I move the last Vote, No. 64, the Ministry of External Affairs. £25,000. This was not formerly a charge on the Exchequer Fund. It was a Dáil service, and as such came before the old Dáil at all times for a Vote. As the Dáil funds have practically ceased since July last except for small sums, it is necessary to bring up the Votes for these Services.
DAIL IN COMMITTEE. - MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS.
From what date does this service begin which is being provided for by this Vote?
We are only taking this on from now, so you will probably have to consider what has been spent since July in a separate Estimate. It can be bulked in connection with charges on Dáil funds. It was only at the last moment that I came to the conclusion that this should be put forward. Since the 6th December, it is a regular and proper charge for which this Oireachtas should be responsible.
On this Vote there are two or three things I would like to say of some importance perhaps apart from the criticism of the Vote itself. The amount is divided into two—Salaries, Wages and Allowances, £10,000, and Travelling and Incidental Expenses and Telegrams, £15,000. That lump sum of £15,000 strikes one as exorbitant, and without some explanation of what is intended or likely to be swallowed up in such a large sum one would feel doubtful as to the wisdom of supporting the Vote. But it is not particularly on that matter that I rose. I want to say that the absence of the Labour group here from the meeting yesterday has been commented upon. It is well, I think, to explain that our absence meant no personal disrespect to Mr. T.M. Healy. God made him, and he, therefore, deserves our respect; but if we had been present we would have felt bound to protest, in perhaps an unpleasant way, against the bringing into this Assembly of anyone from outside without the formal consent of the Assembly. We do not think that it was a right thing to do—to invite the Governor-General to come here in person. We accept him as an official, the representative of the Crown, one partner to the Oireachtas.
Could not this matter be better raised on the motion with regard to the Speech itself?
No; I think not.
It has no relevance to this Vote, certainly.
I submit, with all respect, that it is a matter that comes within the purview of the Ministry for External Affairs.
It is not a matter with which this particular Vote is connected. What we are concerned with is expenditure under this particular heading. There is no expenditure under this particular heading in connection with the Governor-General or the bringing of him here.
I take it that there will be expenditure in connection with the communications that will take place between Ireland and England; and it is in his position as representative of the British Crown in Ireland——
I think it is not relevant on this motion. I would ask the Deputy to reserve what he has to say for another occasion.
I happen to have said all that I wanted to say on that. I think it is germane, however, to inquire into the relations between Ireland and Great Britain, between the Free State and the self-governing Dominions and England, on this Vote, and, consequently I want to draw the attention of the Dáil and to ask the Dáil to express itself in regard to the status in the Commonwealth of Nations of Saorstát Eireann. We read in the morning papers, and in this document that has been circulated, that the following message was conveyed to the Governor-General from the King. It begins: "With the final enactment of the Constitution the self-governing Dominion of the Irish Free State comes into being." And we have the record of the Governor-General's reply, "acknowledging the gracious message by which your Majesty has inaugurated the self-governing Dominion of the Irish Free State." That is a denial of the claim that has been made since the 6th December last that the Treaty placed Ireland in a position of equality with England. The Saorstát is not a self-governing Dominion. It is not a Dominion, as has been pointed out so frequently, and as Mr. Lloyd George, the late Premier of England declared, quoting so eloquently the late Commander-in-Chief, Michael Collins, who said Ireland was a mother country, and was not in the relation to England that Australia or new Zealand or Canada were in. But even Australia does not acknowledge the title "Dominion." It claims to be a Commonwealth, not a Dominion. And I think it is due to the authors of the Treaty on the Irish side, and to the authors and supporters of the Constitution on the Irish side, to assert that Ireland—Saorstát Eireann—is not a Dominion, but is a free nation, a free partner, an equal partner in the Commonwealth of Nations, which is a very different thing from the status of a Dominion.
It is in the Constitution. Article 1 of the Constitution says so.
