: I move:
Go ndeonófar suim nach mó ná £3,937,000 chun íoctha an mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31ú lá de Mhárta, 1969, le haghaidh Tuarastail agus Costais Oifig an Aire Tailte agus Oifig Choimisiún Talún na hÉireann.
In line with the agreed procedure adopted for the last few 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 34 and 35 and at the conclusion of the debate the Motion in respect of Vote 34 will be put to the House. Vote 35 will then be formally moved.
The Lands Vote (No. 34) shows a net increase of £413,000 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, viz. £26,000, required this year is attributable partly to the need to make provision for increased staff for pilot area work and partly to normal incremental progression—offset by a saving on the suppression of a large number of clerical posts as a result of the installation of a computer in the Land Commission.
Following the enactment of the Land Act, 1965, a reorganisation of the Land Commission was effected under which the administrative and inspectorate personnel were expanded and strengthened. On the administrative side an additional post of assistant secretary was provided with other extra posts including one principal officer and one assistant principal officer. On the inspectorate side a new senior post of deputy chief inspector was created, located in the West, with the special responsibility of speeding up the solution of land problems in western areas. At the same time 25 new subordinate inspectorate posts including two posts of inspector grade I were also provided.
To deal with the new work arising from the pilot areas a further reorganisation of the Land Commission is now under way. The inspectorate is being redeployed and strengthened and recently there was authorised the creation of more additional outdoor posts including one post of senior inspector and four posts of inspector grade 1.
I may say here that in common with other Departments which have technical or professional staff the Land Commission have been encountering difficulties in effecting adequate recruitment to maintain their full complement of inspectors. In view of the extent and urgency of land structure reform it is essential to ensure the optimum utilisation of qualified inspectors. It seems to me that this can best be achieved just now by relieving the inspectors of a range of lesser duties which could be performed quite effectively by non-professional officers. Accordingly, I have decided in principle to create a cadre of sub-professional field officers to assist the inspectors to carry out their land settlement functions. The precise number, title, salary scale, qualifications and duties of the new grade have still to be settled.
At the same time I am giving serious consideration to a corresponding reorganisation and strengthening of the administrative staffing. In addition to these organisational and staffing proposals, a Management Services Unit has been established in the Land Commission to consider and develop modern management techniques aimed at increasing efficiency and productivity generally. I am confident that when the proposals I have outlined have been brought to finality the organisation and staffing of the Land Commission will be adequate to deal satisfactorily with the full work programme.
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. The extra amount, viz. £1,750, this year is required for the most part to meet heavier outlay on miscellaneous items and advertisements.
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 £51,400.
The moneys required under subhead D are in the nature of statutory commitments. They represent the taxpayers' 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. £1,202,900, constitutes the biggest individual item in the Vote and represents nearly one-third of the entire net Estimate. Of the total subhead provision, some £1,044,000 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 £57,520 in the subhead this year is attributable mainly to the halving of purchase instalments payable by new allottees as land settlement proceeds. All allottees in congested areas, together with migrants and displaced employees getting holdings in non-congested areas, get the benefit of the halving of annuities.
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, viz. 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 1965, cash purchases under section 27, Land Act. 1950, were restricted to lands required for migrants' holdings or for the rearrangement of fragmented holdings. As Deputies are aware, however, these hampering restrictions were set aside by the Repeals Section of the Land Act, 1965, and purchases for cash are now open to all general purposes of the Land Acts. During the year ended 31st March last, a total of 107 properties, aggregating 5,329 acres, were purchased for cash under section 27 at a price of £327,375.
Section 6 of the Land Act, 1965, provides basic authority for the scheme of life annuities for elderly, incapacitated or blind persons who voluntarily sell their interest in land to the Land Commission. This scheme and the scheme for self-migration loans, to which I shall be referring later, were brought into operation early in 1967 and the details have been widely publicised. While it would still be rather premature to expect anything spectacular in terms of land intake from the schemes, it is heartening to be able to report that they are beginning to show positive results.
