Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 25 Nov 1959

Vol. 178 No. 3

Private Members' Business. - Revision of Valuations of Island Holdings—Motion.

Mr. M.P. Murphy

I move:—

That in view of the grave lack of amenities in islands around the coast and the consequent hardship accruing to people living on them, Dáil Éireann is of opinion that the valuation of all island holdings should be revised.

Whilst this may be the first time that a motion of this nature has been tabled in this House, it is not, by any means, the first time that the attention of this House has been drawn to the plight of the people living on the islands around our coast. Unfortunately the demands made over the years by myself and other representatives, particularly in relation to my own constituency, have gone unheeded so far as the Government is concerned. Even though the people living on these islands may represent a small percentage of our total population, nevertheless this House has certain obligations to them; and this House is not honouring those obligations.

Everybody knows that the position of these island people is different from that of those of us living on the mainland. Comparing the position of the people living on the islands around our coast with the position of those living on the mainland, what do we find? I need not go beyond my own constituency of West Cork to find the answer to that question. As one who lives only a matter of five or six miles from several inhabited islands I am as conversant as anyone with the position that obtains, and I am as well qualified as anyone to speak on behalf of those people here to-night.

The inhabitants of these islands have neither the facilities nor the amenities one finds on the mainland. They have very poor, or no roadways. They have no sanitary services. They have no secondary schools. They have no vocational schools. They enjoy very few of the facilities ordinarily enjoyed by those living on the mainland.

Work and employment on these islands is exceptionally scarce and for everything that the island man has to buy, he has to pay something over and above the average cost of it because the additional cost of transport from the mainland to the island must be borne by him. In the same way, every item he has to sell has to be sold at a reduced price due to the extra cost of transport from the island to the mainland. Deputies can picture the position of those small island holders who at most have two, three or four cows and two, three of four pigs, when an islander is faced with the disposal of these animals.

This motion asks the Minister to give consideration to these people, consideration which should have been given to them long ago. From whatever angle one examines the matter, it is reasonable in all respects. The Minister may tell us that if rates on island holdings are reduced as a result of Departmental action, these rates must be borne by the people living in the particular counties to which the islands belong. I believe, however, that there is a moral duty on the Government to give some grant-in-aid to these people to help them to meet their commitments to the local authorities.

If I am to give some examples of what some of these commitments are, I can mention the islands in my own constituency. In Whiddy Island the net amount of the current year's rate is £916 11. 8d. These rates are the amount that the people will have to pay and they do not include that portion of the rates covered by the Agricultural Grant. The population of Whiddy Island is about 95 and all these, young and old, have to contribute to Cork County Council the sum of £916 11 8d. Let us examine what the people of Whiddy Island are given in return. They have very poor roads on that island, they have almost no public water supply and they have no vocational or secondary schools. They have no public lighting scheme which is a charge on the rates of the local authorities and they have to come three miles oversea to Bantry to attend Mass or Church services. Surely the Minister will not claim that the people living on this island are in the same position as the people living on the mainland?

If we move along we find that the position on Sherkin Island is that the demand made is £543 11s. 7d. The population of Sherkin Island, combined with that of Cape Clear Island, where the demand is £728 11s. 10d., is about 400. As one who knows these islands very well, I must say that the people living on them cannot meet that demand. It is physically impossible for them to do so, with the resources at their command.

Then we have the biggest island on our Cork coast—Bere Island—where the people are expected this year to contribute £2,163 10s. 2d. to meet the demands of the local authority. Bere Island has a population, according to the recent census, of 493. I had occasion to visit this island recently and I was informed of, and saw for myself, the plight of the people and the difference in their position now and that of some years ago when part of that island was taken over by another power. That portion which was formerly under British occupation is now almost completely desolate. Of the two publichouses on that part of the Island, which formerly did good business, one is completely closed down and the other is only opened on one day of the week. The Licensing Bill which we are debating at the moment does not concern those people.

Little or no employment is available on Bere Island at the present time. There are only two or three men employed on the roads and only five or six employed by the Department of Defence, so that we have that large number of people trying to earn their living, rear their families and meet their commitments on the small acreages of land which they have. I say it is not possible for them to do so and that is one reason I am asking that special attention be given to these people.