Article 1 speaks of the Irish Free State being a co-equal member of the Community of Nations forming the British Commonwealth of Nations, and that does not place Ireland in the position of a Dominion. I leave to other Members of the Dáil the duty of speaking their minds on that particular matter. Another question of somewhat different character is worthy of consideration here. In the course of certain discussions during the Constitution debate there was quoted, I think, a report of a speech by Mr. Lloyd George at the Conference of Prime Ministers of the British Commonwealth in June, 1921, in which he said: "The direct communication between the Prime Ministers established during the war has, I think, worked well. We have endeavoured to keep you thoroughly abreast of all important developments in foreign affairs...." This was a speech to the Ministers of the Dominions—"We have endeavoured to keep you thoroughly abreast of all important developments in foreign affairs by special messages sent out weekly, or even more frequently when circumstances required. Indeed, at every important Conference, either here or on the Continent, one of the first duties I felt I ought to discharge was to send as full and as complete and as accurate an account as I possibly could not merely of decisions taken, but of the atmosphere, which counts for so very much. I have invariably, to the best of my ability, sent accounts, some of them of a most confidential character, which would give to the Dominions even the impressions which were formed, and which gave you information beyond what we could possibly communicate to the Press. We shall also welcome any suggestions which you may have to make for associating yourselves more closely with the conduct of foreign relations. Any suggestions which you can make upon that subject we shall be very delighted to hear and discuss. There was a time when Downing Street controlled the Empire; to-day the Empire is in charge of Downing Street. On all matters of common concern we want to know your standpoint and we want to tell you ours." Now, my desire is to know whether there has been any communication from the present Premier of England in regard to the recent Conferences —that at Geneva and the more recent one, which comes within the period since the Saorstát was established, that held in London—and whether any representations have been made to that Conference of the desire of the Government here in regard to the Reparations Policy, in regard to the effect of the demands for Reparations and the fulfilment of the Peace Treaty to the letter. It is a matter upon which some expression of the mind of this Government should be made known to the Premier in England because of the inevitable effect upon Irish affairs of a settlement or the continued unsettlement of European politics. The Minister for External Affairs has, no doubt, been keeping a close watch upon European politics, the movements of Ministers and the movements of peoples; and I have no doubt that he was waiting for the moment, when he was in formal office, when he had a right to make representations to the Ministers in London in regard to these European affairs and the dangers of a still further conflict, especially in view of the reactions upon Irish economy. I think we ought to know whether such representation has been made, and, without going into details, what the purport of those representations was. We cannot, unfortunately, disassociate ourselves from Europe, and whether the Irish Minister is going to support the French point of view or the English or Italian points of view in regard to foreign affairs is a matter on which we ought to have some information.
On the same lines that Deputy Johnson suggests, I would like some information from the Minister for External Affairs as to an item of news that appeared in the Irish Independent of December 12th. It stated that a message from the Pope was received by the Governor-General. Now, no matter what our status may be, of being equal or co-equal with England, we have at least according to Article 1 of the Treaty the same rights as the Dominions. In the Dominions if a Governor-General receives any communication a copy of that communication is lodged with some Minister, usually the Secretary of State. I know that is so with regard to Canada. I would ask the Secretary for Foreign Affairs in the first place have we still a representative in Rome? and was this message from the Pope through His Eminence Cardinal Gasparri, Papal Secretary of State, and did it come through our Envoy in Rome; and also did a copy of it come to the Minister for External Affairs? I would also suggest, that in future he should get copies of any communications coming to the Governor-General. The same applies to messages coming from the King of England. I think the Minister has a right to have a copy of such communications. I notice here that this Ministry has not heretofore been a charge upon the Exchequer funds, that is its organisation is still being considered, and I would like to know did we appoint a Minister at a salary, and is his position still being considered. I would also like to know is it an indication that this Ministry is going to be disbanded, or what is the meaning of this Note. In connection with the expenditure also, I would like to know if the Consuls or Trade Commissioners—I do not know what they are called, or whether they have any new term— whether their expenses come under the charge here, and whether diplomatic representatives, like the one in Rome, and the one in America, whether they alone, or the Trade Commissioners, are included in the expenditure. I think I might suggest that if the Minister for External Affairs has not got this communication from the Pope he should draw the attention of the Papal Secretary of State to the fact that we have a Minister in Rome to whom the communication should have been sent.