The objective of the life annuity scheme is to facilitate land structure reform by encouraging elderly, incapacitated or blind farmers to retire from farming and make their lands available for land settlement purposes. Elderly people, especially those with no obvious successor, find it beyond their physical capacity to work land properly and too often they are unable to carry on in the face of growing difficulties. Socially and economically the best results ought be obtained when land is in the hands of active persons.
The number of firm applications received to date is 339, of which 300 have been investigated. Of those 64 were withdrawn—the owners preferring to offer their lands to the Land Commission in the ordinary way, that is for cash or land bonds; a further 138 applications were eliminated at an early stage, mainly because the lands concerned were not found suitable. The remaining 98 applications developed into potential life annuity cases in which price negotiations were feasible.
Price agreement has, in fact, been reached with 25 of these landowners and the position is that in 11 cases the life annuities have been set up; in eight others the necessary arrangements are almost completed; and, in the remaining six cases, the exercise of a formal option by the vendors for a life annuity in lieu of all or part of the agreed price is awaited. Incidentally, the anticipated tendency on the part of vendors to opt for payment by way of part cash and part annuity is already becoming quite apparent. The area purchased by the Land Commission through the 11 completed cases is 563 acres and a further area of 504 acres is expected from the advanced cases.
In order to cater for the substantial expansion in the volume of purchases for cash—particularly in the pilot areas —and also to enable the scheme for payment of life annuities to make worthwhile progress, provision under subhead G.1 is being increased this year to £430,000—almost double last year's provision. It is scarcely necessary to remind the House that the main bulk of land acquisition is financed in land bonds issued under the Land Bond Orders made annually by the Minister for Finance. A series of bonds, of the total amount of £2 million, bearing interest at the rate of 7½ per cent per annum, was created by the Land Bond Order, 1968, for use in the current year.
I am satisfied that the substantially increased cash allocation now proposed, together with the large amount of Land Bonds created by the last Land Bond Order, will enable the Land Commission to push ahead with a purposeful land acquisition programme this year.
The second part of subhead G stems from section 5 of the Land Act, 1965, in which resides authority for the scheme enabling 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-annuity scheme this, too, is a new service, really a banking or credit service, with an overall limit of £10,000 including the price paid for the owner's old holding; it is intended to augment existing land settlement schemes and is, of course, additional to and again is not in substitution for the traditional migration programme carried out by the Land Commission. The primary objective of the scheme is to facilitate the Land Commission programme of land structure reform in the scheduled congested areas, as defined in the 1965 Act—Counties Donegal, Galway, Kerry, Leitrim, Mayo, Roscommon, Sligo and parts of Clare and West Cork. The scheme is intended to encourage initiative by providing necessary capital, through the machinery of the Land Commission, to enable progressive smallholders in the scheduled congested areas to improve their status by purchase in the open market of viable farms suitable to individual requirements, subject to making their existing lands available to the Land Commission as part of the loan arrangements.
The number of firm applications received to date is 120. Of these, 106 have been investigated and, perhaps not surprisingly, a substantial proportion failed at an early stage—mainly because the applicants' lands were considered unsuitable. In all, 40 applications have advanced to the vital stage at which price negotiations were authorised. Price agreement is, of course, an essential prerequisite to the making of an advance under the scheme and it is gratifying that in 18 of the 40 cases mentioned agreement on price has, in fact, been reached. This enabled these particular cases to progress further, with the result that six applicants have been assisted in migrating and have actually gone into possession of their new farms; two others are merely awaiting the completion of the necessary legal formalities before entering into possession of their new holdings and the remaining ten are on the lookout for alternative properties in the knowledge that substantial financial assistance by way of Land Commission loans will be forthcoming. In the six completed cases, loans and grants amount to about £25,000 and the transactions have resulted in an area of 259 acres being made available to the Land Commission. The other 12 cases represent a maximum commitment for Land Commission of some £72,000 in advances and grants and, on completion, will yield a further area of approximately 689 acres for the land settlement programme.
A sum of £120,000 is proposed for the scheme in the current year.
