I move:
That a sum not exceeding £3,155,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1967, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Offices of the Minister for Lands and of the Irish Land Commission.
In line with the agreed procedure adopted for the last two years, I propose to take the Votes for Lands and Forestry together this year also. Accordingly, in my opening remarks, I shall refer to Votes 35 and 36 and at the conclusion of the discussion, the motion in respect of Vote 35 will be put to the House. Vote 36 will then be formally moved.
The Lands Vote, No. 35, shows a net decrease of £259,700 compared with last year. I shall commence by explaining the salient features of this Estimate—especially those items which reflect a significant change from last year's provision—and continue with a review of the principal activities of the Land Commission during the year ended 31st March last.
Provision for salaries, wages and allowances is made under Subhead A. The additional amount, namely £75,000, required this year is partly attributable to salary increases which were granted following the preparation of last year's estimate and to increases in staff numbers. In particular, I am arranging for a telling increase in the inspectorate staff, as I am anxious to get on with the rapid disposal of acquired land and equally to move promptly on the inspection of properties brought to notice. An extra 25 posts are authorised; some were recently recruited and have taken up duty. I have also introduced a new post of Deputy Chief Inspector, headquartered in the West, with assigned responsibility for enlarging, co-ordinating and guiding the campaign towards purposeful Land Settlement which I am determined to have there. The allotment of the Oranmore and Browne Estate amongst upwards of 50 allottees was very welcome. This property of 1,000 acres was aggregated with other nearby lands in the possession of the Land Commission with the result that it was possible to frame a comprehensive and satisfying resettlement scheme for the particular area, embracing enlargements, rearrangements, part-exchanges and a number of new full holdings; this is illustrative of the type of land structural reform which I would hope to see accomplished more generally in the years ahead.
The first part of Subhead B relates for the most part to travelling and subsistence expenses incurred in connection with the inspection, survey and allotment of lands under the Land Acts. Provision for incidental and miscellaneous expenses such as advertisements, etc., is also included. The extra amount, namely £8,050, this year is required for the most part to meet the travelling and subsistence expenses of the inspection outdoor staff.
Part (2) of Subhead B provides for payment direct to the Department of Posts and Telegraphs for all services rendered by that Department. This has now become standard procedure. The total amount required this year is £48,000.
The moneys required under Subhead D are in the nature of statutory commitments. They represent the tax-payers' contribution in the current year towards the service of land purchase debt accumulated, since 1923, on both tenanted and untenanted land. The total contribution this year, viz. £1,108,770, constitutes the biggest individual item in the Vote and represents 35 per cent of the entire net Estimate. Of the total Subhead provision, some £954,600 will be utilised to make good deficiencies in the Land Bond Fund arising from the statutory halving of annuities under the Land Act, 1933. Indeed, the overall increase of £52,830 in the Subhead this year is attributable mainly to the halving of purchase instalments payable by new allottees as land settlement proceeds.
Deputies will, of course, be aware that under the provisions of section 7 of the Land Act, 1965 certain classes of persons who now receive allotments of land on an annuity basis in non-congested areas do not benefit from the halving of annuities under the Land Act, 1933, the classes being (i) recipients of enlargements, and (ii) cottiers and other persons who get allotments in non-congested areas. But all allottees in congested areas, together with migrants and displaced employees getting holdings in non-congested areas, continue to get the benefit of the halving of annuities.
Section 24 of the Land Act, 1965, provides that whenever a purchase annuity lapses by reason of the operation of the Statute of Limitations, 1957, the resultant deficit shall not remain a charge on the ratepayers but shall, where necessary, be defrayed out of public funds. A number of annuities payable out of holdings situated mainly on remote islands are becoming affected by the Statute of Limitations, 1957. Subhead D includes a sum of £150 to meet resultant deficiencies in the current year.
As I am referring to the 1965 Land Act, I might mention that before the provisions could be fully implemented it was necessary to make statutory regulations under certain of the vital sections. Some of these regulations were by their very nature very complex and had to receive careful examination by the Attorney General, the Parliamentary Draftsman and by my other advisers. I was not, therefore, in a position until February of this year to operate the order implementing provisions in section 13 of the Land Act, 1965 for a "stop notice" in land sales. Broadly speaking, the same considerations apply to sections 5 and 6 of the Act, to which I will be referring in more detail later on.