Long Island, which is only two miles from my own home, has 347 acres of land and there the demand is for £182 6s. 4d. What does the State or the Council give to the people of this Island in return for that money? I must say that the Cork County Council did provide a road solely from local funds collected through the medium of rates because the Special Employment Office of the Department of Finance did not see fit to provide a road for the people on this Island.

The population of that island is 50, and what did Deputy Blaney and Deputy Ormonde, when they held the post of Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, say when they were asked to provide a telephone for these people? They said that it would not be an economic proposition for the Fianna Fáil Government to provide a telephone for Long Island. No doubt, if I had known earlier that the people of Long Island had no telephone service, I am sure the previous Government would have made it available, but it did not come to my notice until I went to live in that area myself.

To elaborate a little more—the population of Long Island is 50 and if any of those 50 persons were to become ill tonight and needed a priest or doctor, a small boat would have to be hauled out and a crossing made over one mile of sea and after that, there would be a walk of two miles to the town of Schull for medical or clerical aid, or any emergency assistance required. The attitude of the Department in refusing to provide a telephone installation for those 50 people on this island is, to say the least of it, un-Christian.

The total rate demand for Dursey Island is £165 11s. 6d. The population is about 60 and, as in the case of the other island, there are no amenities or facilities of any account. When I look at the Minister for the Gaeltacht I wonder at his attitude to the people of Dursey when he was Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance and would not accede to the reasonable request to provide a derrick in Dursey and another in Dursey Sound. I suppose, as was stated by his colleague the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, it would not be an economic proposition.

In Horse Island the population is 12 and the rate demand on these 12 is £111 10s. this year. I do not know how the Minister or the Government could expect people living in such conditions to meet that demand. As in the other cases, I think it is an exorbitant demand and should be reduced.

We have still another island with 379 acres of land and a population of about 100. It is known as Hare Island. The biggest farm on Hare Island has not more than 11 acres of mountainy land. The rate assessed against them this year is £259 4s. 9d. Will the Minister for Finance stand up and say that that is fair and reasonable?

I mentioned earlier that these people were not getting the same treatment as other sections of the community and if I am to endeavour to substantiate that statement without unduly delaying the House, I think I should refer to the attitude of the Department of Lands so far as these island holders are concerned. If congestion exists in any part of Ireland it exists on these islands and many of these people, under the weight of economic circumstances, have endeavoured to get out of the islands and to get the Land Commission to locate them in some other part of the country under some of its schemes. The Land Commission removed about three, I believe, from Dursey Island and one or two from the other islands. Then they said: "We are not going to do any more for you so far as the relief of congestion is concerned." Is that fair or constitutional?

In case there is any doubt about that, I brought along the Report of the Dáil debate for the 5th March of this year. I asked the Minister for Lands whether the Land Commission proposed to deal with applications for migration from island residents in West Cork. In supplementary questions I asked was it not made clear that no further applications would be considered and that the Land Commission had stated they would not do anything to relieve congestion on these islands. The then Minister, Deputy Childers, said that was the case. When Deputy Childers was Minister for Lands he made an order through this State-sponsored body, the Land Commission, that no further help or relief was to be given to island-holders. I say that is completely unconstitutional.

Mr. McQuillan

He has gone now.

Mr. M.P. Murphy

He has, but we do not know what his successor is like.

Mr. Moran

What was his predecessor like?

Mr. T. Lynch

What did his predecessor do? He was there for 16 years.

Mr. M.P. Murphy

I could say much more about these island people. It could be said, and it is regrettable to have to say it, that they are the forgotten people so far as the Government are concerned. My main motive in putting down this motion is that the position came to the notice of Cork County Council during 1958 and by a majority resolution—if it was not unanimous—they decided that these people were entitled to relief and that any help that could be given by the council should be given.

The county manager informed them that they had no function and no authority, and that neither had he, to make such a recommendation. He said that State legislation had completely tied his hands in regard to relieving these sections of the community. He mentioned that he could only deal with them in the same way as he would deal with any other ratepayers in the county and that if any redress were to be given to them it should come through this House. That is my motive for putting down the motion.

The Minister may say it would be a very difficult and cumbersome job to revise island holding valuations. If he thinks that, there is another and possibly much easier and simpler way —by remitting a percentage of the rates. If I were to nominate a percentage, I would say that at least 50 per cent of the rate should be remitted.