I should, perhaps, stress here that while every effort is being made to operate the life annuity and self-migration loans schemes with the utmost flexibility, they are intended primarily as additional sources of land for the Land Commission's programme. Accordingly, the suitability of the proffered lands for structural reform and the degree of urgency with which these lands are required by the Land Commission are necessarily of paramount importance in the determination of applications.
These schemes operate entirely on a voluntary basis and their success inevitably depends on the willingness of suitable landowners to adopt them. In both schemes there are many attractive features for the participants and I am confident that as they become more widely known these schemes will appeal to an increasing number of suitable applicants. From the land settlement standpoint, the fact that both schemes have, so far, produced an aggregate potential land-pool of over 2,000 acres is very encouraging and illustrates clearly that these new schemes can play a part in augmenting the Land Commission's traditional sources of land intake for land settlement purposes.
Informal booklets have been prepared for the guidance of landowners interested in the schemes and any Deputy who wishes can obtain copies by getting in touch with the Land Commission.
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. It is anticipated that £60,000 will be required this year. Perhaps I should explain here that up to 1963 the practice was to pay auctioneers' commission only in respect of lands purchased by the Land Commission for cash under section 27 of the Land Act, 1950. This was extended in 1963 to properties purchased on a voluntary basis for land bonds. The extension of payment of commission on the lines indicated has proved a decided incentive to auctioneers to offer lands on their books to the Land Commission thus facilitating an acceleration in land acquisition for the relief of congestion. My own preference is for voluntary rather than compulsory transactions— and I freely acknowledge the co-operation and assistance of auctioneers in this matter.
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 £12,227 were paid to 56 ex-employees—an average of £219 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 fore cast 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. Last year's figure of £15,000 is being repeated for the current year.
Subhead I, 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 the focal point of the Vote inasmuch as it finances one of the most essential features of the land structure reform programme. Expenditure for last year totalled £815,000 including about £505,000 on building works. Some 440 men were employed on the various improvement works and their wage bill amounted to over £233,000.
For the current financial year the amount proposed under subhead I is £990,000 which represents an increase of £140,000 over last year's provision and amounts to about 25 per cent of the entire Estimate. This substantially increased provision will, I feel sure, be welcomed by Deputies, particularly those from rural areas, having regard to the importance of estate improvement and development works.
Late last year an announcement was made about an important new development being undertaken by the Land Commission in relation to lands earmarked for migrants and intended for distribution to tenants whose holdings are being rearranged. It has been decided that all such lands are to be rehabilitated prior to allotment. The rehabilitation consists of lime and fertiliser application — and the cost is about £8 an acre. In addition the Land Commission are also doing the preliminary (reclamation) work on these lands —such as drainage, removal of scrub, eradication of rushes and so on. The aim is to give these allottees the best possible start on their new holdings. It is to be hoped that this new development will induce more tenants to participate in rearrangement proposals involving land of varied fertility. The major portion of the cost involved is being borne direct by the Land Commission — a small proportion being charged to the allottee by means of an addition to his annuity.
Another important matter which was dealt with last year was the question of improving designs for houses and out-offices built by the Land Commission. As Deputies are, no doubt, aware dwelling houses provided by the Land Commission are fully serviced as to water supply and electricity, where practicable. The design and construction of these houses have recently been revised and many progressive features have been added to fit in with modern needs and trends. Improvements include cavity walling, better insulation, more satisfactory heating, cooking and storage facilities.
In consultation with An Foras Talúntais, a number of new out-office designs have been introduced. These represent a considerable advance in quality and layout and reflect the most up-to-date thinking on farm accommodation. The underlying intention is to provide a good basic set of outbuildings which can be readily adapted for expansion and development if the allottee chooses.
In addition, yard areas are being increased and blacktopping of yards, approach roads and access roads is being undertaken as a standard feature of improvement works associated with the provision of buildings on new holdings.
The sub-item entitled "Housing Loans" 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 paid out by way of loans for this purpose was £81,000 to 200 applicants. It is estimated that for the current year £75,000 will be required.
