264 outoffices built by or with assistance from the Land Commission, the total expenditure on buildings amounting to approximately £273,000.
I referred last year to the question of Land Commission housing designs and stated that, before going ahead with some new plans which had been contemplated, I wished to get the views of the Irish Countrywomen's Association. As a result, revised plans have been drawn up, following collaboration between architects of the Office of Public Works and the Irish Countrywomen's Association. The construction of prototypes, on an experimental basis, according to the revised plans, will shortly be put in hands.
As I announced some months ago, the Government has decided to provide relief measures for the farmers whose holdings in the Shannon Valley, between Athlone and Meelick, in counties Galway, Roscommon, Westmeath and Offaly, are liable to flooding. Planning of technical details for the individual cases is well advanced. Some migrations and resettlements will be involved, as well as the construction of buildings on about 70 farms seriously affected. The cost of the works, as distinct from land, will be in the region of £80,000 to £100,000, which will be defrayed from the National Development Fund.
The position as regards collection of land purchase annuities continues to be very satisfactory. At 31st March, 1958, arrears outstanding amounted to £141,690 being a reduction of £872 on the corresponding figure last year. The efficiency of the collection organisation has been maintained at the usual high level during the year.
In my statement on this Estimate last year, I expressed concern about delay in the allotment of land taken over for division. I had, at that time, given directions in relation to the early disposal of unallotted lands in two of the principal counties, namely, Roscommon and Tipperary. I am glad to be able to inform the House now that good progress has since been made towards the disposal of lands on hands —especially arable lands—in these counties; and the achievements to date reflect great credit on the officials concerned.
In County Roscommon, an area of 2,100 acres was allotted in the year ended 31st March last—compared with 1,135 acres in 1956-57—and in County Tipperary, an area of almost 1,000 acres was allotted last year compared with 874 acres in the previous year. In both counties, the areas allotted in 1957-58 were almost entirely arable land. Further areas of 2,700 acres in Roscommon and 980 acres in Tipperary were allotted during April and May, 1958. The effort to dispose of the backlog of lands on hands will be sustained; and I have directed that arable lands acquired before 1st April last in all counties should generally be disposed of by March, 1960.
The allotment of lands acquired by the Land Commission in the future will be hastened to the utmost, so as to ensure that approved allottees are put into possession of their parcels speedily. There will necessarily have to be some exceptions—for example, relatively small lots of land taken over for rearrangement purposes cannot be finally allotted until full rearrangement proposals are integrated for the particular neighbourhood, with the co-operation of all concerned.
Examination of the overall position regarding lands on hands inevitably took some time, and the results of my directions for their disposal will not be really evident until the end of the current financial year. The allotment figures for April and May, 1958, however, suggest that the prospects for the whole year are very bright.
With a view to securing greater output from lands divided by the Land Commission, every effort must be made in future to ensure that allottees avail themselves to the full of the advisory services provided by the Department of Agriculture and county committees of agriculture. In the case of migrants, it was felt that some advance instruction on good farming methods might stimulate them to seek this valuable assistance. Accordingly, prospective migrants were encouraged last autumn to take advantage of two short courses provided at Athenry Agricultural Station by arrangement with the Department of Agriculture.
A number of prospective migrants attended these courses—the cost of which, per individual, was a nominal £2 a week for maintenance—and it is hoped to arrange a further series of these special courses in the coming winter. The majority of migrants come from small holdings, generally comprising poor quality land, and the change-over to working a Land Commission standard holding may be a considerable one for them, especially in the early years following migration until they settle down in their new environment. Courses on practical farming such as those arranged at Athenry should be very beneficial in equipping them to meet the challenge of their new holdings but it will not be possible for a few years to assess the full advantages of these courses.
Land Commission allotments are made to selected applicants on moderate repayment terms. The funds available for land settlement are necessarily limited and, in order to secure the maximum land division from the amount of money available, it has been decided that future allottees of parcels given as enlargements will be required to make reasonable contributions by way of labour and materials towards essential improvements works.