I may be asked why I should request a 50 per cent. remission for island holdings over and above other holdings. Anyone who has a knowledge of island holdings and the position that has obtained in respect of them through the years knows that when the valuations were assessed some 107 years ago the position on islands was far different from what it is to-day. At that time, it could be said that, if anything, the island holder had an advantage over his opposite number on the mainland. In 1852, when the valuations were assessed, there were no good roads in most of the rural parts of the country; sanitary services, secondary education, vocational education, public lighting, telephones, et cetera were not even heard of. Many people believed that on the islands they had an advantage. They possibly had at that time in that fertilisers in the form of sand and seaweed were readily available. Fertilisers were imported only to a very small extent 100 years ago. Therefore, at the time of the assessment the position on islands compared very favourably with the position obtaining on the mainland. But 107 years is a long time and matters have changed greatly and now the position is completely reversed so that there is no relationship at all between the disadvantages experienced by islanders and the position of people on the mainland.

As I shall have an opportunity of replying to the discussion, I do not wish to delay the House much longer but I will say that the motion deserves the approval of the House. As I said at the outset, it may be argued that the number of people living on islands is very small. It is quite true that in West Cork the island population has dwindled over the past 30 years by 80 per cent. The population of the islands off the West Cork coast is somewhere in the region of 1,200 to 1,300.

The Minister for the Gaeltacht and Deputies from Mayo also have to deal with island people. In view of their presence in the House, I have deliberately refrained from mentioning the position on the islands in their constituencies because they are more conversant with it than I am but, before the Minister speaks on the motion, I should like to make it clear that it has come to my notice that in other counties—Mayo, Clare and Galway have been mentioned—island holders who are resident on islands do not pay more than 50 per cent. of their rates.

That statement was made at our local council meetings on a number of occasions and appeared to be substantiated by written statements from some of the council offices concerned. I am not sure if that is so or not but, if it is so, there is an obligation on the Minister to ensure that these people are dealt with on a uniform basis. If, as the County Manager in Cork and the county council state, forcefully and vehemently: "Any of these people who are not destitute must meet their commitments to us or else we will endeavour to levy the amounts by restraint," how is it that in Clare, Mayo and Galway a different law operates? I am just giving the Minister the information at my disposal, but I have no doubt that the Minister and his Department have ascertained the facts from all these counties and know whether my statements are entirely or partly correct.

I would ask the Minister and the Government to take cognisance of the position on these islands, to examine the motion carefully and closely and, if they are not satisfied with the exact wording of the motion, I have suggested an alternative, that, instead of having a revision of valuations on all island holdings, the present assessment of rates be reduced by a certain percentage and I have suggested 50 or 60 per cent. That would be an easy way of dealing with the matter.

In conclusion, I ask the Minister and the Government and the House to approve of the motion. We cannot allow the present position to continue. The Constitution guarantees equal rights and equal opportunities to all citizens. It is physically impossible for people living on islands to have equal opportunities and equal rights with people on the mainland. If that is so, they should not be expected to pay the same rates as those on the mainland.

Mr. Kyne

I formally second the motion.

Mr. Blowick

I fully agree with the motion, particularly since the mover has explained the position as far as the wording of the last part goes, that is, the request for a revision of valuations. The Minister is aware that, when there is an application for revision, the Commissioners of Valuation are at liberty to raise the valuation. The mover of the motion has made it clear that, if the motion is accepted, the revision envisaged is a reduction of the valuation. I fully agree with that because it must be admitted that people living on the islands off West Cork, Mayo, Galway and Donegal cannot benefit from the march of progress from which the people on the mainland benefit. They cannot take advantage of hospitalisation unless the weather is fine and boat accommodation is available.

During the whole year from the middle of October until the middle of the following March journeying to the mainland is hazardous. The way to and from most of these islands is impassable for weeks at a time. They have no facilities on these islands; there is no electricity and no roads; at least, if there are roads, they are of the most primitive sort. There is no employment. We must admit, that anyone who goes through these islands sees plenty of fine healthy boys and girls growing up there generation after generation. It is from there we have a great deal of emigration.

