Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 12 Dec 1924

Vol. 9 No. 26

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE. - POLICE FORCES AMALGAMATION BILL, 1924.—SECOND STAGE.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

I move the Second Reading of the Police Forces Amalgamation Bill, 1924. On the First Reading of this Bill I explained that its main purpose was to secure unity of control of the two police forces functioning in the Saorstát. It will be appreciated that two artificially divided areas of police jurisdiction, each with a separate headquarters police staff, necessitate a considerable amount of wasteful routine and it is difficult to achieve the co-ordination of services which is essential to efficiency. In framing the Bill, care was taken to effect the amalgamation of the two existing forces rather than have the abolition of either. Every member of both forces, when amalgamation takes effect, will become a member of the amalgamated force which will be called the Gárda Síochána.

At present, the senior headquarters officers of the D.M.P. consist of a Commissioner and an Assistant Commissioner, and the senior officers of the Gárda Síochána include a Commissioner, a Deputy Commissioner, and two Assistant Commissioners. The senior officers in the amalgamated force will be one Commissioner, two Deputy Commissioners, and two Assistant Commissioners. The present Commissioner of the Gárda Síochána will become the Commissioner of the amalgamated force, the Commissioner of the D.M.P., and the Deputy Commissioner of the Gárda Síochána will become Deputy Commissioners of the amalgamated force, and the two Assistant Commissioners of the Gárda Síochána will become Assistant Commissioners of the amalgamated force. All others, members of the existing forces, will become, on the appointed day, members of corresponding rank in the amalgamated force.

Future appointments of officers will be made by the Executive Council. Existing members of the D.M.P., and the Gárda Síochána, will continue to be entitled to pay and allowances at the rates now respectively applying to those forces, and no member of the D.M.P. will become liable to serve, without his own consent, outside the Dublin Metropolitan area. The existing pension enactments applying to the D.M.P. will continue to apply to those members of that force who become members of the amalgamated force, and for the purpose of these enactments, the service of such members in the amalgamated force will be deemed to be service in the D.M.P. Future pay and allowance orders for the amalgamated force may be made by the Minister for Justice, with the sanction of the Minister for Finance, and copies of such orders must be laid before the Oireachtas.

Future pension orders may similarly be made, but will require to be approved by resolution of each House. The present D.M.P. regulations as to promotion, discipline and such matters will continue to apply to the members of the amalgamated force stationed in the D.M.P. area, while the Gárda Síochána regulations on these subjects will apply to members stationed outside that area. The power to make future regulations on these matters is conferred on the Minister for Justice, subject to the approval of the Executive Council. With the exception of Section 16, the remaining provisions are merely minor consequential adaptations of existing enactments. Section 16 deals with the future of the Dublin police rate, and proposes that this rate shall abate by one penny yearly from the end of the financial year following the commencement of the operation of the Act, and expiring at the end of the eighth year.

There were certain erroneous statements made recently which I would like to correct. The statements were made in the Press relative to retirements from the D.M.P. It was stated that about 100 of the old force—meaning the force as it was transferred to the Irish Government—now remained. The facts are that out of 1,124 members of the force serving at the date of transfer, over 400 are still serving; 558 retired in consequence of the change of Government. That was the reason given for their retirement. Over 100 went in the ordinary way on retirement, or died, or were discharged.

About 40 have been refused retirement with compensation for various reasons, and their cases will be affected by proceedings at present before the High Courts. It was stated in the Press that owing to the numerous retirements, promotion was now so rapid that a man could become a station sergeant after eighteen months. Excluding the Detective Branch, none of the existing sergeants has less than sixteen years' service, and no sergeant has less than four years' service. I thought it as well to correct the statements which have appeared recently.