Special consideration was given during the past year to the problem of minimising the disruptive effects of the compulsory acquisition powers of the Land Commission. Despite the long-term benefits resulting from the acquisition and division of land which is not being worked satisfactorily, some detrimental effects can occur from time to time during the period in which the acquisition process is under way.
At 1st April, 1957, the Land Commission inspectorate were faced with the formidable task of inspecting and reporting on 938 properties which were on the books for consideration with a view to acquisition. Of these cases, 516 were at a preliminary stage and 422 were at a more advanced stage. The total number represented far more than the inspectorate could hope to deal with expeditiously. With the constant addition of new cases, the overall position was seriously disimproving. In effect, it meant that almost 1,000 existing landowners and several thousand potential applicants were in a very unsettled position.
After a thorough examination, substantial procedural changes were introduced in the course of the past year. They relate to the period preceding the commissioners' decision as to whether, or not, to negotiate for purchase or institute acquisition proceedings. After that stage, the procedure is largely governed by statute. Under the old system, both voluntary and compulsory subjects generally underwent the same two successive report stages, namely, (1) preliminary and (2) suitability and price. That system involved two visits by the reporting inspector. A detailed valuation of the lands was invariably made at the suitability-and-price stage, although further progress may not have been indicated.
Under the new system, voluntary and compulsory subjects receive distinct treatment, there being only one report stage, namely purchase and acquisition. This new arrangement generally involves only one visit by the reporting inspector compared with two visits previously. A detailed valuation of the lands is omitted, unless there are sound indications that further progress towards purchase is feasible. Obviously, the new system has decided advantages from the standpoint of efficiency. The general aim will be that each acquisition case will be investigated and completed, up to price-fixation, within about six months. It is of the utmost importance that effort and expense will not be dissipated, particularly on trivial cases.
Having improved the inspection procedure, the next step was to afford the inspectorate an opportunity of clearing off the accumulated arrears. With about 45,000 acres arable on hands and with over 900 pending acquisition cases in the queue, it was time to be realistic. The investigation of new compulsory acquisition cases had to be temporarily suspended but any lands offered voluntarily were not affected. This course has been fully justified by the results. By 31st March, 1958, the figure for acquisition reports outstanding had fallen from 938 to 372—a reduction of 60 per cent. After another few months, it is expected that the arrear on the acquisition side will have been entirely eliminated. In some districts, clearance of arrears of work has already been accomplished. A return to normal working has followed in these districts. Elsewhere, the position is being kept under close review.
I also expressed concern last year about the long time which may elapse between the inspection of an estate and ultimate payment of the purchase money. On investigation, I have found that the time-lag is divisible into two stages—first, the period up to the giving of possession to the Land Commission; and secondly, the period from possession onwards. Up to last year, when the procedural changes to which I have referred were introduced, the average time taken in completing the first and second stages was three years and two and a half years respectively, or a total of five and a half years. Statutory periods for objections and appeals cannot be set aside by the Land Commission and allowance must be made for adjournments granted to objectors and applicants in the court proceedings. Nevertheless, I am confident that the procedural changes referred to earlier will help to shorten substantially the initial period of three years up to possession.
Only when the second stage is reached, that is after possession of the land is obtained, can allocation of the purchase money arise, and there the average delay of two and a half years is something for which the Land Commission are not responsible. It is for the owners themselves to see that they give their solicitors prompt and effective instructions about title. My Department is at present in communication with the Incorporated Law Society in relation to this side of the business.
I should like, at this stage, to say a few words about the extent of the congestion problem confronting the Land Commission and also to consider the practical steps which can be taken towards its alleviation in the immediate future. I speak of alleviation rather than solution, simply because congestion in this country cannot be solved in terms of land alone. According to the latest available figures of 379,000 holdings in the State, 215,000, or nearly 57 per cent., have rateable valuations between £2 and £20. In the nine congested counties, some 87,000 holdings are between £2 and £10 rateable valuation.