There is another aspect to the appeal contained in this motion to lighten the burden of rates on these people. With the march of time these islands will be depopulated completely and fairly rapidly. The middle-aged and the older people are quite content to live there but I cannot see the younger generation being very much inclined to spend their lives on these islands. The younger people may be anxious to sell their holdings and they will not get any price for them. I can see that in the future these islands will be bought up for a song by some immensely wealthy person.

The appeal made here should be answered and in case the Minister would take advantage of one possible loophole I am removing that loophole. He may use the argument that removing the burden of rates from the islanders would involve a burden on the ratepayers of the mainland. The mover of the motion wants the Minister for Finance to come to the rescue. The ratepayers of the mainland, as well as those on the island, have burdens enough already. Deputy Murphy has mentioned the islands off the coast of West Cork. There are three principal ones off the coast of South Mayo. The islands of Inishark and Inishboffin belong to Galway; and off Donegal there are Tory and Arranmore. All that is being asked for in the case of these islands is the small relief of rates of 50 per cent. or 60 per cent. That would not be a large sum for the Minister for Finance to meet. I realise it is a new departure and I can see the officials of the Department of Finance raising their eyes up to heaven in horror at such a suggestion. Nevertheless a bold Minister who has at heart the welfare and the prosperity of this small section of the population, such as the islanders are, will overrule advice he may get in the wrong direction from his officials in the Department of Finance and take the steps requested here.

The Minister will probably ask us: where is all this money to come from? The sum involved in this would not be more than a few thousand pounds. Some officials have got that much of an increase in their salary in one step. Perhaps they are deserving of it but these islanders are most deserving of consideration. In case the Minister should fall back on the wording of the motion in relation to revising valuations, the Deputy who moved the motion has made it quite clear—and I am backing him in this—that we want the valuations revised or else some little help given towards the support of these islands.

Mr. Coogan

I rise to support this motion. I know the hardships of the islanders from Aran to Innisboffin. I know what they have to go through with very little assistance from mankind, especially from this House. They are bereft of amenities, they have no industries, no schools or no hospitals. There is no Deputy in this House who would live 12 months of the year on any of the islands. Speaking from what I have seen myself, I can say these people are at the mercy of the elements. At times they come to the market on the mainland with their produce and their cattle which they swim to a steamer accompanied by a canvas currach.

It is not too much to ask that these islanders should get some consideration. Like Deputy Blowick, I realise that the wording in this motion may cause a little disturbance in the minds of many of the revisers. It is a dangerous thing to suggest revision because the valuations can be revised up the scale as well as down. I think the mover of the motion has made his meaning clear but it is no harm to make it a little clearer.

The amount involved would not make a great impact on our economy but little as it is, it would mean a lot to these islanders abandoned as they are by nature and by this House. Any man who would cross the barrier to vote against this motion should be ashamed of himself. The Constitution guarantees equal rights to all citizens but here is an instance in which we can prove that that is so. Only for the fact that we have migratory labour and for the money these people bring from across channel the islands would be sold to some of these Yanks who come over here now and again.

Deputy McQuillan had in mind some time ago the provision of helicopters. We know how the Government frowned on that suggestion when it was brought up in the House. At the same time they were providing jet aircraft to fly the Atlantic.

Acting-Chairman (Mr. MacCarthy)

That is not in the motion.

Mr. Coogan

I know it is not, but it was in other motions.

Acting-Chairman

We are dealing with this motion.

Mr. Corish

We have aeroplanes down on some of our islands.

Mr. Coogan

You could not land an aeroplane on some of our islands because of all the rocks. I support this motion because I feel it is about time something was done for the islanders.

Mr. Manley

I think Deputy Murphy's motion demonstrates the most practical way of assisting these islanders all along the coast. All the islands are being gradualy denuded of their people. For sentimental reasons I should like to assist them because they are the real Celts, who have lived for generations under very difficult economic circumstances. The Chairman is quite familiar with the type of life the islanders on the coast of Cork have to face. They suffer, as Deputy Murphy put it very forcefully, many privations that the people inland do not suffer, and I do not think anybody on the mainland would exchange a holding with those living on the islands. Because of these privations they are entitled to some type of sympathetic treatment.

