Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1950 > Committee of Public Accounts > Interim and Final Report - Appropriation Accounts 1947 - 1948

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Dé Céadaoin, 8ú Feabhra, 1950.

Wednesday, 8th February, 1950.

The Committee sat at 3 p.m.

Mr. W. E. Wann (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste ), Mr. J. Mooney and Mr. M. Breathnach (An Roinn Airgeadais), called and examined.

VOTE 52—LANDS.

Mr. W. F. Nally, called and examined.

793. Chairman.—Paragraph 47 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General reads as follows:—

“Subhead I.—Improvement of Estates, etc.

In connection with the scheme whereby certain lands in County Meath, available for the relief of congestion, are reserved for allottees from the Gaeltacht, sums amounting to £26 5s. 4d. expended in providing necessary improvements are charged to this subhead. The total expenditure borne on the Vote for Lands in connection with the scheme from its inception in 1934-35 to 31st March, 1948, amounts to £103,594 11s. 9d. In addition, expenditure amounting to £2,050 9s. 10d., which was subsequently recouped to the Land Commission by the Office of Public Works, was incurred in the erection of a schoolhouse.

Under the scheme for the provision of holdings in certain counties in Leinster for migrants from districts where there is acute congestion the expenditure, apart from the cost of general improvements (roads, drains, fences, etc.), borne on the Vote during the year amounts to £237 5s. 0d. The expenditure on general improvements in respect of migrants’ holdings from the inception of the scheme to 31st March, 1948, has recently been assessed at £26,722 11s. 1d. Including this figure the total charges to the Vote in respect of the scheme since 1937-38 amount to £140,678 7s. 5d. made up as follows:—

Perhaps you might be able to give the Committee some brief general account of this scheme?

Mr. Nally.—The scheme began in 1938, following a recommendation by an Inter-Departmental Committee in connection with the taking of steps that might lead to a reduction in emigration. There were two schemes undertaken by the Land Commission—a Gaeltacht scheme and a Group scheme. The first sub-paragraph of the paragraph deals with the Gaeltacht migrants’ scheme. Under that scheme the Land Commission migrated 122 migrants to County Meath; other migrations were to Westmeath, Kildare and Dublin. Migration has practically stopped since 1946—we have not migrated any more Gaeltacht people.

794. Deputy O’Sullivan.—The total up to 1946 is 122?—Under the Gaeltacht schemes. There were 213 families migrated under the Group schemes.

795. Are both schemes in operation in Meath?—Both are in operation in Meath, and some in Kildare, Dublin and Westmeath. They were taken to the counties where we found large tracts of land available, the idea of the Gaeltacht scheme being to bring as many Irish-speaking families as possible together and settle them contiguous to each other to form one Irish-speaking community.

796. What is the total number of families in Meath under the two schemes? —122 under the Irish-speaking schemes and 213 families under the Group migration scheme.

797. In Meath?—Not altogether in Meath. I can give you the counties, if you wish.

798. Chairman.—I presume that the whole of the 122 families referred to are in Meath?—They are. All the Gaeltacht people are in Meath.

799. Could you saw how the 213 others are placed?—They are spread around Meath, Westmeath, Kildare and the border of County Dublin.

The majority probably being in Meath? —The majority in Meath, where most of the land is available.

800. Is the total amount of this expenditure irrecoverable?—No. The expenditure is scheduled at the bottom of the paragraph. The expenditure chargeable under “Advances” is recoverable and the expenditure which is not recoverable is scheduled under “Free Grants”.

801. What about the other items?— They are special expenditure which is in the main not recoverable.

802. So that of the £140,000 £14,000 is recoverable?—Yes.

803. Deputy O’Sullivan.—Is it in fact being paid in any form?—The migrants are paying their Land Commission annuities in respect of advances for the purchase of the land and also paying a small portion of the cost of the buildings.

804. Chairman.—The position at present is that there is no migration scheme in progress?—Not at the moment. Preparations are being made for a resumption of migration. It may be possible to migrate five or six families this year before the end of March, but there is no certainty in the matter because the houses have to be built. They are at present in course of construction.

805. Will this be a group migration scheme?—Yes, if possible.

806. From the point of view of the Exchequer, that is more economical?—It is not so costly as the Gaeltacht scheme.

807. Deputy O’Sullivan.—What is the essential difference between the Group and Gaeltacht schemes?—To qualify for migration under the Gaeltacht scheme, a man and his family had to be native Irish speakers. Under the Group scheme, no consideration is given to whether a man is an Irish speaker or not.

