I move: "That a sum not exceeding £25,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1924, for expenditure in respect of Secret Service. (£25,000 had been voted on account.) I have answered questions put by Deputies in connection with this particular item, and I explained the last day that I would answer any such question. I think they are satisfied with that.
COMMITTEE ON FINANCE. - SECRET SERVICE.
I do not know that the Dáil ought to be quite satisfied about this matter. Deputies who inquired did get a certain amount of information, but I do not think it went very far. When the Vote came up on a previous occasion an explanation was given which everybody, I believe, was quite satisfied with, but I do not think that that is the position now, not by a long way. Certainly no such explanation was forthcoming this time as on the last time, and it is necessary, I think, in justice to the Dáil and to the citizens, that we should have some further explanation and I would urge the Minister to give that explanation."
This is not a Vote that is explained in any other House that I know of. In this particular case I have items of the various expenditures which I am prepared to give to any Deputy, as I had been on the last occasion with regard to the other Vote, but this particular Vote in any other representative House such as this is not the subject of explanation, and it ought not to be. I have the items here, and I will give them to any Deputy who wishes to get them.
I am sorry that I was not able to follow everything the Minister said on this Vote. £50,000 for secret service is a decrease from £220,000 voted last year. Explanations were given regarding the very large sum included under this head last year which were accepted by Deputies, but we were assured that it was certainly not a vote for espionage. There is now the sum of £50,000, none of which is to be spent for the purpose for which the large sum was spent last year, but £50,000 is a very large sum to spend on espionage. £50,000 is an extraordinary large sum to spend on secret service for a country of this size. I assume that we have not sent spies to the Chancellories of Europe. I assume that we have not sent spies to all parts of the world, and I cannot think, in the absence of that overseas espionage, what £50,000 is required for. It may be true that the practice in other countries has been to vote large sums for Secret Service, and to ask no questions. I do not know how this sum per head of the population compares with Votes in other countries per head of their population, but I would have hoped that our position would not require a sum of £50,000 to be spent on Secret Service, which I assume, in the absence of contrary information, is for espionage. Three and one quarter million of people, no army for overseas service, no necessity to find cut what other countries are doing with their armies, and their navies, and their fortifications, and yet an expenditure of £50,000 on spies. I say it is altogether too much, and I move that this Estimate be deferred back for further consideration and reduction, and some detailed information to be given to the Dáil. I am not going so far as to say that the State may not spend any sum on Secret Service, but I dissent entirely from the suggestion that any sum of this kind of £50,000 should be so spent.
I would like to correct any misapprehensions that might possibly be in the minds of the Deputies by reason of the statement that has been made by Deputy Johnson. On the last day, three or four weeks ago, when this Vote was on, I undertook to give Deputies who would apply to me any information that they thought it was their duty to get in connection with this Vote. To any Deputy who so applied, I gave the information, and it is scarcely fair to a Government to have the statement that has been made by Deputy Johnson made and not met or answered, having regard to the fact that I agreed to give all reasonable information to settle any reasonable doubts or scruples Deputies might have with regard to this Vote. There are no agents of the Government in the Chancellories of Europe or elsewhere, to find out what prospects our Army might have in the event of a war taking place with any of these countries. We are not interested in such matters. We have no schemes of conquest in our minds, and neither have we any fears in our minds that in these Chancellories there are any sinister methods behind the Governments. We are only concerned with the stability of the State here. As far as I have been able to discover from the figures, there is a relatively small sum which by any stretch of the imagination or any elaborate exaggeration that might be made by any person would not have the colour or tinge, or could not have the term "spy" applied to it. As far as I have been able to see from the lists supplied to me, the sum of about £140 is not explained with the same degree of detail as the other items. I have undertaken to give the information to any Deputy, and even though a great number of Deputies have not applied for that information at any time, never would I rebuke them, or refuse to give them reasonable information on a reasonable enquiry on a vote of this character. But I do say, if there be a privilege at all attached to the Executive Council, there is a privilege with regard to an item of this character. The amount, having regard to the circumstances of the case, is a relatively small sum of money, not a very large sum, but the largest sum spent to date, from the information, before me, is £6,050. It is a matter, which if I informed Deputies as to the reason of its disbursement, or the service it is applied to, they would shrug their shoulders and say it is really not Secret Service at all. I am still prepared to give that information, but I think it is due to the Executive Council and to the public that we should not lie under the inference that might be drawn by Deputy Johnson's speech that we are using this money to reward spies. That is not the case.