The suggestion made in the motion by Deputy Murphy that they would be relieved of 50 per cent. or 60 per cent. of their rates is some gesture of recognition of the hardships the islanders have to face. They have a hazardous life. They are restricted in such activities as going to Mass, shopping, having medical attention and receiving secondary and vocational education. Very often, they have to go to the nearest town on the mainland and it is difficult for them to carry on these activities. Their hardships are numerous in every respect, and it is time the Government decided on some uniform policy for all the islands around our coast, particularly those mentioned in the motion. No matter what Government are in office, their approach to this problem should be practical and sensible.

Mr. Lindsay

I always think that the economy of this country is essentially the economy of the good land and that islands, and even remoter areas on the mainland, play no part in the planning of that economy. I sympathise fully with the desire expressed in this motion to alleviate the conditions of the islanders, not alone off the coast of Cork but on the islands off all our coasts.

Mr. M.P. Murphy

The motion is general.

Mr. Lindsay

I appreciate that but Deputy Murphy very properly gave greater consideration to and dealt in much greater detail with the islands off his own county, Cork. It is true to say that the islands do not have the facilities available through local authority channels which the mainland people have. That is natural in the scheme of things and I do not know that there is very much the local authorities can do about it. Neither can the islanders do much about it unless they either of their own volition leave the islands and come to the mainland or are brought to the mainland under some such scheme as was adopted under the Cosgrave administration in relation to the Iniskea Islands off the coast of Mayo back in 1929, 1930 and 1931. The people were brought on to the mainland and given houses and small holdings where they still thrive, enjoying all the amenities of the mainland and indeed enjoying to a great extent the amenities of the islands as well in so far as they can live there during the fine weather and the fishing season or graze them at regular and appropriate periods of the year.

The Minister will probably find himself in some legal technical difficulty about the reduction of rates in so far as they affect townlands. It is a good while since I came across this matter in the course of legal study, but I think there is something there that would require the amendment of existing legislation in order to reduce the valuation of part of a townland or some such thing. The Minister may come up against that difficulty but it could probably be overcome by an assurance that the matter would be examined either with a view to bringing the people off the islands and providing them with amenities on the mainland and giving them free access to the islands to use them in such manner as they could, or, on the other hand, providing a public service to some of the islands so that both spiritual and medical assistance will be readily available to them through public transport. I know that a boat has been provided by the Department of the Gaeltacht from Baltimore to Cape Clear. It has caused a certain amount of dissatisfaction but nevertheless it must be regarded as an amenity which probably could be given to other islands with consequent advantage.

Minister for Finance (Dr. Ryan)

I was anxious to hear the supporters of this motion to get all the information I could before coming to a conclusion upon it. I do not think a case is ever served by giving one side of the picture. In order that we may understand the case and see what we shall do about it, we should give the facts in regard to these islands, whether they have disabilities as compared with the mainland or not.

There are several islands around our coasts—many more than I thought, I must say—I believe about 60 altogether. The total population of these islands is about 1,300 families which means there are about 5,000 people living on these islands altogether. But one thing about them is that they are all very dissimilar in circumstances. Take, for instance, the Northern island of Inishboffin and the southern island of Valentia. They are two very different matters. A case might be made for special treatment for one, but no case could be made for the other. A motion of this kind, therefore, is very general in its application and for that reason it would require a little more examination before it could be considered.

When I saw this motion on the Order Paper some time ago, I wrote to all the Departments to ascertain in what way would the various schemes and so on which the Departments had for the benefit of the people apply as between the mainland and the islands. In most cases, the islands get the same benefits from the various schemes as are given on the mainland.

Mr. Coogan

Such as the E.S.B.

Dr. Ryan

Let us discuss this sensibly. I did not interrupt the Deputy. I am only giving the facts as I found them. We shall talk about the E.S.B. too. That will come into what I have to say. Generally speaking, all local authority schemes for housing and so on apply in the islands, as do the Department of Agriculture schemes in regard to fertilisers and so on apply to the island holdings. Generally speaking, all social welfare schemes apply in the islands; in fact, I think it could be said that social welfare schemes apply at least as well as on the islands as on the mainland, if not better. I know of one island—I had better not mention the name—which has 30 or 40 families and only one family on that island is not in receipt of social welfare benefits of some kind. That shows the islands are getting their share of the social welfare benefits.

Debate adjourned.