808. Chairman.—And you are not giving the same amount of assistance in the second case as in the first?—The Gaeltacht scheme costs more on the average. The average per holding for the Gaeltacht scheme was £303 special assistance and for the Group migration scheme £125 10s. That is over and above what is ordinarily spent per holding by the Land Commission in land settlement.

809. Are you able to set off against that the value of the old holding in any way? —The old holdings are of inestimable value to the Land Commission in the places in which they are situated because they are used to relieve the conditions of the people in the neighbourhood of the places the migrants have left.

810. You could not put any value on them in these cases?—I am afraid not with accuracy. I do not think that is calculated closely.

811. It is a question that may be asked when the cost of the scheme is being considered, since the expenditure is considerable. If it were not possible to give the financial advantages accruing on the other side, it might be possible to state the number of cases in which tenants benefited by extensions to their holdings from these migrants’ holdings which had been given up. Would that be possible? —It could be taken that in every instance tenants in the locality which these people left have benefited because these migration schemes involved the migration of whole families and those families already had land in the neighbourhoods from which they were taken and that land was used by the Land Commission for relief in the neighbourhood.

812. The position is that if there is a system of bad rundale in an area it is very difficult to deal with the rearrangement of holdings without taking out a number of these very congested tenants? —Exactly.

813. Deputy O’Sullivan.—Do the Land Commission’s activities cease when the migrants arrive in Meath?—They do not cease. The Land Commission continues to watch over them. They arrange, for instance, with the Department of Agriculture that their agricultural overseers should give the migrants instruction in new methods of farming because they have to adopt methods entirely different to those to which they were accustomed in their own part of the country.

814. Chairman.—Is any account available to explain the relative success or otherwise of the migrants from the agricultural point of view?—I think reference has been made occasionally to the conduct of the migrants in the annual reports of the Land Commission. It may be of interest to the Committee to know that only one family out of 213 Group migrants were found to be a failure and wanted to return to their old holding. They were afterwards settled in another holding in County Kildare. Failures amongst the Gaeltacht migrants were a bit more. Out of 122 families eight or ten failed.

815. Deputy O’Sullivan.—When you say “failed” you mean that they expressed a desire to return?—Yes, they did not want to continue. Some found it a very hard battle. They were not accustomed to using horses, for instance, and found it very hard to get accustomed to them and a special quiet type of horse had to be provided. Then the soil they were working on was altogether different from the soil they left behind. It was a heavier type and harder to work. Also they had not been used to ploughing. Generally speaking, the Land Commission is very well satisfied with the way the migrants have conducted themselves.

816. Chairman.—The Committee might also be interested to know whether the Land Commission are trying to get migrants from different congested areas or whether they concentrate on particular counties and whether they find a difficulty in getting migrants to come?—It is the practice of the Land Commission when they have on their hands land which they consider suitable for migration to inform their Inspectors in congested counties that such land is available. The Inspectors report back to the Land Commission that in their areas, say in Galway, Kerry, Donegal or Mayo they have people whom they could recommend to be migrated. Then negotiations take place between the Land Commission and the tenants recommended. We often have to go to as many as ten, twelve or fifteen people and show them the land in this part of the country before we get one to accept. They are very slow to migrate.

817. You give preference, I presume, to possible migrants with families?—We do. The whole idea of migrating the people in groups rather than singly is to encourage them to come and live in community with their own people that they were used to at home.

818. I take it that subhead H (1)— Payments under section 11 (7) of the Land Act, 1923—refers to the State contribution towards land purchase?—It provides for the payment of 4 3/4 per cent. interest and sinking fund on all Land Bonds issued under the Land Acts, 1923-46 for (a) the 10 per cent. State contribution to the Standard Price of Tenanted Land (section 25 (1), Land Act, 1923), (b) the 2 per cent. for the Costs Fund (section 5 (1), Land Act, 1923) and (c) the State contribution of 1/11th to price determined under section 52 of the Land Act, 1923 in the National Land Bank Sales.

819. Will this sum remain roughly at the present figure?—It will not increase materially but naturally the more tenanted land the Land Commission buys and re-sells the greater it will be.

820. Subhead H (3)—Payments under Section 27 (2) of the Land Act of 1933— refers to the cost to the Exchequer of defraying the charges on that portion of the annuities remitted under the 1933 Act so that that is roughly half the appropriate annuities?—Quite so. The sum is increasing every year as the more annuities the Land Commission set up the more the Exchequer will have to bear under that subhead.