As this subhead is in four separate parts, I think I can best deal with it by referring to each part individually.
Subhead G.1 involves two items, namely, the purchase of land by the Land Commission for cash in the open market and the provision of life annuities under section 6 of the Land Act, 1965. Up to last year, cash purchases under section 27, Land Act, 1950 were restricted to lands required for migrants' holdings or for rearrangement of fragmented holdings. As Deputies are aware, however, these hampering restrictions have been set aside by the repeals section of the Land Act, 1965 and purchases for cash can now be made for all the general purposes of the Land Acts. During the year ended 31st March last, a total of 68 properties, aggregating 4,326 acres, were purchased for cash under section 27 at a price of £338,000.
Section 6 of the Land Act, 1965, provides that where elderly, incapacitated or blind persons voluntarily sell their interest in land to the Land Commission, the Land Commission may, at the option of the vendor, and in lieu of payment in cash in whole or in part of the purchase price, provide the vendor with a life annuity. Substantial progress has been made with the Department of Finance on the preparation of the detailed regulations and actuarial tables which are necessary to make the section fully operative and these regulations will be finalised shortly. It is encouraging to note that some 57 applications or inquiries relating to section 6 have been received to date and will be dealt with when the regulations are operative.
The funds being provided this year under Subhead G.1 amount to £175,000 —representing a cut back of £190,000 on last year's provision. I need hardly remind Deputies that in common with other Departments, the Lands programme has necessarily to bear some limitations on public spending just at the present time. However, the main bulk of land acquisition by the Land Commission is financed in land bonds issued under Land Bond Orders made annually by the Minister for Finance. A new series of bonds, of the total amount of £2.5 million bearing interest at the rate of 7 per cent per annum has been created by the Land Bond Order, 1966, for use in the current year. This large amount of £2½ million should more than compensate for the temporary curtailment which is unavoidable in the cash sector, in the present stringency. The cash provision has, of course, in the past proved a decided advantage to the Land Commission in purchasing some useful properties which would otherwise have fallen into the hands of non-nationals. This danger, however, has now been eliminated as section 45 of the Land Act, 1965, provides a system of absolute control by the Land Commission over such purchases. Taking these factors into account and having regard to the strengthened acquisition and resumption powers of the Land Commission which will have the effect of speeding up considerably the acquisition of vacant and let lands, I felt that for this single year we might tolerate a cut back on this Subhead and at the same time maintain the land intake figure at a satisfactory level.
The second part of Subhead G stems from section 5 of the Land Act, 1965, which enables the Land Commission to make loans to progressive farmers in congested areas for the purchase of viable farms of their choice, subject to making their existing lands available to the Land Commission for land settlement purposes. As in the case of the life-annuities scheme under section 6, appropriate regulations requiring the consent of the Minister for Finance are necessary before the loans scheme can be operated and these regulations are expected to be ready at an early date. A sum of £45,000 is proposed for the scheme in the current year.
Subhead G.3 provides £10,000 for payment in cash of compensation for tenancy interests resumed on the small outstanding residue of Congested Districts Board estates. The fourth and final part of the subhead relates to the payment by the Land Commission of auctioneers' commission on relevant purchases of land for cash and land bonds. The amount provided for this purpose last year was £35,000 and it is anticipated that £70,000 will be required this year. This is a big figure but I welcome it and I hasten to acknowledge the co-operation of auctioneers and the new disposition that has been found between them and my Department. I should say that the provision has proved a decided asset in inspiring the voluntary sale of properties and my own preference is for voluntary rather than compulsory transactions.
Subhead H provides the funds for payment of gratuities, pursuant to section 29 of the Land Act, 1950, to persons displaced from employment on estates taken over by the Land Commission for distribution. Last year, gratuities totalling £14,452 were paid to 64 ex-employees—an average of £225 each. Perhaps I should reiterate that displaced employees who are deemed competent to work land are automatically considered for allotments—indeed, this is only right and proper—but, where they are not found to be suitable for allotments, they are considered by the Land Commission for a cash gratuity, depending on such factors as length of service, personal and family circumstances, availability of alternative employment and so on. It is difficult to make an accurate forecast of commitments under the subhead in any particular year because this depends on the level of acquisition activity and the extent to which estate workers become displaced from employment through these activities. With continuing impetus in the acquisition sector, it is anticipated that £14,000 will be required for the current year.