The application of work study techniques to the estate improvement works of the Land Commission continues. For the year 1967/68 productivity was 2.7 per cent greater than that for the previous year and was 56.5 per cent above that for the period before work study was introduced.
The amount set aside for Game and Wildlife Development, £95,000, is an increase of £15,000 on the sum provided last year.
During the past year the sum of £61,000 was paid out in respect of schemes of game improvement. Grants for the preservation and improvement of game resources will continue to be available to assist Regional Game Councils, representative of all appropriate interests, in carrying out approved locally-organised schemes of direct improvement of game stocks and habitat. It is hoped that the network of Game Councils, roughly one for each county, will be completed this year.
Despite the interruption of the shooting season and the restrictions of movement on the land necessitated by the overriding urgency of preventing the foot and mouth outbreak in Great Britain from affecting this country, good progress was made in preservation and restocking generally and it is hoped that sportsmen will reap the benefit by way of an increased head of game during the coming season. Because of the foot and mouth emergency, however, game-tourism suffered considerably last year.
Conservation of our heritage of wildlife is coming in for increasing and deserved attention. The acquisition of the first State refuge on the Wexford Slobs should be completed soon. The creation of further refuges is in hand as also are measures for the preservation of valuable wetlands, vital for wildfowl, which are threatened by drainage and development projects.
The preparation of new legislation on game and wildlife conservation is proceeding steadily and I hope to be able to introduce the Bill next year.
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 quite satisfactory.
On the acquisition side, the aggregate area inspected during the year was 89,000 acres while the total intake of land amounted to about 33,400 acres. As the total area in the acquisition machine at 31 March, 1968, amounted to over 90,000 acres, acquisition prospects for the current year are particularly good.
As regards land settlement for the year the total area allotted amongst some 1,638 allottees was in the region 30,253 acres. The acreage distributed included the provision of 79 fully-equipped holdings for migrants and the rearrangement of 310 fragmented holdings. In all 93 new dwellinghouses and 142 new out-offices were provided for tenants and allottees during the year. With the increased funds which are now being made available I am hopeful that an accelerated rate of land division can be achieved in the present year.
The vesting of holdings and allotments was continued and, in all, over 2,400 holdings, parcels and rights of turbary were dealt with. Tenanted land —including residues of CDB estates— outstanding for vesting at 31 March, 1968, comprises approximately 5,900 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 satisfactorily. Out of a collectable total of £2,772,163 for the year, the amount actually collected by 31 March, 1968, was £2,641,804.
As Deputies know 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. The position generally now is that no interest in non-urban land can vest in a person who does not come within the categories of "qualified person" as defined in section 45 (1) of the Act except with the written consent of the Land Commission. As mentioned in previous years 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. During the past year—apart from what might be called unobjectionable transactions, for example, those (a) arising solely from mortgage interests, (b) involving areas not exceeding five acres and (c) representing transfers between one non-citizen (individual or company) and another—the total acreage in respect of which the consent of the Land Commission, pursuant to section 45 of the Act, was given to the vesting of interests in land in non-qualified persons as individuals or companies controlled by non-citizens was 4,500 acres. A substantial proportion of the acreage involved consisted of the types of property which could hold no attraction for the ordinary Irish purchaser. The corresponding area for the previous year was 4,700 acres.
I might perhaps mention here that when the 1965 Act was being enacted many towns which had no distinct legal status as such came within the scope of section 45. These are referred to as non-municipal towns and are listed in part II of the First Schedule to the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1963. I understand that the areas of these towns have now been precisely delimited by their appropriate planning authorities and accordingly I am considering the question of putting them on a par with municipal towns by excluding them from the section 45 restrictions by way of regulations. This would add to the convenience of the business community and the legal profession in the conveyancing of properties in these areas.
Last year reference was made to an important new task being undertaken by the Land Commission aimed at providing the vastly improved land structure pattern which is the essential foundation for a lasting solution to the western problem. The structural reform of sub-standard holdings coupled with the elimination of fragmentation and rundale is a prerequisite to the development of any purposeful agricultural programme in the West. The need for the establishment of economically viable farms as a basic ingredient of any modern agricultural system is generally recognised throughout the countries of Western Europe—and here at home it is now accepted that small farm areas must be underpinned by a dynamic campaign of land reform.
