asked the Minister for Lands the grounds on which the Lay Commissioners allowed an objection to the proceedings which were instituted by the Land Commission last year for the acquisition of the Hanley Estate, Carrowcrin, County Roscommon.
19.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Carrowcrin (Roscommon) Estate.
18.
asked the Minister for Lands if a transcript is available of the hearing last October by the Lay Commissioners of an objection to the acquisition by the Land Commission of the Hanley Estate, Carrowcrin, County Roscommon; and, if so, if he will make it available to interested parties.
With the permission of the Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 18 and 19 together.
Under Section 12 of the Land Act, 1950, the determination of lands to be acquired is an excepted matter and the Minister for Lands is not empowered to regulate or control the exercise or performance of the powers and duties of the Lay Commissioners in such matters.
I understand that the decision of the Lay Commissioners in the case in question was based on all the circumstances disclosed in the sworn evidence tendered for both the objector and the Land Commission at a public hearing on 30th October last.
A transcript of the hearing is not available but, in accordance with normal practice in such cases, a summary—which does not purport to be a verbatim note—of the submissions, evidence and findings is made for record purposes. In the event of an appeal on a question of law, this summary is available, to the parties directly concerned only, as an appendix to the report furnished by the Lay Commissioners to the Appeal Tribunal.
May I ask the Minister, when he states this document will be made available to those interested, what category of people does that cover?
As in every other legal case, it will be made available to the parties before the court.
The Minister is well aware that the congests, the small farmers within a mile or two of this estate, were not before the court. In view of their very deep interest in this estate, would he now say whether or not this document will be made available to a representative of these people?
Not at all. This is a matter regulated by law between the individual owner and the Land Commission. I would suggest that the Deputy is well aware that in cases of this kind the Land Commission are the representatives of the small owners in the immediate vicinity of the lands. That is their purpose in acquiring the lands.
The interest of the Land Commission in the 30 smallholders in the vicinity with valuations under £18 was proved by the Land Commission allowing this first-class farm to pass into the hands of a man who does not know what to do with all the money he has.
The Deputy, because of his own vicious spleen against the veterinary surgeon in question, is using the privilege of this House to make this attack. The fact remains that under the law there is the right to private property. The Land Commission, taking proceedings of this kind for the purpose of acquiring land for the relief of congestion, must go before a court set up by this House, where each side can put their case. That has been done in this instance. If the Deputy or any other Deputy wants to take away these powers from the Land Commission—they are a reserved function of the Commission—and transfer them to the political head of the Department, that can be debated in this House.
I do not want to delay by asking further supplementaries, but I want to ask the Minister this question. Is it a fact that the Minister is acting on behalf of this veterinary surgeon, to whom he has referred, and against the interests of the small farmers, in view of the fact the Minister is bringing in legislation now which will enable him to get rid of the small farmers and leave the land to these people?
The Deputy is venting his personal spleen against this veterinary surgeon. I hope at the next election this veterinary surgeon and his friends in Roscommon will remember that for the Deputy.
There is a fair amount of spleen in those remarks.