Subhead I—£675,000—in the main, provides the funds required to meet the cost of the various estate improvement works which are such an important feature of land settlement. These works include the erection of dwelling houses and out-offices; the provision of access roads; fencing and drainage; provision of water supply for domestic and stock requirements; turbary development; repair and maintenance of embankments. Subhead I is invariably a popular debating sector in the Lands Vote. Last year, the amount provided under Subhead I was £900,000 and expenditure totalled approximately £908,000, including about £552,000 on building works. Some 630 men were employed on the various improvement works in the course of the year and their wage bill amounted to almost £264,000. I might mention here that the Land Commission have recently undertaken, on an experimental basis, the erection of a new type of out-office on holdings being provided for migrants and displaced employees. This consists of a three-bay hayshed with lean-to byre for twelve cows with feed store and dairy. Technical opinion is that this type of flexible accommodation will constitute a good basic set of out-buildings which will be readily adaptable.
Having regard to the current acute pressure on resources the provision under Subhead I for the coming year has been fixed at £675,000. This will mean that the building programme which normally accounts for a very large proportion of expenditure under the Subhead will have to be curtailed for the year ahead. I can assure the House, however, that there will be no slackening in the tempo of other land structural reform measures. Special emphasis will be given to the direct allotment of additional land to bring smallholders up to the current family farm standard. The provision of buildings does not generally arise in these cases and the usual range of estate improvements works—roads, fences and drains—will be carried through as far as practicable.
Deputies will notice that a new subitem entitled "Housing Loans" has been inserted in the Subhead. This refers to the scheme under which advances up to £500 are made to farmers to supplement grants from the Department of Local Government for the erection of new houses and for reconstruction work on existing houses. During the past year the total amount sanctioned for this purpose was £116,000.
While on the subject of estate improvements, I should say that work study techniques continue to be applied to Land Commission fencing, drainage and roadmaking operations. Since the introduction of the Incentive Bonus Scheme six years ago the productivity of Land Commission workers has increased by 58 per cent. During the past financial year alone, the scheme resulted in increased earnings, aggregating £33,100, for the workmen, while increased productivity resulted in savings worth £60,700 in the cost of the improvements works concerned.
Grants for the preservation and improvement of game resources are provided under Subhead L—£60,000—to assist Regional Game Councils, representative of all appropriate interests, in carrying out approved locally-organised schemes of direct improvement to game. In the main, these schemes include provision for the re-stocking of game, improvement of habitat and selective control of predators. Despite the prevailing economic stringency, it has been found possible this year again to increase the provision for game development.
Good progress continues to be made by the 24 Game Councils which have been established throughout the country. Last year grants totalling some £40,000 were paid in respect of current schemes of game improvement in addition to grants amounting to £5,210 in respect of some previous years' schemes.
The 1965 hatching and rearing programme of the Quarantine Station operated by the County Dublin Game Council, to which I referred when speaking on last year's Estimate, was, I am glad to say, very successful. Deputies may be interested to learn that over 5,000 game birds, pheasant, partridge and quail were successfully reared and distributed to Game Councils and others concerned with game breeding. This hatch is, I think, very nearly a record.
These birds have been well received by the game councils and there are hopes for an overall improvement in the quality of our stocks. Consideration is being given to further importation of game birds' eggs and, in this context, consultations are taking place between my Department and the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries with a view to establishing a suitable balance between the hatching and rearing of birds of native strains and of imported strains at the Quarantine Station.
I spoke last year about the importance of the setting up of sanctuaries or refuges for game birds, particularly for wildfowl, native and migratory, and referred to our international responsibilities for the conservation of the migratory species. On my recent visit to England to study the practice of game and wildlife development there, I was particularly struck by the cordial co-operation between sporting, agricultural and nature conservation interests. I saw very quickly that the work of conservationists and that of sportsmen are not inimical but are, in fact, complementary and of mutual benefit. I would like to see similar co-operation here—particularly in a national build-up of conservancy or "bird refuge" areas where wildfowl can be encouraged to breed. This would be of tremendous benefit to our sportsmen as a whole; they should realise that "conservation" today simply means wise and careful management and development of our resources for man's use and benefit.
