asked the Minister for Lands whether it is a fact that when redeeming an annuity a land annuitant is not given the benefit of having the redemption value calculated on the basis of the revised annuity reducing by half the annuity originally payable, and whether when the period originally fixed for payment has expired any capital sum will still remain unpaid and charged on the land.

The reply to each part of this question is in the negative. I would refer the Deputy to the provisions of Section 22 of the Land Act, 1933, which govern the procedure for redemption of revised and funding land purchase annuities.

May I ask the Minister if it is not a fact that the capital sum has not been reduced and that when the holdings are sold and the capital sum has to be redeemed the whole sum has to be redeemed? Might I ask the Minister, if that is a fact, what will be the condition of affairs when the period of redemption has expired?

I think the answer I gave the Deputy in the first instance sufficiently clears up that issue but if the Deputy desires full information, volume 82, No. 6, columns 2048 and 2052, of the Official Report, 1941, contains a completely clear statement by the then Minister for Lands on the matter, which sets it beyond all doubt that the halving of the annuities actually means the halving of them— they are redeemed at half the original amount and there is no extra time over which payment must be made.

Is the Minister quite sure of that?

Absolutely.

Does the Minister say definitely that it is a fact that when the capital sum has to be redeemed it is redeemed at half the value?

That is correct.

Well, that is not so. His Department are not carrying out that. Would the Minister give directions to his Department that they will do so?

The Minister for Education dealt very fully with this particular question before. There is one difficulty, maybe. The Deputy will remember that, under the 1933 Act, any arrears over three years were wiped out, and for three years before the Act was passed those were funded. The reduction in the annuity does not affect in any fashion the three years that were due before the Act was passed, but it does affect every annuity payable since, and I think if the Deputy will read this particular part of the debate he will find the whole thing quite clear in it.

I can assure the Minister that it is because his predecessors failed to make the matter clear that I have appealed to him to make it clear.

In the case of a Land Commission certificate, is not the Minister aware that if you apply for a Land Commission certificate the full amount of the balance of the advance that has been made appears on the certificate?

I do not think that matters, because——

That is so, is it not?

That may be so, but there may be a very good administrative reason for that, so as to keep, shall we say, the history of things correct, but I have experience of cases where the annuity had to be redeemed and only the half amount was payable on the annuity. I think the Deputy should rest assured that that is so.

I can assure the Minister that that is not so.