The exact figures as to retirement under Article 10 of the Treaty are, 11 Inspectors, 25 Station Sergeants, 95 Sergeants, and 427 Constables, giving a total of 558. There are forty cases pending that will be affected by the decision of the case at present before the Court. I mentioned to-day that one reason for my desire to obtain the Second Reading of this Bill before the Recess was that I would take certain action, administratively, if the principle of this Bill is approved by the Dáil which I would not otherwise take. Deputies are aware, from personal knowledge of their constituencies and from the daily Press, of the need for greater security of person and property in certain areas of the country. The particular relevancy of this Bill to that question is, that under the Bill the Detective Branch of the Metropolitan Police, with an increased membership, will be enabled to function through the country. Strictly and legally, they could so function at the moment, but unless I had a reasonable certainty of this Bill becoming law I would not attempt to use that force in areas in which the Gárda Síochána at present serve. There are human difficulties in the way of that. It would be, in general, undesirable that the members of one force would be actively operating in an area in which members of another force are serving. If I felt that within a few months the two forces would be likely to be fused and amalgamated that particular difficulty would tend to disappear. It is probably generally recognised that the unarmed and uniform force which operates in the country requires some stiffening and falling back, vide, the performance of a criminal who resorts to arms in his crime. It will also be recognised that it is not a proper state of affairs that the only stiffening and falling back should be the Army. It is, I submit, bad for the Army and bad for the people that the Army should be called on to intervene frequently in what is substantially a peace situation, and it is wrong that the military machine would be called upon to move every time some thug holds up a bank or post office, or perpetrates some robbery with arms in a rural area. The change of enabling the Detective Branch of the Metropolitan Police, or rather what has been the Detective Branch of the Metropolitan Police, to operate in the country in cases of the more serious forms of crime will tend to diminish the occasions on which the military would be called on to intervene in the ordinary life of the country.

I would like to assure Deputies that there is a very full appreciation of the fact that when you put arms into the possession of men who do not wear uniform, and when you put arms into the hands of men who have no particular badge or insignia to distinguish them from ordinary civilians, you take on a responsibility with regard to the personnel of such branch or organisation which is greater even than that which you must accept with regard to your uniformed forces. I undertake that, in the case of this detective branch, there will be the closest scrutiny of the character of the men who are recruited. I recognise fully the necessity for that, but I recognise also, and I ask the Deputies to recognise, that one cannot expect the Gárda Síochána to continue facing, with their bare hands, so to speak, the armed criminal, the man who uses arms in the performance of his crime. I hope that the supplementing of the unarmed force with plain clothes detectives, who will carry and use arms when necessary, will have good reactions on the general peace of the country and on the security of person and property to which citizens are entitled, citizens of rural areas being as much entitled to it as citizens of any other area. Deputy Gorey will appreciate a remark of that kind. If the Dáil, in reasonable proportion, or by a reasonable majority, approves of the principle of this Bill, I will not wait for its final passing before I commence to take administrative action tending towards a complete fusion of the forces. I want to draw attention to the fact that for the ordinary member of the Metropolitan Police the change will be very slight. His duties will remain the same and the scope of his duties will remain the same. It is simply a fusion at the top, a fusion at headquarters. To every existing member of the Metropolitan Police there is guaranteed by the Bill, security of tenure in the metropolitan area. He will not be asked to serve outside that area without his own consent. Recruiting in future will be to a single and amalgamated force, and those who recruit in future may be sent to any part of the area in which the force serves. I do not know that I have anything particular to add, but I will be glad to endeavour to meet any point that may be raised.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The question is: "That the Bill be read a Second Time."

Major COOPER

I am very reluctant to occupy the time of the Dáil at such a late hour, but this Bill raises one or two points of very considerable importance. To begin with, this is the third Bill which we have had in this session dealing with the police forces of the country.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

Might I intervene to say that I promised this Bill when one of the other Bills was before the Dáil.