I think the President is really attempting to misinterpret Deputy Johnson on the matter. The President said the Executive Council was only following the example of other countries in not giving much public information on a vote of this kind. That may be perfectly true, but it is well known that the main reason why that information is not given in other countries is because no Government desires, if it can possibly help, other Governments to know what exact measures of spying it is taking against these other Governments. Deputy Johnson has said he assumed that it was for no such purpose that this vote or the greater of it was designed.
In other words, the Vote is for internal purposes—for internal espionage. Now, while it may be satisfactory to Deputies to get full details if they ask for them privately, it is not, I think, in the public interest that the public should be kept in the dark as to the main lines on which this money has been or is to be spent. It is in the public interest to know whether it is a political service or a military service. We all know the Army has got its intelligence service; we do not know whether or not that service is covered by this Vote. We know that other arms of the State, such as the police, for instance, have got their intelligence service and their secret service: we do not know if it is for them this money is being provided. Then there is the ordinary police anti-criminal secret service. There is one thing that the people of this country have to get an assurance of, and the putting down of a Vote like this, without giving any public explanation, makes them think that there is being carried on in this country what was carried on under another regime—a purely political secret service, not altogether against criminals or people who attempt to further their ends by violent and illegal methods but that there are possibilities of quite a different order of political secret service altogether; and while an Executive Council has certain rights and privileges, it is not proper that the country should not be taken into confidence on some of these things, even if there were only a broad general outline of the particular activity given, without revealing anything that would weaken the position of the State. I think that ought to be given publicly. In other words, the directions in which it is intended that this money should be spent ought to be indicated. It is much better in every sense that people should know exactly where they are and what they are responsible for. After all, when a Deputy gets information of a private nature, it is more or less confidential, and we here in the Dáil should not consider that we are simply the rulers and the governors. When we come in here, anything we know or do is a matter for our own responsibility. There is a responsibility for us outside, and it is only fair and just that that responsibility should be shouldered. It is only fair and just that the people who will have to shoulder it should know exactly what it is. I urge that the Dáil should ask for more consideration in this respect, because we are not here merely as a body of individuals who come and hear certain things and get certain information for our own private satisfaction; we come here to do business and get information for the public satisfaction.
I would like to say that there is not any of this money used for political purposes, as intimated by the Deputy, I have no misgivings regarding the matters which have been mentioned by Deputy O'Shannon. I quite understand it is open to severe criticism, by people who have peculiar mentality, to allege all sorts of things against the Government. Whatever Government is in power it will have to have a service such as this. I do not know, and I have not been able to find out, that any Government has given, or offered to give, as much information as I have offered to give in regard to this matter. I do it all in good faith, believing in the confidence of the members of the Dáil and believing that they are entitled to this information. It is quite possible that another man in the same position, or another Executive Council, might not be so willing. There are; as Deputies know occasions when certain expenditure has got to be made which it is not desirable in the public interest that people should know. Whoever has the responsibility of Government at a particular time may be placed in exactly that position. It may be while one would ask for a sum far in excess of what is required, none of it might be spent, or a very small portion of it might be spent, in one year. For instance a sum of £220,000 was voted last year, and not £130,000 in that respect was spent. When this particular service was entered in our list, the largest portion of it was not even in contemplation. It was found that a certain service was required and there was no other means of discharging the cost of that service except through this Vote. Having regard to that fact, and the fact that there is nothing to hide but there is a certain position which had to be conserved and which is not conserved in the interests of the present Executive Council, I do not see my way to publish broadcast the details of this particular Estimate. I am prepared to give reasonable information to any reasonable inquiry, and if Deputies were to approach me on the subject and get the information that I am prepared to give, they would be satisfied too, I am sure.