Since 1939, the aim of the land settlement policy of successive Governments has been the relief of congestion, with special emphasis on the scheduled congested districts. The Land Commission have been migrating as many tenants as possible each year as part of the answer to the congestion problem. Likewise, they have been engaged in the rearrangement or enlargement of about 1,500 small holdings annually. These measures do much to ease the extensive congestion in western districts. It is estimated that there are still about 8,000 unvested intermixed holdings in the nine congested counties and, at the recent rate of progress, it will take 15 years to complete their rearrangement.
Some idea of the magnitude of the general problem of small holdings uncovers itself in the figure of 165,000 as the number of holdings above one acre but not exceeding 30 acres: to enlarge these by no more than a dozen acres would require about 2,000,000 acres, that is one-sixth of the total area of arable land in the country. The fact is that the amount of land available for land settlement purposes is limited but the demand is almost unlimited. The current Land Commission programme catering for an intake and division of about 25,000 acres annually is as realistic as overall conditions permit.
For many years past, in the more western parts of the congested districts, the Land Commission have worked to a standard of £10 rateable valuation, that is to say, they have aimed at creating new units of that size or enlarging existing units as far as possible to that size. It has often been suggested that this standard is too low and, therefore, I have had this whole problem re-examined. Unfortunately, I have found that in most districts the intensity of congestion and the scarcity of land for division make it quite impractical to raise the standard. Indeed, in many areas the Land Commission have found it quite impracticable to achieve even this modest standard and have been obliged to adopt a lower one. For almost all these districts, therefore, there can be no question of going beyond the £10 rateable valuation standard.
In my examination of Land Commission problems, I am bound to face the unpleasant fact that the size of what is considered an economic farm has increased since the war. In this we must be realistic. While there will always be ancillary employment on public works, the income from these, in the long run, will not prevent the tendency for farms to become larger as the decades pass—even if the total population remains stable or slightly increases.
Unemployment assistance, moreover, should not be included in the computation as a permanent income, particularly as it does not appear to restrain emigration.
When I ask the question in the Midlands: "What is an economic farm?" most reply, "50 to 60 acres". But, of course, one-third of the farmers in the 30-50 acre class are making the incomes of one-third in the 50-100 acre class through greater use of fertilisers.
In examining the position, the prevailing standard of £10 valuation in the congested areas seems abnormally small. This very low standard can be looked at from two standpoints. It can be said that each beneficiary is given a good start and can progress from there onwards; at least the beneficiaries have a sound foundation in the shape of a good home and a compact farm. Or alternatively, one can say that the valuation is absolutely too low.
I have come to the conclusion that the £10 standard should be raised wherever practicable and this will henceforth be done up to a limit of £15. Because of the scarcity of available land in these acutely congested districts, I am not overoptimistic as to the results. In the remaining parts of the country, the standard of 33 acres of good land remains in force and, again, if the farmers selected are ambitious, a reasonable income can be secured.
Concluding on the subject of farm size, I might point out that all European countries carrying out consolidation of holdings have had to keep their standards low—notably France, Sweden and the Netherlands.
It is essential that the congestion problem be regarded with great realism. The number of 50 to 200 acre farms is increasing; not so the farms above 200 acres. I mention this point because occasionally I hear reference to big farmers increasing their property. There are, of course, also sales and sub-divisions to balance these enlargements. Consolidation of small holdings by the management of a number of farms by one person has proceeded rapidly in the western areas. The number of women left on the smaller farms irrevocably dictates the growth in the number of larger farms 30 years from now.
The Land Commission is most unlikely to secure greater subventions in the future for its work. The pool of badly worked land is almost certain to diminish. I asked the Land Commission to tell me whether, without limit to staff or finance, the intake of land could be substantially increased, assuming, of course, that the same regulations applied. While it is difficult to be definite I have been given an opinion that the intake might increase for a time by about 25 per cent. but it will be clear to all that the amount of land which can be acquired is limited.
I should make it clear beyond all doubt that the Government stands for the free sale of land when properly worked. Any agitation or interference in the normal pattern of land sales will be resisted as in the past. The Land Commission work has been confined in the past decade and will be confined in the future to the problem of alleviating the intense congestion in the West and to acquiring the larger tracts of badly worked land and of voluntarily offered land for this purpose and for the relief of local congestion. The result of this work, involving gifts of £400 to £3,000 per holding, must be directed so as to secure greater production as an investment in providing total employment.