Major COOPER

I think my recollection is right that the Minister adumbrated the Bill but did not actually promise it. He suggested the possibility of bringing in the Bill. What is the result? We devoted a considerable amount of time to the Gárda Síochána Bill and the Dublin Police Bill, and we are now asked by this Bill to repeal 10 out of 24 Sections of the Gárda Síochána Act and to repeal 7 out of 14 Sections of the Dublin Police Act. That hardly looks like very good staff work, and it hardly indicated very much foresight, that after discussing, debating, and amending these Bills we have to repeal half of them within less than a year. I think the time of the Dáil would have been saved and a more satisfactory solution would have been given if the whole problem was thought out, and if we had one comprehensive Bill dealing with the whole of the police force in the first instance. I would pass from one or two points which seem to be Committee points, but as the Minister has indicated that he is going, if he gets the Second Reading, to carry out the policy of the Bill at once it is not unfair to raise them now. One point is, what is going to happen to the Assistant-Commissioner of the D.M.P.? He appears in the Schedule but not in the Bill, and in the Gárda Síochána Act there are already two Assistant Commissioners with regard to that force, and under Section 7 of this Bill they will continue to be Assistant Commissioners. Is the Assistant Commissioner of the D.M.P. going to be placed on the pension list?

Mr. O'HIGGINS

Yes.

Major COOPER

Then we are inflating the pension Vote, which is already over-inflated. I am glad to have obtained that admission from the Minister. I know that the officer who holds the post has certain rights under the Treaty. I think it is common ground, even on the Ministerial Benches, that the country cannot afford to pay any more pensions. This measure is, in some respects, going to add to the pension list and I think it will stand as a retrograde measure. Then again what is going to happen to the bands of the Metropolitan Police and of the Civic Guard? There is nothing about them here. They exist, I believe, as a matter of private arrangement. Are they both going to continue to exist? Is the Minister going to send the man who plays the trombone in Phoenix Park to track down illicit alcohol in Connemara? Is he going to send the man who plays the big drum in the D.M.P. band to control traffic in College Green? The principal objection which I wish to raise is this. What will be the position of Dublin after this re-organisation? Will there be any officer definitely responsible for the policing of the city of Dublin and the adjoining townships?

If I may recall the past to the recollection of the Dáil, five years ago the City of Belfast was policed by the Royal Irish Constabulary. There was in the City of Belfast an officer of the Royal Irish Constabulary of high rank who held the post of City Commissioner, and who was responsible for the policing of Belfast. Will there be any such official in Dublin? Will there be any one authority to whom the citizens of Dublin and the adjoining townships can turn and regard as a responsible authority? Will there be anyone for suggesting legislation regarding Dublin which applies to Dublin, and Dublin alone? I have heard, and I believe it to be the case, that there is a measure in draft regulating traffic, street trading and other matters in Dublin. What will happen to that measure when there is no longer a Commissioner of Police for Dublin alone? Will it be persevered in? Will it have to be remodelled in order to meet the new conditions? I think we are entitled to know all that before we approve of the principle of the Bill and give it a Second Reading. The population of Dublin Metropolitan district is 400,000, which is considerably more than one-tenth of the whole population of the Saorstát, and I suggest that there is a case for exceptional treatment, a case for creating one officer to whom the citizens of Dublin can go and apply on police questions, and that there should be someone, whether a Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner, or whatever he may be called, in high rank on whom the police charge of Dublin should definitely devolve.

Mr. JOHNSON

I did not think we would have this Bill before us for Second Reading until after the resumption. I know nothing about what is in the Bill except what I have picked up from the Minister. Just looking through it, I think the object of this Second Reading is to get sanction to the proposal that the Minister may allow plain clothes policemen to exercise their talents in country areas, which he says he is at present legally entitled to do. I think it is quite a good procedure for the Minister to acquaint the Dáil with his views as regards the utilisation of a central control—that is, a Dublin control of police for service in the country. If he has the power to do it, and wishes to exercise the power, I think it is well that he has come to the Dáil and given it an opportunity to express its views on that proposal.

I think it is a pity he should mix up that with the motion to give a Second Reading to the Bill, which embodies many more things than that. I think he can make quite a good case for his proposal regarding the utilisation of plain clothes police in the country districts for special service. It is very desirable that the bulk of the policemen in the country should remain unarmed, that that should be the normal, and that only special officers, specially trained, with special qualifications, with restraint, discrimination and self-control, should be allowed to carry arms, and then only under special circumstances. I think it is a pity that that proposal should be bound up with a proposal to carry the Second Reading of this Bill.