When opening the debate on the Lands Estimate for last year my predecessor referred to the fact that the Government had approved a proposal to initiate a vigorous campaign of land settlement in the pilot areas over and above the normal land settlement programme. This campaign was launched on 1st May, 1967, when a selected force of Land Commission inspectors commenced a detailed survey and analysis of all the holdings involved in the original pilot areas. The survey has now been completed for over 4,800 holdings comprising almost 205,000 acres and gives a complete picture of what needs to be done and what can be done to build up the basic farm structure in the pilot areas to the levels we require. To date 192 holdings— 6,300 acres—have been earmarked for compulsory acquisition or voluntary purchase and detailed inspection reports have been furnished for these. A total of 41 applications for migration involving 2,000 acres have been investigated and a pool of land totalling 2,600 acres in 61 properties has been acquired in these areas to facilitate structural reform. The overall ambition of land policy is to establish sound and worthwhile agricultural units, satisfying to the owner, in which productivity can be raised and which in turn will yield their quota in the campaign for competitive export of farming produce.
Turning to the Forestry Vote there is a net increase of £161,000 in the amount being provided for 1968-69 compared with 1967-68; this reflects increases on most of the expenditure subheads, offset by an increased allowance for Appropriations-in-Aid.
There is provision in the Estimate for a full planting programme of 25,000 acres although there was uncertainty at the time the Estimate was framed as to whether it would in fact prove possible to plant on that scale. It is now certain that this year's programme will be of the order of 22,000 to 23,000 acres. As the House knows, the difficulty here arises from the inadequacy of our plantable reserve and the fall-off in land acquisition in recent years. I believe we now have the means to overcome this problem to which I will refer further in dealing with subhead C.1.
Going now to the details of the Estimate, there are a number of minor subheads—B.1., B.2., C.3., and F—which require no particular comment this year.
Subhead A—Salaries, Wages and Allowances—at £907,000 shows an increase of £72,610 over the provision for 1967-68. The increased provision covers the normal growth of the inspectorate and forester staff in line with the expansion of the State Forests and a major overhaul of administrative and engineering staff which had not been strengthened for a long time and was unable to cope with the much increased work-load of recent years.
Under subhead E—Forestry Education—I should draw attention to the provision for the new Training Centre at Avondale House. This new Centre, now fully commissioned, will be used largely for refresher and specialised courses for our field staff and will play a very important role in keeping all our staff up to date with developing knowledge and techniques. In present-day conditions when forestry practice here as in other countries must undergo a continuing process of evolution in line with changing technological and economic circumstances, this development of improved communication and educational facilities within the Forestry Service is most valuable.
There remain, apart from subhead D (Grants for Afforestation) and subhead G (the John F. Kennedy Memorial Park) to which I will refer later, the main operational subheads: C.1, C.2, and H.
Subhead C.1 is the grant-in-aid for the acquisition of land. The balance in the fund on 1st April, 1968, was slightly over £204,000; with a new provision of £150,000, a total of £354,000 will be available for purchase of land in 1968-69.
Expenditure in 1967-68 was £123,261 in respect of a productive area of 14,713 acres acquired in 378 transactions. This was inadequate to keep the plantable reserve in equilibrium. The nominal plantable reserve now stands at about 58,000 acres but as this includes many areas, which, for one reason or another are not immediately available for planting, the true reserve is about 40,000 acres.
Last year my predecessor informed the House that the system of valuing land for forestry purposes had been radically altered and that the old ceiling-price of £10 per acre was no longer an inhibiting factor where higher prices were justified by the economic return prospects and where the higher prices were not out of line with market values.
The new system of valuation now being operated is a big break-through in the campaign which the Forestry Division has been waging over the last decade to put the whole State Forest Programme on a sound economic footing. It is imperative that we hold and strengthen the gains which have been made in the campaign if we are to be in a position to continue to develop the country's forest potential in face of rising costs. Only thus can we have a sound prospect of selling our produce in the future at acceptable prices in face of free international competition.