821. You will remit half of the annuities in all cases in which you settle land on incoming allottees?—Rather, the Dáil votes half the annuities to be paid to the Land Bond Fund and the tenant pays the other half.

822. In the case of a tenant whose land is being acquired how would that work out at present? Is there a benefit for the tenant who has been paying only half his annuities? If you take over that man’s land for acquisition and division do you take into account the fact that annuities have been remitted and that he has had that advantage at the cost of the State? —We take land over for the purpose of giving it to somebody else. In giving it to somebody else we set up an appropriate annuity on it. The annuity roughly speaking represents half the cost of the land to the Land Commission. The price paid for tenanted land is the market price.

823. So whether it is an outgoing or incoming tenant the State contributes half the annuity?—Yes.

824. Chairman.—There is a note on subhead E—Solicitors Branch. Incidental Expenses—which reads: “Excess due to high costs incurred in two Court cases in connection with the resumption of holdings and to an increase in the total compensation paid under section 16, Land Act, 1939.” The Committee would like to know something about the high costs referred to here?—I am afraid I have not particulars of the case but I will furnish them to the Committee if you wish.

825. Deputy O’Sullivan.—With regard to subhead I, what exactly does the term “improvement of estates” cover?—When the Land Commission acquire land for the purpose of allotment they often find that land in large tracts. In order to allot it to a number of people they divide it up into parts. The erection of fences comes under the item “improvement of estates.” Sometimes land has to be drained, houses have to be built, out-offices provided and roads have to be made and all these things come under “improvement of estates.”

826. It includes the building of houses? —It does.

827. Chairman.—A portion of it is recoverable. Could you say what portion is recoverable or would it vary in different cases?—The practice of the Land Commission is to place as high an advance on improvements as the Inspectors will certify that the allottee’s land or holding will be able to bear. Generally the practice results in about 75 per cent. free grant and 25 per cent. recoverable advance.

828. Deputy Kitt.—Would that include the sinking of a well and the erection of a pump in a large tract of land that would be divided?—It would.

Do the Land Commission do that work? —They do.

Or is it left to the local authority to provide these amenities?—The Land Commission take responsibility for providing water for their own allottees.

829. Deputy Davern.—Does any portion go towards the maintenance of roads?— No, we do not maintain roads.

Deputy Kitt.—You just make them and let the local authority take them over. If the Land Commission put down a pump for an allottee, must they maintain it if it goes out of order? Could there be cohesion between the Land Commission and the local authorities if they put one in—I know a few estates where they have not water—whereby the local authority would take over, repair and maintain them? There seems to be no co-operation between the two departments?—The Land Commission’s responsibility begins and ends with the acquisition and division of land and then as soon as possible it is their aim to get rid of the whole business.

If the Land Commission make roads, it is unfair that they should be maintained by somebody else. The same thing would apply to the erection of a pump?—The Land Commission do not receive the rates which the allottees may be paying in respect of roads and water.

830. Chairman.—As to Item J.— Advance to meet Deficiencies of Income from Untenanted Lands—what does that represent?—The Land Commission get grazing rents from untenanted land—land on their hands which they have not yet disposed of. They manage that land as best they can. They have revenue from the setting of grazing for cattle and sheep. Sometimes they sell timber and demolish old buildings and sell the materials.

831. What would the payments be?— We have to pay somebody to look after the land—herds and stock managers. Sometimes we have to put grass seeds on land and so on.

832. As to subhead L.1—Losses on Unoccupied Holdings—the amounts charged to this subhead were sanctioned by the Department of Finance. There seem to have been more substantial losses than you anticipated. Was there any special reason for that or was it an accidental variation?—We had to repair gates and fences and the cost was regarded as a loss. It had to be reported to the Department of Finance which gave sanction to write it off, having investigated the circumstances.

833. If there is a dwelling house on an unoccupied holding and it is pillaged, there is no redress in that case?—No ordinary redress.

834. What about the malicious injury code?—That is the first consideration that is given to the matter by the legal advisers of the Land Commission and the solicitors branch. If, as a result of their consideration, we are advised that there is no use lodging a malicious injury claim, we do not do so. You can have losses, too, without their being malicious.