There are some of us, of course, who look forward to a time when the police idea will be that of a Civic Guard, but a Civic Guard in the local sense—that is, a local police force, a locally controlled police force. That, I admit, is an idea that is probably a long way from realisation, and it would be folly to attempt a reform of that kind at the moment. I do not think that the proposal to combine in headquarters the D.M.P. and the Gárda Síochána will, to any extent, frustrate that idea being achieved. I agree with Deputy Major Bryan Cooper that in a city like Dublin there ought to be a distinct element of local authority for that force. If there is nothing in the Bill to create that local authority, or to ensure that there shall be a distinct authority applying to Dublin, or the Metropolitan area, then I think it ought to be introduced, but I would wish that the Dáil would not be asked to give a Second Reading to this Bill to-night. I do not know whether there are any other Deputies besides Deputy Bryan Cooper who have had the opportunity of reading the Bill, or have taken such great interest in the Bill——

Major COOPER

Everybody had the opportunity——

Mr. JOHNSON

Opportunities can be made, no doubt, if people can do without sleep.

But I quite seriously say that I do not believe that that Bill had consideration, even sufficient to warrant the Second Reading. Might I suggest to the Minister that it is not tactically wise to announce to the Dáil, and to another House of this legislature, that if the Dáil gives a Second Reading to a measure he will take that as sufficient to justify him in taking special action. I say it is not tactically wise, if he wants to get this measure through the other House. He would be, I think, just as well armed if he would accept a general expression of opinion, without pressing for a Second Reading, that in the special circumstances he is warranted in using the legal powers that he has to send armed police officers on special service to the country districts, and if that general expression of opinion is available for him to-night I would urge that he would not press for a Second Reading of this Bill, which has not had and cannot have to-night the real consideration that such a very important measure should have.

Mr. HEWAT

Undoubtedly this Bill is one that will create a large amount of public interest, and I would agree with Deputy Johnson that having had the measure introduced, I would like to give the public an opportunity of expressing an opinion on the principles of the Bill, and give Deputies rather more time to consider a very important change of this nature. At first blush the principles that underlie the Bill appeal to me as being in a direction which I can entirely approve. The Dublin Metropolitan Police, of course, as an isolated force, is and has always been a very expensive luxury. The Minister in this Bill, I think, also brings home to us in a rather direct way the position of our new State and, perhaps, will bring our minds down to examine the comparatively small resources that are at our disposal, that the Free State as a whole is not large enough to have numerous bodies, each self-contained, that the policing of the area of the Free State, including Dublin, would seem to be a matter that could be very well carried out by one force. On the other hand, in Dublin it would also seem to be desirable that in replacing a body of men, picked men they always were, like the Dublin Metropolitan Police, some arrangement should be made so that the status of the force in the capital of the State should be maintained at a standard somewhat approximating to the traditions of the force in the past. I think the Minister for Justice, in connection with the statement as regards the armed body of men within the organisation of the police, brings home to us that a considerable amount of protection is still required to deal with the cases which are cropping up constantly, as reported in the Press, and the transforming of the organisation of the police into a partly armed force raises a very big question as to this matter of arming police. But if it is desirable, and it would certainly seem to be necessary in the present state of affairs, I think the other side of the question, expenditure, would be something to be considered also. I am sorry if it is out of order——

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I did not say it was out of order at all.