Every Government must have some fund at its disposal for purposes of this kind, a purpose to which, I have no doubt, this money is devoted. So long as we keep the amount within reasonable bounds, in my opinion the Government ought to get what they ask for subject, in our judgment, to whether or not the amount asked for is an amount they could possibly require for the purpose within the 12 months. It would frustrate all the objects of such a fund as this if, in the middle of the year, the Government were to come to the Dáil and say: "we want such and such a sum for Secret Service." It would at once appear from the facts existing at the time what it was the sum would be used for, and then it would altogether cease to be secret. It equally ceases to be secret if they have to disclose at the beginning of the year the kind of purpose for which they intend to use it, and once one concedes that there must be some money available for Secret Service purposes, then I think the only question we can ask ourselves is whether the amount put down is so grossly exorbitant that it ought to be refused. When I recollect the fact that only a year ago we voted £220,000 for this purpose, it seems to me to demonstrate a very reasonable exercise of economy on the part of the Executive that they have reduced it to about one-quarter of that amount this year. Although a good deal of this year has gone already, they have only expended five or six thousand pounds for this purpose. Whatever surplus is left over after the expenditure of this year goes into the Exchequer.
It is not as if we were voting money which they could hoard for us in future years. In this case whatever is not expended comes back to the Exchequer, and if they come for a new Vote next year they must tell us how much they spent last year. If it should appear in this year, which I fancy would be a normal year, that instead of £50,000, only £25,000 will be spent then you could say that next year it could be cut down to £25,000 or £20,000. If they come down such a big amount in one year, then the Dáil would say that they would be able to take a further slice off next year.
I think it is quite unreasonable to ask the Minister to publish the details of this Estimate. He has been extremely fair to the Dáil in offering to give any Deputy who applies to him full details of how this money is spent. I do not think we should ask or go further in the matter than that. I do not think it would be right to ask him to publish the details of the money set apart for secret service when he is quite willing to let us know how that money is spent. It may be that some of us would object to the amount as being unreasonable. But at the same time we are able to form an opinion of that by going to the Minister and getting these figures from him. I certainly intend to support the Minister in this Vote.
It would be idle, I suppose, to paint the lily. I am prepared to support this Vote, because I do believe that any Government would require some such fund as this. I do not think it is excessive. I am not rising to question the amount. I think one is bound to deplore the necessity. But the necessity is generally admitted, and has been admitted by Deputy Johnson, and I think is resident in the fact. I am not rising, therefore, to question it. but merely to ask for information on one matter that I think the President would do well to mention. I do hope he will take my assurance that I am raising the matter in no fractious spirit. It is this: When an item like this, labelled under the general label "Secret Service," with no sub-heading and no particulars, is passed by this Dáil, what exactly is the procedure adopted in the Accountancy and Audit Departments in order that it might be known by the Accountant and Comptroller and Auditor-General's Department whether the sum is being put into the pocket which the Dáil, trusting to the Executive Council's discretion in a matter of this kind— this Executive Council, or any Executive Council—desires it should be put? It is a matter that does lie in the control of the public purse. I am sure he will give us information on that matter. It is really at the bottom of the whole thing, and would be a matter for elucidation in the Dáil.
The amendment I have put forward is that this estimate be referred back for reconsideration with a view to reduction. The amount would run to about £1,000 a week for a year. The Minister has said, I think, and Deputy FitzGibbon understood him, as I understood him, to say that only about £6,000 had been spent under this head up to date, and nearly four months of the year have passed. Why, then, is £50,000 required? Contingencies presumably? Possibly that the Secret Service money may be required? I think it is too much. I have admitted that it is possibly too much to expect that a modern State can do its work wholly with its heart, if it has a heart, on its sleeve; but I am not prepared to admit that a sum of £50,000 is required by this State for Secret Service. I have not asked for all the details to be published. I have asked the Dáil to disagree with a sum of £50,000 being voted for this purpose. The Minister has said that he would give as much information as it was reasonably possible to give to the Deputies if they would make inquiries from him, and more than other Ministers may be willing to give. That is not satisfactory either. Deputies obtaining information of that kind are thereby precluded from raising the question of any matter which may be divulged; in their receipt of that information they become parties to the expenditure of the moneys, whether they approve of the purpose or not. There cannot be much discussion on a matter of this kind. It is really a question of whether we are willing to vote such a sum whether it is considered large or small, is a matter of opinion, such a sum as £50,000, or £1,000 per week, for a Service of which we know nothing, and shall know nothing. Even when the accounts are audited the figures or details will not be given to the Dáil, because it is a Secret Service. It is a vote of a sum of which we know nothing, and shall know nothing, and I say that a sum of £50,000 is too much to vote away in the Dáil.