835. As to subhead M—Advances to meet Payments under sections 13(3), 15(2), 18(2) and 19(1) of the Land Act, 1931—these are payments to meet the costs of legal proceedings?—Yes.

836. There is a statement on page 174 of Advances and Recoupments. Am I correct in saying that this account is to provide for cases in which bonds are issued over what is necessary?—The subhead is to provide for the repayment of bonds issued under the Act of 1931 in respect of holdings in which the purchase proceedings are subsequently dismissed or in respect of holdings in which the annuity is altered.

837. How does this balance which appears in the statement of advances and recoupments arise? I understand that on some previous occasion the Committee asked for a statement of this nature and it probably appears as a routine matter from year to year, but it is no harm to refresh ourselves as to what exactly it means?—There is payment back to that subhead under Appropriations in Aid, subhead S (8).

There is an estimate there of £500 and you realised £1,310?—Yes.

838. As to the Appropriations in Aid, in connection with (7)—Fees Collected in Connection with Proceedings under section 28 of the Land Act, 1933—are these from long term leases and fee farm grants?—The proceedings under section 28 of the Land Act. 1933, are proceedings for the recovery of arrears. We recover fees from people against whom Court proceedings have to be taken.

839. Deputy O’Sullivan.—As to (1)— Contribution for Cost of Management of Church Property Branch—what is that specially concerned with?—The Church Property Branch collect tithes and rents for the Church Temporalities Fund. The Land Commission have a branch which does the collection. They get recouped from the fund under that subhead of the Appropriations in Aid.

From whom do you collect?—From tenants who are liable for tithe rents, etc.

Chairman.—It is no longer payable for its original purpose. It was taken over when the tenants were being transferred to the Land Commission. This was part of the purchase arrangement—that they should continue to pay this particular amount. It is a purely financial obligation?—It has no relation to any Church.

This £8,000 collected under (7) goes back to the registrar or sheriff?—Yes. We have to account for it.

840. “Repayable Exchequer Advance for Financing Payment in Lieu of Rent” —this is a continuing matter?—It should be nearly completed because it is going on for a long time. Payment in lieu of rent as such has ceased to be paid long ago, but there are still a few snags outstanding that keep it in the books.

VOTE 53—FORESTRY.

Mr. W. F. Nally further examined.

841. Chairman.—There is a paragraph number 48 on page 21 of the Comptroller and Auditor-General’s Report regarding over-expenditure which has already been dealt with in an Interim Report of this Committee and the Dáil has passed the necessary Supplementary Estimate. Therefore we can pass on to the Vote proper. As to subhead D—Grants for Afforestation Purposes—these are grants to private individuals?—Yes.

842. Could you state what the number was? It must have been very small because only £804 was expended.

843. Deputy Fitzpatrick.—How does an individual qualify for a grant?—If he plants a minimum of one acre of trees in accordance with good methods of forestry he is qualified to get a grant of £10 per acre paid in two instalments.

844. Chairman.—It must be one acre at least?—Yes; it used to be five, but it is now one.

845. Deputy O’Sullivan.—How would that figure of £840 compare with previous years?—It would probably be a little bigger than previous years which were war years. Even yet the figure is very small, because plants are in very short supply and, for a long time, rabbit netting was practically unobtainable. In nearly every case the plants while young have to be strongly fenced in to protect them from damage.

846. Chairman.—Is there any publicity in connection with this? One would imagine that, taken in conjunction with other schemes in progress at present, farmers might be induced to do a little more planting on these reclamation schemes?—Since the Department itself cannot get 50 per cent. of the plants that it needs to put in it follows that the private individual has a very poor chance of getting the plants that he requires to qualify for a planting grant.

Deputy Fitzpatrick.—Do you mean that the Department iself cannot get sufficient plants?—It cannot.

847. Deputy O’Sullivan.—May we take it that the low amount expended in comparison to the amount voted is due rather to a shortage of materials rather than to the absence of applications from individuals?—It is almost altogether due to the existing shortage of materials.

848. Deputy Fitzpatrick.—Can you tell us if you had many more applications than could be considered? Is the position this that you had to turn down a number and leave them on a waiting list? Can you say if there is a general tendency amongst people to plant trees under this scheme if plants were available?—We have replanting obligations in the case of a large section of the community in respect of timber that was felled during the war involving I think about 3,000,000 trees. These people will qualify for the planting grant and, at the same time, will discharge their replanting obligations as soon as they can get the tree plants.