We have been for a good many years protesting very emphatically a right to a place in the world's affairs, and I fear that there may be some reluctance in the pressure of a great deal of work and responsibility that has fallen upon the Ministry to accept that now, that we have got it, because I maintain that we have got it. It is clearly and emphatically laid down in the Constitution that we are a co-equal member, and I think that Deputy Johnson has done service in drawing attention to what I, myself, can only describe as a very unfortunate wording of certain messages to and fro by our colleague, our equal colleague, of the designation of this country as a Dominion. Of course, it may be true that Ireland is a Dominion. I think not myself; but if that be the case, then I have to learn for the first time that England should be described as a Dominion, because in Article 1 of our Constitution it is definitely stated that the Irish Free State is a co-equal member of the Community of Nations forming the British Commonwealth of Nations. England forms part of that Commonwealth. If we are co-equal with them, and we are a Dominion, then England is a Dominion. I do not think, if we address the communication across the water to them as a Dominion, that they would regard it as a very courteous form of address, and consequently I think that when communications are addressed the other way we might also resent it as possibly not the most courteous form of address. The matter arises in connection with this Vote, because we have a certain responsibility at the present moment of which we can not disavow ourselves, whether we would like to do so or whether we would not like to do so, because here we have an item set down in this Estimate of salaries, wages, and allowances of £10,000. But, as Deputy Dr. MacCartan has already stated, we are also informed that the organisation of this Ministry is still being considered— that is to say, the organisation, in spite of the fact that it is in existence since the beginning of this year, that organisation apparently has not been completed, and apparently it does not yet exist; and, in spite of the fact that no organisation exists, we have an Estimate here for that, including travelling expenses, telegrams, and incidental expenses, coming to the sum of £15,000. How it could be possible to estimate so large a sum for travelling and incidental expenses for an organisation which is still being considered, and which does not yet exist, is a matter which somewhat passes my comprehension. It is important— this is possibly one of the most important votes we could be required to make. It is one of the most critical and important votes for the future. I am not quarrelling with the size of any of these sums. I think that the Votes that we are being asked to pass here are exceptionally moderate, considering the responsibilities we have undertaken, but I would have like that when this was being moved we should have been told exactly what the nature of the organisation was so far, and what was the rest of the organisation that we are told is still being considered.
I would like to ask the Minister for External Affairs to tell us what is the policy of his Ministry with regard to the question of the League of Nations. Those who are opposed to war and militarism in this country, are strongly desirous of seeing set up in Europe a real League of Nations that will prevent a recurrence of the terrible war which affected us. Troubles in Europe have their reactions, as has been stated, in this country, and I would like to get an assurance from the Minister that as soon as he is satisfied that a real League of Nations is set up—not composed of big Empires, out for greed or possession and control of great straits or exploitation of mining districts—his Ministry will take the earliest opportunity to see that Ireland has a seat in that League of Nations.