The aim of conservation and development measures is to build up and maintain sound stocks of game and native-breeding wildfowl, to cater for the legitimate needs of our sportsmen and of visitors alike. As was recently announced, I have appointed a joint management committee, comprising senior officers of my Department and of Bord Fáilte, for the specific purpose of developing projects for the provision, promotion and sale of shooting for visiting sportsmen.
The co-operation and goodwill of local game development interests will, of course, be essential factors in the success of the work of this committee. In order to assure in advance full understanding of the functions and objectives of the committee, I recently convened a meeting of representatives of all game councils, at which this matter and also all aspects of local game development were discussed in a frank and cordial atmosphere. I am happy to say that the setting-up of the committee and its intended lines of activity met with general acceptance on the part of the game councils.
I want to emphasise that the committee will in its activities be seriously concerned to ensure that conflict or rivalry will not arise between our sportsmen and gunclubs on the one hand and the genuine sporting visitor on the other.
The Game Branch of my Department has been strengthened by the recruitment of scientific and advisory personnel; arrangements have been made for specialised training of these officers in up-to-date techniques of game management and conservation and their knowledge and experience will soon be available to Regional Game Councils and others engaged in the conservation and improvement of our game resources. This will enable the Department to take a much more active part in game development generally.
I have dealt in some detail with the more important subheads of the Lands Vote. As the remaining items are either unchanged from last year or else are token provisions, they do not seem to call for specific comment, but if Deputies wish to obtain further information about them I shall, of course, gladly supply it. I propose, therefore, to continue by reviewing the principal activities of the Land Commission during the year ended 31st March last. In some instances the statistics are still provisional but they are unlikely to vary to any significant extent from the final returns. The over-all results are very satisfactory.
On the acquisition side, the aggregate area inspected during the year was 67,000 acres while the total intake of land amounted to about 33,000 acres. As the total area in the acquisition machine at 31st March, 1966, amounted to about 63,000 acres, acquisition prospects for the current year also are particularly good.
As regards land settlement, the total area allotted amongst some 2,650 allottees was in the region of 50,000 acres which is amongst the best achievements since the war and is the result of very solid and sustained effort. The acreage distributed included the provision of 120 fully-equipped holdings for migrants and the rearrangement of 500 fragmented holdings. In all 150 new dwellinghouses and 227 new out-offices were provided for tenants and allottees during the year. With the increased staff that has been made available I am hopeful that this accelerated rate of land division can be maintained in the present year.
The vesting of holdings and allotments was continued and, in all, approximately 3,200 holdings, parcels and rights of turbary were dealt with. Tenanted land—including residues of CDB estates—outstanding for vesting at 31st March, 1966, comprises approximately 6,400 holdings. These residual holdings, situated for the most part in western congested counties, now represent the remaining hard core of difficult tenanted land cases: they are being released for vesting according as the necessary rearrangement, enlargement or other improvement is carried out.
The position as regards collection of land annuities continues satisfactory. Out of a collectable total of £2,655,043 for the year, the amount actually collected by 31st March, 1966, was £2,526,212.
I have already referred to the fact that there is now in operation a system of direct control by the Land Commission over the purchase of rural land by persons who are not "qualified persons" as defined in section 45 of the Land Act, 1965—principally non-nationals. It is probably true to say that the measures taken are acting as a brake on the inflationary trend in agricultural land prices which now appear to have reverted to a more reasonable level. On the whole the general guideline in force is that permission would not be granted to non-nationals to purchase land in order to engage simply in those forms or lines of production commonly practised by our own farmers; "white-elephant" properties unable or unlikely to attract Irish purchasers in the market could be entertained for sale to outsiders.
A non-national who could illustrate that he was going in for some special line with expertise and capital to back it up, and with export possibilities, could very well be acceptable. Since the passing of the Land Act, 1965, on 9th March, 1965, up to 31st March, 1966, the number of non-national purchases exceeding 50 acres permitted has been 22, amounting to 5,100 acres. Of this acreage, half was accounted for by three transactions affecting large properties, that is to say: (a) an extensive area noted as a wildfowl habitat; (b) a substantial property encumbered with buildings carrying a rateable valuation of £162. 10; and (c) a large stud farm disposed of as a going concern.