849. And they are anxious to do it?— We know that a lot of them are.

Are we to understand that the people would avail of this grant if you had the plants?—A good many of them would, if they had the plants.

850. Could you give an indication as to what the number would be? The position we find here is that the sum granted was not expended and possibly the same thing will occur again?—The question is rather difficult to answer. If times and supplies were normal the Department would prosecute defaulters who did not do the replanting that they have undertaken to do. But, since the Department are quite well aware that the defaulters are unable to get tree plants, it could not in justice bring those people into Court. The only way in which the anxiety or the desire of people to comply with their obligations could be properly tested would be to prosecute those who did not comply with the conditions and to endeavour to accommodate those who are prepared to comply, but at the moment we can neither prosecute the one party nor accommodate the other.

851. I am thinking of the people on whom there is no obligation to replant. It the plants were available do you think there is any desire amongst that class of people to plant?—I am not able to say. They might like to plant a few trees here and there, but we will require them to plant properly.

852. You want more than a shelter belt?—Much more.

853. Deputy Kitt.—I think that it the scheme were properly advertised and, if the people were aware that there was a grant of £10 per acre, you would have plenty of applications?—I am now in a position to answer the question which was asked a short time ago by the Chairman. The expenditure of £805 represents 23 grants covering the plantation of 104 acres.

854. Deputy Fitzpatrick.—Would those grants be in respect of people who were under an obligation by law to replant?— Probably some of them were, and some represent voluntary planting.

855. Deputy O’Sullivan.—Has the position in regard to plants and materials eased since these reports were published? —It is easing gradually because a lot of seeds have been planted in the nurseries. It takes from three to four years for some seeds to fructify into plantable trees. I should say also that seed is in very short supply. The whole world is looking for tree seed.

856. Chairman.—Does the Department distinguish between an owner, a landed proprietor, who made money from the sale of timber during the Emergency and who is obliged to replant and those whom you would consider would need assistance and for whom provision is being made? If you are to assist them in a substantial way, I take it that the £2,000 would be only a flea bite?—The £2,000 is a flea bite. We understand the position to be that most people cannot get the plants. We do not assist one party in preference to another. Everybody who has to replant is entitled to the £10 an acre planting grant and everybody who wants to plant voluntarily is entitled to the £10 an acre planting grant just the same.

857. Do you propose to give them something over and above the £10?—We propose to give them £10 when the trees are planted and satisfactorily growing.

858. Deputy Fitzpatrick.—Do you supply them with plants?—We do not.

859. They have to secure them themselves?—Yes. The nursery people would take a poor view of the Department supplying plants. The plants have to be obtained in the outside nurseries.

They are obtainable?—They are in very limited supply.

860. Deputy Kitt.—As regards subhead F.2—Membership Contribution to the Imperial Forestry Bureau—what exactly does that mean?—That is the Commonwealth Forestry Bureau consisting largely of English-speaking forestry experts who meet and issue technical and scientific publications. They carry out research and send their findings and conclusions as well as their publications to the Forestry Branch in this country. It is comprised of experts from Canada, South Africa, New Zealand and other countries which have highly developed forestry services.

861. Chairman.—As regards subhead H—Appropriations in Aid—I take it that the sale of timber is a continuing matter? —Yes.

862. You are satisfied that it is being carried out in a businesslike manner and that proper control is being exercised over these operations?—All the big sales are advertised. Price control is now removed and the highest bidder gets the big lots.

863. Are commercial accounts in contemplation so far as the sales of timber are concerned?—Yes.

864. As regards small sales of timber and thinnings the Committee will see from the explanatory note that it was found possible to sell thinnings in larger numbers than had been anticipated. I take it that the amount will tend to increase when replanting operations are started again?—Yes.

865. The note says that a sum of £2,834 8s. 10d. was written off in respect of losses incurred as a result of forest fires during the year. I see you were able to recover a certain amount?—Yes.

866. Was that entirely by way of a malicious injury claim?—We had one small malicious injury claim allowed.

867. Deputy Mrs. Crowley.—Is there much damage done maliciously to forestry plantations?—Very little.

868. Is that land usable again for forestry purposes?—It is after a while.

869. Chairman.—How do you manage as regards a fire-fighting apparatus? Have you to depend on what provision there is locally in that respect? Do you depend on the co-operation of outside people?— We have no fire brigade or appliances of that kind, but the forestry foremen are all trained in the best way to stem forest fires. The forests generally are surrounded with fire belts—deep ditches—to prevent the fires from spreading.