I do not think there is any Department of State where the Government should step more warily, at the present time, than in regard to external affairs. Speaking for myself, I am very glad to see that the whole subject is rather in a state of constructive development. Many concrete proposals in regard to foreign affairs are submitted to us in this Estimate. The Estimate certainly covers a very large amount of money, but, in view of the fact of its being concerned with affairs practically of the whole world, I think it is quite legitimate that a very large Vote should be asked for. There is no reason that the money should be entirely spent, but at the present time, in view of the fact that it is an experimental and creative stage, I think the Vote is justified. I cannot agree with Deputy Johnson in his idea of there being a delimitation of our powers by any language in the Address yesterday. The members of the Oireachtas were addressed in these words:—"To-day, in the name and with the authority of the people of Saorstát Eireann, you enter into the fullness of your partnership in liberty with the Nations co-operating in co-equal membership of a great Commonwealth of free peoples." Surely that is the position we have been standing for. It was officially announced to us yesterday. It puts all the people who are in that Commonwealth on a free and equal footing. It declares their free and full partnership. I hold that we are free and full partners and have equally free and full rights with England herself, and that we are on just as great a status of national freedom as England is. There has never been, by reason of the objection of the other parties to that partnership, a definition of what exactly their independence meant. They themselves objected to any definition of the term Dominion. It is all in the nature of growth, and I hold that we, in making this Treaty, and in entering into the position we now occupy, are equally as free and as independent as any of them, both in our home and in our foreign policy. I hope the foreign policy of Ireland will be directed from the inspiration of the national history of Ireland; that it will be directed by our taking as full a part and as national a part as we are entitled to take in the development of such an idea as a League of Nations, and that every year the Estimates for the Ministry for External Affairs will show us that that Ministry is extending its usefulness, its initiative, and its work throughout the world, and that our representatives abroad are everywhere animated with that spirit, and that they are pushing the interests of Ireland along the lines of peaceful development all over the world, towards the general propagation and strengthening of the same principles upon which we have entered in joining this Commonwealth of free nations.
I wish a reply to a question. The gist of the question, I think, was indicated in Deputy MacCartan's query—that is, who are our representatives abroad? Are our representatives Trade Consuls, and, if so, do their salaries come out of this Vote; or are they, as it seems they might be so regarded, items of expenses to be defrayed by the Ministry of Trade and Commerce? It is very hard to make these things definite water-tight compartments. I think a little information as to what is involved in travelling and incidental expenses and telegrams would be extremely illuminative. I would like also to support the suggestion of Deputy Sears that the question of Ireland's attitude towards the League of Nations should have serious consideration from the Minister. I have some sympathy with the latter part of Deputy Johnson's inquiry when he asked was this particular Ministry taking its part in the development of world policy. Though I am inclined to think that it is somewhat premature to anticipate what advantage either to ourselves or to Europe will accrue in face of these things at the present time, I take it that the note in the Estimate about the organisation of this Department being considered does not certainly indicate an intention as to whether the Department should or should not be considered. We have got a certain international status. It is natural, I think, at the beginning of things, and I think it is very important and vitally important in regard to our position as a factor in international affairs, that our relations with other parts of the world, instead of being curtailed, should be very much increased; and I think the exposition of a policy towards that end, which will indicate that our relations abroad are such as make for an increase of our commercial relations with other States, and make for the increase of our friendship with other States, should strengthen our influence as a factor towards peace. I think the policy outlined by this Ministry indicating that would justify an even larger Vote than is now before the Dáil. It is one of the most important matters which concerns us. This is a Vote which has implications, and may have ramifications of the most far-reaching consequences. I think this is not at all an extravagant Estimate, and I hope, if circumstances warrant, we shall see that value is yet obtained, and I think the Vote in the next Estimates will be substantially increased on the present one.
I do not quarrel with this Estimate at all, but as a student of history I would like to say that a League of Nations has always been a League of Tyrants, if not in its initial stages at least in its development. I quite fail to see, or to appreciate the millennium which a League of Nations is presumed to bring about. Ireland's position in this matter should, as far as regards the League of Nations, be practically more or less the position of the United States— that is, while always keeping in mind its own relation to foreign countries and encouraging Trade and Commerce as much as possible, it must also keep itself clear of all foreign combinations of any kind whatsoever.
The item here under B, "Travelling and Incidental Expenses and Telegrams," does not exactly convey what it covers. It covers the cost of maintenance of establishments in foreign countries. The use of the word "Dominion" for countries such as South Africa and Canada defines them as Free Nations. Ireland also is a Free Nation. The application of the word "Dominion" to Ireland does not change Ireland's position, but the application of that word to Ireland changes the meaning of the word "Dominion."