In reply to Deputy Figgis, the operations regarding the expenditure in reference to this money is that the matter is first brought before the Executive Council. Arrangements are then made in the Department of whatever Minister is concerned. The responsible Minister shall personally sign or transmit to the Minister for Finance a form showing the amount to be expended. The Minister for Finance signs it. Then, after the check that takes place in the Department responsible for the expenditure there is no other check, nor will accounts be published regarding the expenditure of this money. That is the usual normal course in other countries. Regarding what Deputy Johnson stated, the question arises as to whether the amount is excessive. One cannot express an opinion about that without knowing in what particular circumstance the money is expended. The next question that would arise is—is value received? Well, I am satisfied that there is, and I believe any Deputy to whom I would disclose the figures would be equally satisfied. The third question is—is the money well and properly expended? This would lead, to some extent, to the question that has been raised by Deputy O'Shannon. I am obliged to Deputy FitzGibbon and to Deputy Sir James Craig for their support of this vote, and also to Deputy Figgis. The time might come at any period during the year, when it might be necessary to have a sum of money available for the purposes of a national character. I have stated more than once here as well as elsewhere, that it was my hope that this Dáil either now existing, or in the future to be elected, would be a Dáil composed of people who would accept a certain share of national responsibility with regard to the matter. I am not at all sure that other people would agree with giving the information that I am willing to give Deputies who would put a question privately to me with regard to these services.
I know that there is political insight, and sometimes a political scruple, in this country, which is not so well evidenced in other countries, and so many people in this country know so many people, that suspicion is sometimes well grounded. In that case, I think, there is a certain candour advisable in dealing with public affairs. That candour entails responsibility. The Dáil must accept that as the Executive Council accepts its responsibilities. I think it is in the interest of the public that that candour should be accepted. If members do not agree with that, it is open to them to wash their hands of the responsibility of providing the Executive Council with a considerable sum of money. None of the money has been wasted, and it has not been used in the sense that people associate secret service in their minds. It has not been used in the sense in which secret service was associated in the old days in the Castle. It is money spent with one purpose only in view, and that is the best interest, the best good, and the safety of the citizens of the State. To that extent, I believe, it is our duty to insert a pretty considerable sum of money in the Estimates. It would not be sufficient if it was used in the sense of the criticism made by Deputy O'Shannon.
Amendment put. The Dáil divided: Tá, 11; Níl, 36.
Tá
|
Tomás de Nógla.Riobárd Ó Deaghaidh.Tomás Mac Eoin.Liam Ó Briain.Tomás Ó Conaill.Aodh Ó Cúlacháin. |
Liam Ó Daimhín.Cathal Ó Seanáin.Domhnall Ó Muirgheasa.Risteárd Mac Fheorais.Domhnall Ó Ceallacháin. |
Níl
|
Liam T. Mac Cosgair.Seán Ó Duinnín.Mícheál Ó hAonghusa.Domhnall Ó Mocháin.Seán Ó hAodha.Séamus Breathnach.Pádraig Mag Ualghairg.Darghal Figes.Deasmhumhain Mac Gearailt.Seán Ó Ruanaidh.Pilib Mac Cosgair.Domhnall Mac Cárthaigh.Maolmhuire Mac Eochadha.Sir Séamus Craig.Gearóid Mac Giobúin.Liam Thrift.Eoin Mac Néill.Liam Mag Aonghusa. |
Pádraig Ó hÓgáin.Seoirse Mac Niocaill.Fionán Ó Loingsigh.Séamus Ó Cruadhlaoich.Criostoir Ó Broin.Risteárd Mac Liam.Próinsias Bulfin.Séamus Ó Dóláin.Próinsias Mag Aonghusa.Eamon Ó Dúgáin.Peadar Ó hAodha.Séumas Ó Murchadha.Seosamh Mac Giolla Bhrighde.Liam Mac Sioghaird.Tomás O Domhnaill.Earnán de Blaghd.Uinseann de Faoite.Domhnall Ó Broin. |
Amendment declared lost.
Motion put, and agreed to.