870. How did you fare last summer, for example?—Last summer was a bad summer in that it was very dry. I think we had more fires than usual last summer.

871. Normally you would not think it necessary to make special provision by way of having your own apparatus?— No. I think the ordinary fire apparatus would not be the best means of dealing with forest fires. In the case of a forest fire the main thing is to confine it to a limited area. In fact one of the methods of dealing with a forest fire is to start a counter fire somewhere else.

VOTE 54—GAELTACHT SERVICES.

Mr. W. F. Nally further examined.

Gilbert Mac an Bháird (Stiúrthóir, Seirbhísí na Gaeltachta) also called and examined.

872. Chairman.—As regards this Vote, there is a paragraph number 49 on page 21 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General. It sets out that under the Housing (Gaeltacht) Acts, 1929 to 1939, the aggregate amount of grants and loans which may be made is not to exceed £750,000. What would the present limit be?—£900,000.

In the same paragraph the Committee will see the position regarding such grants and loans at the 31st March, 1948. There is set out there the total amount of grants sanctioned, the total amount of loans sanctioned and the total amount of actual payments?—Quite so.

873. Deputy O’Sullivan.—How do your loans compare with grants at the Local Government end so far as housing is concerned?—They are slightly better.

874. Chairman.—Paragraph 50 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General deals with industrial loans. There were no advances made during the year ended 31st March, 1948. The Comptroller and Auditor-General informs the Committee that there is an amount outstanding of £10,862 17s. 7d. This represents, I understand, an advance of some £7,000 which was originally made to the Galway Granite Company. I wonder in what year it was made. The Company ceased to exist in 1925 and I wonder in what year was the advance originally made. It must be very far back?—It was in 1910.

So the interest is piling up?—Yes.

875. Will legislation not be necessary to deal with this matter, or is it one of these matters that has to be left in its present condition?—They cannot do anything without new legislation. A new State Lands Act is required.

876. Deputy Fitzpatrick.—Has there been unnecessary delay in bringing in legislation to deal with this matter which has been going on from 1910? Has the matter been overlooked?—It is not our responsibility.

877. Deputy O’Sullivan.—When did it come under notice that the amount was no longer realisable?—When we took over the Congested Districts Board in 1923 we found there had been a sub-lease for a period of 99 years at £120 per annum. It is practically in the same position as we took over. That sub-lease is still there—£76 a year goes in Head Rent, thus leaving £44 Profit Rent out of the £120 received by the Department from people in Galway renting it.

878. Chairman.—The Comptroller and Auditor-General’s Report states: “As stated in previous reports, the realisation of such security as is held by the State was the subject of negotiations, but owing to certain legal difficulties realisation cannot be effected.” I think members of the Committee—I, certainly—would be interested to find out what date can be marked as indicating when it became known that the amount concerned could no longer be realised?—We cannot dispose of the property because it is not open to any State Department to alienate land which was already the property of the Crown before this State was established independently. If we had new legislation we would be able to dispose of the land.

879. The Report says that “owing to certain legal difficulties realisation cannot be effected.” That is referring to a specific item. What was the date of that? —1925.

Deputy Fitzpatrick.—Then it is apparent that since 1925 legislation is necessary?—It is, not only in respect of this property, but in respect of a lot of other properties.

Would it not be the duty of your Department to advise the Minister that such legislation is necessary?—I cannot fully answer that. I do not know what the precise difficulty is. Our understanding is that we have got to put up with the matter.

Can anyone give us information on this matter?

Mr. Wann. —Perhaps the representative of the Department of Finance can.

880. Mr. J. Mooney.—There is a State Property Bill actually in draft at the moment. It has been for years under consideration. It is now being examined. It will be submitted to the Government and should be ready for introduction in the Dáil some time this year. It will enable properties of this kind, as well as other properties, to be disposed of. This Bill has been under consideration for decades.

Deputy Fitzpatrick.—We can look forward to this item not appearing next year if the necessary legislation is introduced?

Mr. Mooney.—I could not say that.

881. Chairman.—The form of the submission may be changed, anyway. On the Vote, as regard rural industries, the travelling expenses set out in subhead D.4. seem to have gone up. The explanation given is that a much greater amount of travelling was necessary, due to reorganisation and post-war development of the rural industries?—Yes.

882. There was also an increase in the rates of allowances. As regards subhead D.6., there was an over-expenditure consequent on the delay in the delivery of textile machinery for the spinning mill, and extra requirements of materials (woollen yarn) had to be purchased? Yes.