With regard to Conferences, we have not received reports of these conferences from the British. We have only been in our present position for one week, and I may just as well say, that during that time we were much concerned with "sacro egoisms," and far too much concerned with the affairs that are of too immediate importance to us to take up these other matters. We naturally presume that the British representatives in Conferences, in places where we are not represented, will convey to us a full report of what took place. With regard to the message from the Pope to the Governor-General it should be understood that the Governor-General was in correspondence with the Pope prior to his taking up his position here. It was an individual personal correspondence, and I understand the Governor-General in that correspondence, conveyed the news of his appointment to the Pope. If it was conducted in any other circumstances I presume the Pope would have thought fit to communicate it to us through the proper channel.
May I make a suggestion? I know of a similar case of Sean Leslie who was sent by Cardinal Gibbon to take a letter and deliver it in Washington; he was asked for a copy of that letter by the Secretary of State, and he lied like a gentleman. It was a private communication, but the Secretary of State expected to get a copy of it. I expect that indirect correspondence will always be carried on behind the backs of these gentlemen.
We did actually receive a copy of the letter but I was referring to the channel. Ordinarily it should come through one channel, but as it was a personal correspondence with the Governor-General, before he took up office, it came to him directly. Now the word "organisation" in the footnote referred to by one of the Deputies actually means re-organisation, that is to say, this estimate is presented from the point of view of the Treasury. The Treasury has had no expensive knowledge of our existence up to the present, therefore from their point of view we are being organised. From our point of view we are being re-organised. The functions of the Foreign Affairs Department of the past Dáil were slightly different from ours under the new Dáil. At that time the Foreign Office attempted to attain what we have now, and now we wish to use what we have attained. The Trade Commissioners abroad are under this Department, and the expenses of their Ministry are included in this Estimate. Some months ago, it will be remembered, a motion, or rather a resolution, was brought forward in this Dáil, proposing that as soon as advisable Ireland should proceed to take proper steps with a view to taking her place in the League of Nations. That resolution will be acted upon.
I should like to say——
I understood the Minister was closing the Debate.
I was, as a matter of fact, inclined to criticise the Minister speaking for a Ministry like this who really has not dealt with many of the matters raised.
The Deputy had an opportunity of speaking when others were putting points to the Ministry.
With all due respect I think it is right that if a member of the Dáil thinks he has not got sufficient light from the Minister, he has a right to press for further information and to ask the Minister further questions. I do not think it is at all a proper course that Deputies on this side when these Estimates are brought forward, should be content with asking questions of the Minister when the Minister has merely formally moved the Estimate and then after a few questions are asked, the Minister replies and that then the closure comes into operation.
Not necessarily except as a matter of arrangement. But the Deputy has a right to continue if he so desires.
I want to criticise, and I stand for the rights of Deputies to criticise. I am not quite satisfied, or at all, with the replies of the Minister. I have said that this Ministry is a first-class one and an important one, and I rise to ask whether it is a real Ministry or a sham one. I want to know the work it intends to do. The Minister says its work is not going to be like the Ministry of the Second Dáil. The work for that is gone, and the work for the new Ministry is beginning. I want to know—because the new Ministry will be the test of our status, not only in the British Commonwealth, but internationally—whether it is to be a play at having a Ministry of External Affairs in order that we may cod ourselves into the belief that we are really an independent State functioning in international affairs or not. The Minister has said that the Consuls are Trade Consuls, and that they are functioning under this Ministry. I want to ask him if their whole function is merely that of Commercial Consuls, or whether they have political functions in the countries to which they have been allocated? Is it the intention of the Ministry that they should have political functions or be commercial representatives; and, if the latter, would not their proper Ministry be the Ministry of Trade and Commerce, which ought not to be concerned with the political relations of the State? I should like to ask whether it was the intention of the Minister to appoint anyone with an ambassadorial function to, say, Washington or Paris? The old and the new relations between Ireland and the United States have been very close. They undoubtedly should be as close, apart altogether from the question of contiguity as between Canada and the United States, and I should like to have an answer as to whether the Ministry propose to make such appointments, whether in Washington or Paris or Petrograd, or anywhere else. There is another