In the new system of land valuation, we have now for the first time succeeded in establishing a cost/benefit type analysis of each new area of land being included in the forest estate as the basis for optimum management policies. With the aid of detailed costing information built up over the past decade, each area being considered is now studied in relation to both its potential timber yield and the level of capital development cost likely to be involved and a price is determined which recognises its fair value for forestry purposes.
Under the new system, the range of prices which we are prepared to offer is much wider than under the old £10 ceiling-price system. Land of relatively low productive capacity will still command only a very low price, if it qualifies at all for purchase. For good forest land, however, valuations now range frequently up to twice the old ceiling-price and, in favourable circumstances when capital development costs will be minimal, may go substantially higher.
We have, in fact, under the new system, on occasions valued exceptionally attractive parts of blocks on offer at figures over £25 per acre. This does not mean, of course, that every farmer selling land to the Forestry Division can hope to get prices up into that bracket. It does mean, however, that any farmer can with confidence expect to get a fair market price for any land which, in the national interest, would be better devoted to forestry than to agricultural purposes. To put it simply, price should no longer be an obstacle to land acquisition for forestry purposes.
Unfortunately, it will take time to get the benefit from the new system in terms of improvement of our plantable reserve. The low intake last year represents the tail-end of the old situation but it will take time for farmers to react to our new approach and there is an inevitable time-lag in inspection, negotiation and legal conveyance.
The first need is to step up the flow of offers and I would ask every Deputy in the House who represents a rural area to assist me by encouraging his constituents to give us the opportunity of buying the land we need. It would not help, of course, if we were inundated with offers of useless submarginal land; this would occupy wastefully the time of my officers who must work hard if they are to secure good results and do so quickly. Neither would I wish to see a sudden heavy flow of offers of very small extent which would also clog the machine. Every Deputy must know, however, where in his constituency there are substantial areas of average to good forest land which could be offered to us. It is these areas on which we must concentrate if we are to restore our planting programme quickly. My Department will be very happy to give any Deputy who responds to my plea advice as to the likely areas in his constituency. There is a very fruitful opportunity here for Deputies to assist in a practical way in furthering one of this country's most promising fields of development.
Subhead C.2., which covers the cost of Forest Development and Management, shows an increase of £105,400 on the provision for 1967-68. Among the factors contributing to the overall increase are increased provision for replacement of worn-out and outmoded equipment, extra charges arising from devaluation, and allowance to cover the cost of a sick pay scheme for forest workers introduced last year.
The total sum provided for labour under the various heads is £2,375,000. With continued limitation of the planting programme and also continued curtailment of road construction programmes due to engineering staff shortages, it is now clear that average employment this year will be at a somewhat lower level than last year when 3,851 men were employed.
No allowance was made, of course, for the 11th round which has been granted to forestry workers as from the 1st April, 1968. This, along with a reduction in the working week from 45 to 42½ hours and the introduction of a service pay scheme for longterm employees, will involve additional expenditure amounting to perhaps as much as £450,000 in the year on this Subhead.
This is a very sharp increase in costs which had already risen steadily over the past decade and it underlines the importance of the continuing and very successful efforts which have been made by my Department over recent years to improve productivity and optimise working methods, techniques and management policies. The ultimate object is to secure from our forests the maximum possible yield of raw material for forest industries at the lowest possible production cost per cubic foot of timber. Thus only can we hope to secure an economic return from the substantial national investment in afforestation.
This problem of rising costs is not peculiar to this country. It has been causing increasing concern throughout Europe for a number of years past and has even given rise to serious question as to the economic viability of substantial areas of existing forest in a number of European countries. As recently as this month, the whole question has been the subject of further intensive reappraisal by the European Forestry Commission in conjunction with the Economic Commission for Europe. The problem as seen by the Commission is that Europe's timber requirements are increasing and will continue to increase at an accelerating rate. There is room for expansion in the output of timber from European forests to meet part of the growing gap between supply and demand but the big question is whether Europe's foresters can produce enough timber at cost levels which the processing industries can afford to pay while operating in a free economy. Throughout Europe, operations in existing forest areas are now tending to be confined more and more to the more productive areas and a searching reappraisal of all forest costs is now getting under way.