883. General expenses, dealt with in subhead D.7., show that this expenditure was greater than anticipated, due to a general rise in prices.

884. Deputy O’Sullivan.—In connection with subhead D.8.—Toy Industry—where is that located?—At Elly Bay in County Mayo and Crolly in County Donegal.

885. Chairman.—Could you say what number are employed and how these industries are faring?—In the toy industry for the year of the report there were 141 employed and their wages came to £10,830. As regards the other industries, you have embroidery employing 397, with a total wage of £8,328.

Deputy Fitzpatrick.—Do they come under the toy industry heading?—They come under the other industries mentioned by the Chairman.

In the toy industry alone there were only 141 employed?—Yes, and the wages came to £10,830 for the year 1947-48. For the current year the number employed on toys was 148—that is, to the end of last year.

886. Chairman.—Perhaps Deputy Fitzpatrick wants to know how you account for the remainder of the expenditure?— The materials cost a good deal of money. The materials were £25,541; freight, £1,649; packing materials, £2,716; machines, tools etc. £1,096; fuel and oil, £263; and miscellaneous, £764.

887. Could you say what proportion of that would be permanent capital expenditure, or are there any accounts to which members of the Committee might refer?— The amount would be small for permanent capital expenditure. Machines and tools would be £1,096. There is no other item there.

888. What about premises—are there any of permanent valued?—They are not value.

889. Deputy Fitzpatrick.—Who decides the value of continuing this toy industry at such an expenditure?

Chairman.—The Government determines that.

Deputy Fitzpatrick.—It seems to be a most extraordinary expenditure. There is an item of £10,000 on wages and then there is all the rest paid out.

890. Chairman.—I think you have to regard these industries as being enterprises which cannot carry on without aid. Some might regard them as in the nature of part of the social services in these particular years. Others might think they are very uneconomical and should not be continued. You have different points of view. I have no doubt it is a matter the Committee would like to have details about from time to time as to how the industries are working out?—On the other side of the account there are receipts of £62,000 under the heading of toys.

891. With regard to receipts from the sales of products of rural industries, workers’ wages came to £100,490 and agents’ commission came to £9,970. The estimated receipts were £146,868 and actually £174,346 16s. 8d. was realised. That seems to be a very good result. Of course, the conditions were favourable for the homespun industry during the war years?—Yes.

892. We pass on then to D (12)— Leaden Models Industry. Can you give the Committee any information about this particular industry?—There was an expenditure of £17,569 as against a grant of £19,675. The expenditure was made up of material, £6,824; wages £4,324; packing materials, £4,270; freight, £674; fuel and maintenance, £916; other supplies, £146, and a miscellaneous £315.

893. What exactly are these products? —Toy soldiers.

Do you think the prospects are favourable?—They are very bad at the moment. The further one gets away from the war, the worse the prospect becomes for toy soldiers.

Are the Japanese and others coming into competition now?—Toy soldiers are not saleable according to reports from America. It was in America our market mainly was. The public is not interested in toy soldiers any more. I suppose children are becoming too sophisticated.

894. Deputy O’Sullivan.—Subheads D (8), (9), (10), (11) and (12)—Toy Industry, Spinning, Homespun, Dyeing and Finishing and Leaden Model Industry—are extremely interesting. Would it be possible for us to have fuller information on these subheads? Could we be informed as to their location, the numbers employed and the other salient features of the particular industries? I do not want it in the form of a balance sheet. I think it is important, for instance, that we should know where they are located. I think we should know what markets exist. We should have all the information possible in relation to the trend of markets.

895. Chairman.—I think that if the Committee could he given fuller information on these matters, it would probably save a certain amount of criticism, in the first place, and, secondly, it might give yourselves an opportunity to think along what other lines might be taken and whether or not certain enterprises are worth maintaining?—We shall give that information. I take it Mr. Wann will have a word or two about the form which it should take. It is something more by way of general information rather than mere accountancy.*

896. I notice that under subhead E.3 Kelp and Seaweed—expenditure was less than had been granted due to the discontinuance during the war of the purchase of seaweed fronds and kelp. Has the position improved?—It has improved as regards sea rods. There is no hope of recovery in the case of kelp and carrageen.