I am doing all I can to see that the pattern of land division will conform to this concept more and more in the future and that the available funds are spent in the most productive manner.
Looking back on the results of land division in the past, while there can be seen many enlarged or new holdings producing more than before, the general picture as reported by the late Seán Moylan could not prove that production on small farms had increased. Thirteen per cent. of the land allotted in a sample area is now let.
I have made a close examination of the Land Commission methods of allocation for some years past and quite obviously as the pool of land has diminished the emphasis on the farming competence of potential allottees has been steadily increasing when allocating land. For example, I have been reading recent reports on allottees in order to analyse the reasons for including sub-standard landholders and I have noted that the frequent use of fertiliser is noted together with other technical features. This would seem reasonable. A small farm can reap just as good a harvest of grass or crops from its use as a big farm. Credit for fertilisers, I am told, is available to most in one form or another. The size of the farm does not make it more difficult to use fertilisers.
If land settlement is to achieve its purpose, two objectives must be secured. Badly worked land must be acquired to provide a better living for progressive uneconomic landholders. The allottees who receive a large gift, the largest the State offers to a family unit for social purposes, of from £36 to £87 per acre, should, by far greater production, help to employ some of the thousands who, as in other countries, will inevitably leave the farms to secure employment in industry.
The farmer creates the purchasing power which makes possible the employment of some of his family who will leave even if he secures a larger holding because on 33 acre holdings there can be no sub-division.
The standard of competence required should relate to the higher standards achieved in the general area, to the improvements in techniques carried out during recent years and allowing for local conditions of soil and exposure. In other words, under present practice the best group of small farmers in the area naturally set the standard for the remainder in the area when land is being allotted.
I have informed the Land Commission that the increasingly high standard of competence required of potential allottees—quite clearly emerging from allotments made in the last decade— can be continued and applied progressively. Having reviewed the general facts relating to land tenure in the country, I can sum up by saying that the demand for land is beyond the capacity of the Land Commission to satisfy. The same position obtains in many other countries. Not only do sub-standard landholders press for consideration of their claims but there are demands from landless men and sons of farmers for land.
With such a heavy burden of claims already, I should make it clear that to add these other classes generally to a land inspector's list from which to make a choice when dividing an estate only aggravates the already difficult task of relieving existing congestion. While there may be exceptional cases, the fact remains that in any ordinary land division the number of applications from the local uneconomic landholders exceeds the supply of land and a careful choice has to be made.
In the last 12 months, some farmers' organisations and individual commentators have been adverting to the need for providing a farming ladder by means of which young farmers with a belief in scientific methods could save money and secure land in the open market. Many interested in land usage have commented on the unique systems of conacre and 11 months grazing which give no security to the taker and too frequently reduce the fertility of the land. It is evident that a large proportion of the land affected is being let as a matter of temporary convenience and that the Land Commission, under the law, could not take successful acquisition proceedings in a very large number of these cases; in many others they would be proceeding for very small areas for allotment to one or two individuals—a completely uneconomic and socially undesirable policy.
I have been addressing my mind to the subject of the letting of lands in order to help the progressive landless farmer and to stimulate the better working of let land.
The existing law leaves it possible for the majority of landowners to make lettings for a term of years subject only to Land Commission approval and I would like the public to know that the Land Commission will readily grant approval to suitable letting contracts except, of course, where they see too much land being concentrated in the hands of one person or of persons not ordinarily engaged in agriculture. I feel that landowners, with surplus land for letting, can profitably avail themselves of this facility both for the better working of their own lands and in the interests of national production and rural progress.
In order not to interfere with the relief of congestion, these provisions will mainly operate outside the scheduled congested districts. Within these districts applications for permission to let lands will have to be considered in the light of the Land Commission's need to acquire land for the relief of local congestion. I hope that this encouragement of longer lettings will result in significant changes for the better in the general pattern of landholding, soil conservation and overall production.