thing upon which we must insist: that a definite stand be made by the Executive Council. Are we going to have any kind of representative in London? I think that will be the hallmark of our equal status with Great Britain—whether or not we are going to have a political representative in London. Another thing I should like an answer on is whether the functions carried out by this Ambassador in relation to, say, France, Germany, or the United States, or Canada, or Australia, will be carried out in relation to Great Britain by this Ambassador, or whether they will be carried out by the President of the Ministry, or by whom shall they be carried out? All those things are bound up in the exercise of our status. It is quite true that there is very much to be done here, and the Constitution is so critical that a great deal of attention should not be given to continental or international issues, but we have got to stand up on certain rights, and especially on those rights, because things done there may very seriously affect us here. It is universally known, in spite of the statement to the contrary in the Governor-General's address, that part of the unemployment here in Ireland, as everywhere else, is not due to local conditions at all but to international conditions, to the mess that was made by the Great Powers after the Treaty of Versailles, and for that reason it is necessary that we should pay attention to the development on the Continent, because this may affect us, and therefore, it is not right for the Ministry to say we have got our hands full here, and it is no business of ours. It is our business, and it is the business of the country. I hope that the want of seriousness in the Minister's reply to Deputy Johnson about the Dominion of the Irish Free State— whatever that means; I do not know what it means except it is the Dominion over the Twenty-six Counties—will not be a sign that this Ministry and its business is going to be treated lightly, because this Dáil deserves better treatment than that. There is no such thing to Irishmen as the Dominion of the Irish Free State in the sense of the Dominion of Canada. I want the Minister to reply on those points I have raised, particularly on the question of Ambassador at Washington, the question of political representatives in London, and if such are to be appointed by this or any other Ministry; also the method of communication between Great Britain and the Irish Free State. We have got unfortunately to look on with, as it were, two sets of eyes upon the Government that sits at Westminster. We have got to consider them as being the Imperial Government. We have got in the other connection to consider them as the National Government of the State next door to it. Our relations with them therefore would be delicate in some respects, and intricate in other respects. The contracts that acknowledge other places ought to be of a certain kind. I want to know if, and when, the Irish Free State Government is dealing with the Government of Westminster as the National Government of England, what are to be our methods of communication with them?
Before the Minister replies I would like to call his attention to the fact that, through an oversight no doubt, he omitted to answer some of the questions put by a previous Deputy. One question is how many representatives there were and where they were placed.
Deputy O'Shannon failed to understand that in my last remarks I was replying to a definite question from Deputy Dr. MacCartan, who from his knowledge of the work of the old Dáil, knew that we had representatives abroad under the Department of Industry and under the Department of Foreign Affairs. The representatives under Industry were Trade Commissioners and those under Foreign Affairs, for want of a better word, were described as Diplomatic Commissioners. He asked if the Trade Commissioners were also under this Department, and my reply was they were. I was just definitely specifying them as distinct from the others. Deputies asked if we proposed to have Diplomatic Representatives in Paris, Washington and London. The reply is in the affirmative. When dealing with the British Government as the Government of England I suppose we will deal with them through our London representative, who will shortly, I hope, be appointed. My reply in regard to the use of the word "Dominions" was not intended to be light but it was merely intended to be clear. Deputy Figgis asked me the number and whereabouts of our representatives. In Paris we have two, Diplomatic and Trade; in Belgium we have one, Trade; in Holland one, Trade; in Germany one, Trade; in Italy two, one Trade and the other I may call Diplomatic; in Spain one, and in the United States Trade and Diplomatic, and in Switzerland we have a representative, who is watching and giving us information with regard to the League of Nations.
Evidently the Minister did not quite catch my point about Trade representatives. I asked him if the present Trade representatives have any political functions.
No, they have not. As in most places where they are we have a Trade representative also, and the Trade representative confines himself to trade, and the diplomatic people, or whatever you may call them, to diplomatic affairs.
Motion made and question put: "That the Dáil in Committee, having considered the Estimate of the amount required in the year ending 31st March, 1923, to pay the salaries and expenses of the Ministry of External Affairs recommend that £25,000 be adopted in due course by the Oireachtas."
Agreed.
The Dáil will now go out of Committee.