Turning to the Forestry Vote there is a net decrease of £204,200 in the amount being provided as compared with the Vote for 1965-66. While there are a number of changes, upwards or downwards in other subheads, this decrease reflects a drop of £201,500 in the provision for Forest Development and Management. This arises mainly from the decision of the Government to cut back planting in 1966-67 to 20,000 acres but is also influenced by other economies arising from the use of new and improved methods.
The decision to confine the planting programme to 20,000 acres in 1966-67 was taken in the context of the Government's general policy in relation to the stabilisation of State expenditure and in particular of public capital expenditure. Taking the individual headings of the Vote, the position is as follows:
Subhead A—£760,000—provides for salaries, wages and allowances and shows an increase of £101,990 over the original provision for 1965-66 of £658,010, and of £82,349 over the actual out turn for the year. The out-turn in 1965-66 was greater than the provision because of some salary increases not provided for in the original Estimate. This year's figure includes provision for additional forester staff and allows also for the impact of normal incremental progression.
The provision under Subhead B.1 —£155,500—for Travelling and Incidental Expenses shows an increase of £10,300 on the provision for 1965-66 and an increase of £3,584 on the actual outturn of £152,016 for that year. Increases in travelling costs, arising in the main from continuing expansion of activities, have been partly offset by anticipated savings on "Advertising and Publicity".
The provision in Subhead B.2 for Post Office Services at £34,000 shows a decrease of £3,500 on the provision for 1965-66. The actual out turn in that year was £37,383.
Subhead C.1 is a Grant-in-Aid for the acquisition of land. The balance in the Fund at the end of 1965-66 was £141,732 so that a total of £281,732 will be available for land purchase in 1966-67.
Expenditure in 1965-66 totalled £115,822 and covered purchase of 21,645 acres in 486 individual transactions. The productive area acquired was only slightly over 18,000 acres and was, I regret to say, the lowest annual intake of productivity lands since 1956-57. Experience during the past year shows increasing difficulty in maintaining an adequate intake of plantable land and the prospects of improvement in the current year are not bright. Our plantable reserve position, at an effective level of only about 50,000 acres, is, however, much too low for proper and orderly development of new plantations and we must redouble our efforts to improve the intake rate. I am satisfied that the amount which it is proposed to provide will cover the best results we can hope to achieve this year.
Subhead C.2 covering Forest Development and Management, at £2,921,500 shows, as I stated earlier, a decrease of some £200,000 on the provision for 1965-66. The actual out-turn for 1965-66 was £2,884,704.
The provisions on the individual heads of this subhead are (1) £212,500 for State Forest Nurseries, (2) £846,000 for Establishment of Plantations, (3) £445,000 for New Roads and Buildings, (4) £960,000 for General Forest Management, (5) £140,000 for Timber Conversion and (6) £318,000 for Mechanical Equipment for Forest Development and Management.
I have already mentioned that the planting programme is being reduced, as an economy measure, to 20,000 acres, as against the normal target of 25,000 acres and an actual accomplishment in 1965-66 of approximately 23,500 acres. The economies resulting from the reduced programme in 1966-67 affect particularly the provisions for nurseries and establishment of plantations.
Under the Nurseries head there is also an allowance for savings from continuing improvement in nursery techniques. Despite the reduced planting programme the provision for establishment of plantations is up on the 1965-66 provision, due mainly to the transfer to this head of provision for certain drainage work previously charged to general forest management; the amount involved in 1966-67 is £150,000.
The provision for new roads and buildings at £445,000 shows a decrease of £92,000 against the 1965-66 provision but actual expenditure in that year was, in fact, below the level projected for 1966-67. The fall-off in actual expenditure which occurred in 1965-66 and which is expected to continue this year arises partly from a continuing trend towards better organisation of road construction programmes and elimination of costly methods associated with small isolated annual programmes. There is now a greater tendency to question the merits of constructing management roads soon after planting in cases where the basic road network could not be established before planting. These management roads, as distinct from the more intensive network required at thinning stage, serve primarily the objective of better fire-protection but, in cases where the fire-risk is low, it is now considered more economic to defer road-construction until thinning stage.
