Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 21 Nov 1924

Vol. 9 No. 15

NOMINATION OF MINISTER FOR DEFENCE.

On behalf of the President, I tender to the Dáil his resignation of the position of Minister for Defence, and his nomination to that office and to membership of the Executive Council of Deputy Peter Hughes. I move:

That the Dáil assents to the nomination of Deputy Peter Hughes as Minister for Defence and member of the Executive Council.

Before proceeding to give the assent of the Dáil to this nomination, I would like to have some kind of assurance from the President, or the Vice-President, or the prospective Minister, or somebody on behalf of the Ministry, that the promise given some time ago with respect to pensions for ex-Army men—the Amending Bill —will be introduced immediately. It has been hanging fire for quite a long time, and the people who ought to be benefiting by such a measure are gradually getting into a state of despondency, and even worse in many cases, breaking down physically. I think we should have some definite assurance on this matter before giving formal assent to this proposition.

My information is that the Bill of which the Deputy speaks is in draft and is ready to be forwarded to the Finance Department for examination. Probably the delay before its introduction will not be more than ten days or a fortnight.

Cannot the Minister expedite the Bill? It has been in draft, I suppose, for quite a long time. The Ministry of Finance sometimes delays a very long time indeed before assenting to a measure in which it is concerned. A fortnight from now will be the end of November or the beginning of December, and there is danger in such a case that this Bill will not be passed this part of the Session. It might reasonably be expected, if it is not to be introduced until the beginning of December, that it will not be passed before the Christmas adjournment or prorogation.

The Deputy will appreciate that it is a Bill involving a very large amount of money, and consequently one calling for careful consideration by the Department which is primarily concerned with discharging liabilities. We will undertake that there will be no unnecessary delay in the introduction of the Bill, and that everything possible will be done to expedite it.

I would like to get some assurance from the Minister that the making of this appointment will not delay the Defence Forces Bill. That Bill has got to become law, under existing circumstances, before March. It ought to have been introduced by now, I think, if it is to be properly discussed, because the setting up of the Defence Forces, on a permanent and not a temporary basis, is a matter of great importance, which will give rise to a very serious discussion, both here and in the Seanad, where there are numbers of Senators with military experience. Is it intended to force it through in January and February? If so, I doubt whether it will be properly discussed. Is it intended to bring in another temporary Bill prolonging the life of the existing temporary provision, and giving us proper time to discuss it later? I would be glad if the Minister could tell us anything on that point.

It is hoped that this Bill will have a Second Reading before the adjournment. If it is proposed to proceed with the Bill, and not to ask for an extension of the temporary Bill, we will certainly aim at a Second Reading before the adjournment, so that the Committee Stage can be taken in January and February. The question of proceeding to enact a permanent measure is still somewhat in the balance, and I would not like to be taken as giving a definite decision on the matter to-day. But if the decision be to go ahead we will try to secure that the Bill will get a Second Reading before the recess at Christmas.

The Minister will appreciate that we refrained from asking for a great deal of information on the Army Estimates this year, information that we otherwise might have sought, were it not for the fact that we looked forward to having an opportunity of raising the matter on this Bill.

On this motion I would like to take this opportunity to ask the new Minister whether he will reconsider some decisions——

On a point of order, there is no new Minister, and there is no one to whom the question can be addressed at the moment.

There is no new Minister. The Dáil has not yet assented to his nomination.

I was about to say on this motion for the appointment of a new Minister that I wish to take an opportunity of asking the Government to give the new Minister freedom to reconsider some of the decisions given concerning compensation claims against the Army, and in which the Army repudiate liability. I refer to cases where military lorries have done damage to property in Dublin, and in which the defence has been made by the Ministry of Defence that the lorries were not out on official duty. Through that technicality the citizens have been deprived of compensation for damage done to their property, or to their person. It is a serious matter, and there is a number of cases in which people are hard hit, and in which the Government made the defence that the driver was not out officially, and that, therefore, they could not meet the claim. I submitted several such cases, and when they came along the Government said they could not meet the claims. I hope these claims will be reconsidered sympathetically by the new Minister.

I would like to press for a more definite statement on the matter raised by Deputy Johnson with the Vice-President, that is the Army Pensions Amendment Bill. It is three months ago since the President, speaking here, promised that that Bill should be brought in at once. I am aware of a number of cases where the widows and other dependents of National Army men who died from disease contracted while on active service in the Army, have been left destitute. I have seen correspondence from the Minister for Defence giving an assurance to the widows and other dependents that this Army Pensions Bill would be introduced without delay in order to relieve the hardships and starvation that these people are suffering from in the position in which they find themselves. I think it is only fair that the Minister should state at this stage and before the Dáil has given its assent to the nomination that he has moved, that a Bill will be introduced into the Dáil during the present Session, so that the dependents of these people would get the relief they need. The Dáil is entitled to that assurance, and so are those people concerned, especially in view of the correspondence that, to my knowledge, has passed between the Minister and the people interested in this matter in at least three or four cases that I know.

Does it occur to the Deputy that I am not in a position to guarantee the passing of a Bill? I can guarantee the introduction of a Bill, and I have guaranteed that. I find it hard to say in what way I could give a more definite assurance than the assurance I have given to Deputy Johnson, namely, that there will be no unnecessary delay over the introduction of this Bill, and that everything possible will be done to expedite it. After the Bill has been introduced, the matter of the further progress rests largely with the Dáil or Seanad and not with the Minister or with the Executive Council collectively.

The Minister surely is aware that the Ministry has control of the time of the Dáil to a very great extent, and that it is within his power to expedite the passing of the Bill provided it is generally satisfactory. Accordingly the Executive Council can, if they wish, expedite the passing of the Bill.

I hope the Deputy will be amenable in the matter of Standing Orders when the Bill is introduced.

Question put and agreed to.
Top
Share