Our position in Ireland is highly interesting. On the one hand we face the challenge that virtually all our forest production in the future must come from man-made plantations on the creation of which heavy capital investment has been incurred. On the other hand, these plantations, under intensive management and with the climatic advantage which we possess, can give very high timber yields. In the final analysis, the critical factor will be the success of our pursuit of economic management objectives. While so far I have had only limited opportunity since I became Minister to see the practical application of our forest management policies in the field, what I have seen and what I have learned has given me confidence that we are on right lines. I believe we can have faith in the future viability of our national forest undertaking.
I would nonetheless be happier if in the nature of things it were possible to ensure greater continuity in the employment in each forest area. I recognise that to some extent variation in the level of employment is an inherent feature of forest development and that this is especially true in our present situation in which the inadequacy of our plantable resources gives rise to particular local difficulties in securing balanced levels of annual work programmes. Nonetheless I am anxious to do whatever is possible to avoid redundancies and I have asked the staff of the Forestry Division to make every effort to find ways and means of easing such problems.
On subhead H—Appropriations-in-Aid—allowance has been made in the Estimate for an increase of £100,000 in revenue from timber sales. Markets for both sawlog material and pulpwood are buoyant and I am confident that this additional revenue will be secured. Indeed we could sell far more material if we had it. The indications for the future are of a steady increase in output of small dimension material for which markets should be readily available. On the sawlog market the most we can expect over the next few years is to maintain present production with perhaps a marginal increase.
There remains for special mention subhead G which provides for the John F. Kennedy Memorial Park at Slieve Coillte, County Wexford. The provision in the current year's Estimate covered a substantial part of the development stage for this project which was brought to finality on schedule in time for the formal opening of the Park by the President on the 29th May last.
The primary purposes of this project are scientific and educational. Great care has been taken in the planning of the project and there is no doubt that it will fulfil its primary objectives.
It has also had the subsidiary but important objective of providing an amenity of a high order, of value and interest to our own people and of advantage to our tourist trade. I think everyone who has visited the Park will agree with me that in this it has been an unqualified success. Already in its first season it has attracted 75,000 visitors in the four months from June to September.
This amenity and tourist objective is of course being developed extensively also in many of our forest properties throughout the country. Already, as you are aware, a number of forest areas have been opened to the public—some as formal forest parks—others on a more informal basis. I propose in the near future to arrange for the more rapid extension of this work which, I am fully satisfied, has great potential both for the enjoyment of our own people and for the development of the tourist trade and I shall have more to say on this subject in connection with next year's Forestry Estimate.
Results to date in areas opened to tourists have been most encouraging. Taking for example Gougane Barra Forest Park in County Cork, the records show a total of 74,000 summer visitors in its first year of operation.
The Forestry Division are also engaged—in co-operation with the Game and Wildlife Branch of the Department —in experiments in relation to game development in the State Forests. While the immediate object of these exercises is the improvement of sporting facilities the long term effects on the conservation of wild life will, it is expected, be significant.
The State forests are a very substantial national investment. It is my intention that in this and the coming years these resources should be cared not only for their past and primary objectives of timber production but for the multiplicity of the aims to which they lend themselves. It is only thus that the people of this country can recoup the full benefits of their investment in State afforestation.
I have in this speech made no reference to private forestry for the subvention of which at a normal level provision is made in subhead D. I am aware of the efforts made in the past to encourage more active participation by our farmers and landowners in the national afforestation programme and know that a fair measure of progress has been made. I have asked my officials to re-examine the steps so far taken for the encouragement of private forestry and I propose to discuss the matter with them in the near future. In the meantime I would like to assure the House that I share with many of our Deputies an anxiety to ensure that an effective contribution to our forestry objectives is made by the private sector.