Under general forest management, the burden of cost continues to grow annually with the extension of the State forest area but the transfer of some drainage charges to the establishment of plantations head which I have already mentioned, coupled with an expected saving arising from improvements in the methods of controlling competing vegetation in young plantations and some anticipated savings in the construction of firelines, have brought about a net reduction under the general forest management head.
The aggregate of the sums provided for labour under the various heads comes to £2,221,000 and allows for the incidence in the current year of 53 pay-days. The average labour force which expenditure of that order is sufficient to cover is approximately 4,400 as compared with an average number employed of 4,668 in 1965-66 and 4,812 in 1964-65. The curtailment in planting programme, accounting for a fall of approximately 100 in the average employment level, is not the most significant factor contributing to the reduction in labour force since 1964-65. The major cause of the decline is the progressive decrease in operational costs in connection with nurseries, roads and general forest management to which I have already referred. I need hardly emphasise that falling cost incidence is conducive to a more economic return from the State's capital investment in forestry.
Subhead C.3 which provides for the Department's two fixed sawmills, shows practically no change on the provision or out turn for 1965-66.
Expenditure on Subhead D, which provides for grants for afforestation purposes, for 1965-66 was £17,334 against a provision of £17,500. The increased provision of £25,000 for 1966-67 is, in part, due to the fact that second instalments of grants now falling due are at the £20 per acre rate but is mainly designed to ensure that the fund available will be adequate to meet applications. Payment of grant was sanctioned in respect of new planting of 1,054 acres in 1965-66.
Despite propaganda and publicity, the availability of a grant of £20 per acre and free technical advice, the annual volume of private planting seems to have settled at about 1,000 acres per annum. During 1965-66 the Department's mobile exhibit attended fourteen shows. Lectures were given at 13 centres and the scheme whereby demonstration plantings sponsored by "Trees for Ireland" were subsidised by the Department was continued for a further year.
The provision of £33,500 under Subhead E deals with Forestry Education and is £1,560 up on the provision for last year. The increase arises from normal incremental progression of staff and increases in food and general costs.
The provision for Agency, Advisory and Special Services in Subhead F at £30,000 shows an increase of £10,000 on the provision for 1965-66. Actual outturn for that year was £18,493. The increased provision is attributable to expenses which will be incurred in 1966-67 in connection with a comprehensive expert examination of the economies of pulpwood utilisation in Irish conditions, including a survey of all potential forms of processing. This survey, which was envisaged in the Second Programme for Economic Expansion, is designed to assist in securing optimum market development against the increasing production of thinnings from the State forests.
The provision of £35,000 under Subhead G, for the John Fitzgerald Kennedy Memorial Park, which exceeds the provision for 1965-66 by £10,000 and actual expenditure in that year by £26,383, is intended to cover the cost of some roads and of preliminary work on buildings and water supply, as well as the purchase of specimens and the normal day-to-day running of the Park site.
During the year site-planning of the Park was completed and the arboretum area was surveyed and gridded. The forest plot area has also been marked out. The design of the main Park buildings has been completed as has a water supply survey. Planting has commenced in the forest plot area and shelter planting to protect less hardy specimens has been undertaken in the arboretum. A phenological garden has been opened in the Park and a meterological station has been completed on the site and is operational.
Subhead H, which covers Appropriations-in-Aid, represents, mainly, the sale of produce from State forests. The provision this year at £762,500 is £150,500 greater than in 1965-66. Actual receipts in that year, however, were more than £710,000.
The market for forest produce continues to be buoyant and could absorb additional supplies of sawlog and pulpwood timber if such supplies were available from the State forests. While fluctuation in supply—particularly in sawlog sizes—is inevitable there can be no doubt of steadily increasing supplies becoming available as the produce of the increasing planting programmes during the years is taken out of the forests. As I have already stated when dealing with Subhead F a survey of utilisation of increasing forest produce commenced recently and preliminary reports are expected during the year. The total area of plantations now held by the Department is 450,000 acres distributed in 190 different forest centres throughout the country.
I want to assure the House that this Estimate provides for all work necessary to the proper care and protection of our existing plantations. The capital investment value of the State forest estate now stands at a figure of over £50 million and the safeguarding of this investment by a full standard of maintenance is of paramount importance. The Estimate as presented meets these requirements in every respect and, on this basis, I can confidently recommend it to the House.