897. Deputy O’Sullivan.—What is the trouble in connection with kelp?—It is not being sought in the market.

I know one particular area where a tremendous amount of activity used take place during certain months of the year and I have been observing lately that activity has ceased?—As I have said, the market is for rods rather than kelp. Rods are in plentiful demand. We cannot get enough of them. Probably kelp has gone off because substitutes have been found by the biological chemists and others.

898. Does the market for rods substitute in full the market for kelp?—No, but the rods will eventually, if they are developed.

899. Chairman.—Is it possible to get any assistance from the Industrial Research people in these matters? You were really acting as agents. So long as there were purchasers outside the country the situation was all right for kelp. Now there are no purchasers. Is there any hope for it in the future?—There is no hope for it.

900. Has there been any inquiry as to whether any use can be made of the kelp? —Mr. Mac an Bháird has been in close touch with it and perhaps you would permit him to inform you on the matter.

901. Gilbert Mac an Bháird.—We are always on the look-out for uses of any material that can be produced in our industry. Originally kelp was used for the extraction of iodine. The price of iodine became so low that such extraction was no longer economic. For a while before the last war we had a market in England for the admixture of kelp with cattle food. That has died down. The kelp was ground and mixed with the food. It commanded a fairly good price pre-war. During the war kelp was used for phosphates for manurial purposes. That has died down because natural phosphate is now coming in at a much lower price. There is now no demand at all for kelp. Later on there may be a demand for seaweed fronds. The real demand at the present is for sea rods. The price to the gatherers is very favourable—£4 10s. 0d. per ton. That is far better than £10 per ton for kelp.

902. Chairman.—Are the sea rods confined to particular areas?

Gilbert Mac an Bháird.—Along the West coast and partly around the South coast. The industry is not fully developed yet. The frond has to be cut off the rod. The rod is dried on walls, bundled and brought to the factory where it is ground. It is then exported.

903. Deputy O’Sullivan.—How is it conveyed to the factories?-By rail or lorry.

904. Deputy O’Sullivan.—Where are the factories?—There is one factory in Galway.

905. Chairman.—Is the drying done locally?—The rods are weather dried on walls.

906. If there was any particular area, such as the one Deputy O’Sullivan has in mind, where a big industry might be established in these rods, would it be more economical to complete the process there rather than carry the material to Galway?—Undoubtedly as time goes on there will be the question of establishing more factories for the grinding of these rods.

907. Deputy O’Sullivan.—Is there any publicity in connection with this scheme?—There is. The local people know quite well what is happening. I think they appreciate where their advantage lies. Once they know they can get £4 10s. 0d. a ton for these rods they will go out and gather them. It does not require any advertisement. We have people in the areas—they might be described as gangers or stewards—who look after the actual gathering. The walls for drying were erected under our direction for the purpose of improving the product. The people have been very co-operative. We gave them the idea and they have gone ahead with it.

Chairman.—I dare say the Committee would like to know from time to time what the actual position of this industry is.

908. Subhead E.4. deals with carrageen.

Deputy Mrs. Crowley.—Is there any export market for carrageen?

Mr. Nally.—There is no market for it at the moment. There is no demand for it from us even inside the country.

Gilbert Mac an Bháird.—There were other people who packed carrageen besides us and there was no advantage in our continuing. There was very little paid in wages in connection with the packing industry and we retired from it. The ordinary carrageen goes ahead. About 150 tons are exported every year. That is continuous from year to year and the figure remains static. There is no profit for us in commercial carrageen.

909. Chairman.—On subhead H (3).— Grants under the Housing (Gaeltacht) Acts 1929 to 1939—I notice that the grants are very small in this period. Is it the explanation that building could not be gone ahead with, or what is the explanation?

Mr. Nally.—The cost of building materials was high and increased grants were expected from the Department. The Gaeltacht (Housing) Act of 1949 was anticipated.

Deputy O’Sullivan.—And did that slow down things?—They would not apply under the old Act.

Chairman.—With regard to (3) under Appropriations in Aid-Receipts from net sales of carrageen (subhead E.4.)—the Committee will notice that, in fact, carrageen shows no receipts.

VOTE 74—ATHLETICS.

Mr. W. F. Nally further examined.

910. Deputy O’Sullivan.—How is it that this Vote comes under the control of your Department, Mr. Nally?

Chairman.—I think it is because Deputy Moylan, who was Minister for Lands, undertook responsibility for this Estimate.

Deputy O’Sullivan.—What happened? —Nothing in the period 1947-48.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned.

* See Appendix XXIII.