Mr. HEWAT

No, but we have now got to recognise your attitude on some questions; we are under the necessity of having to ask your ruling on them. But I do think that this is a very much bigger measure than the mere measure within the walls of this Bill, because it raises so many thoughts in one's mind. Deputy Bryan Cooper has referred to the fact that there have been two or three Bills dealing with the police forces within a very short space of time. It seems to me that in considering and dealing with this Bill other questions arise which I, as an advocate of economy might like to raise, but which you, sir, would say were out of order at present. I certainly would support the plea of Deputy Johnson that in so far as the subject can be ventilated to-night well and good, but I doubt the wisdom of putting the Bill through its Second Reading in a limited House. I do think that the public have to be taken into account in these matters, and a number of these Bills that come before us are rather hurriedly put through without giving any indication to the public that they are coming on. That is not fair to the public. I think the most valuable work this Dáil has to do to-day is to educate and broaden public opinion on all these points so that we as representatives may get the expression of opinion of people outside the Dáil, and we ought to emphasise to these people the absolute need of considering these matters in the state of affairs that exists, really creating and forming an intelligent opinion of all legislation going through. Bills are constantly passed with a good deal of discussion, or sometimes with very little discussion, and I venture to say that a large number of people in the country never know anything about these Bills until they are put into operation. That, I think, is a very decided drawback to legislation here, and until we get people to take an interest in our proceedings and to take intelligent views on these very big questions, we will be hampered in the expression of our opinions and the way that we would wish to represent the considered views of the public on the matter. This is a simple Bill when you look at it at first, but when you come to examine the effects of it you will find it is not as simple as it looks. I would ask the Minister merely to take a discussion on the Bill to-night, but not to ask for a formal Second Reading of it.

Mr. P.J. EGAN

In so far as this Bill gives an extension of power to the Minister in the matter of dealing with crime down the country, I certainly welcome it. I am not sure as to the precise extent of the Minister's powers at present, but I know that the Civic Guard require a good deal of assistance to keep order and subdue disorder in certain parts of the country at the moment. Very frequently one hears of lamentable outrages which occur, such as the holding up of people, the robbing of banks and one thing and another. These outrages are committed by armed criminals, but the unfortunate Civic Guards who go out to round up these ruffians have to face them with their bare hands. Within the last few days a couple of bad outrages have been reported. In Athy the post office was robbed and the officials held up. The Civic Guards chased the robbers, who were armed. The robbers opened fire on the Guards, but despite that the latter pluckily captured these armed men.

It is not fair to these unfortunate Civic Guards that they should have to stand up, with their naked hands, in front of lethal weapons. Another very lamentable case occurred in my own district within the last few days. A lady returning from an estate of which she has charge, was waylaid by three men. They took her off her bicycle and made an attempt to murder her by poisoning. The worst feature of this sort of crime is that frequently there is common knowledge in the country as to who committed and who were associated with these crimes, but it is very difficult, indeed, to get information in these cases. I think if the Minister had power, as the necessity arose, to send down armed detectives in plain clothes to make inquiries in the districts in which these crimes were committed, it would have a very salutary effect. At present the Civic Guard have to depend in a kind of a way on the military. The military, of course, are armed, but the fact that they are in uniform makes it known to everybody that they are coming, and because of that they are not of any great advantage. I could give an instance of that.

In my own district there are one or two dangerous individuals. At the moment that the military come in sight these gentlemen, as they did on a few occasions, make themselves scarce. Deputy Cooper referred to the cost of this new force, or rather, I think, to the cost of having to pension some new officer in connection with the Bill. I consider that the additional cost of the pension will be relatively small in comparison with the added security which I believe the Minister's scheme will bring about in time. It is about time that this horrible form of crime should be put down in the country, and that the people in general should waken up to a sense of their civic responsibilities so that they would co-operate with the law and with the forces of the law. As long as they know that there are armed criminals going about, and that there is no one to look after them, it will be difficult for them to arrive at that state of mind. I, for one, knowing the conditions in the rural areas, certainly welcome the principle of the Bill in so far as it gives the Minister extra power to deal with these classes of crimes.

Mr. O'CONNELL

There is just one question I would like to ask the Minister. It is this: How is it that a force which, so far as I know, is not known to the law, has made its appearance in this Bill, a force called the "Civic Guard"? This is the first time, so far as I know, that a body of that name has got official recognition. You have in Section 2 the "Gárda Síochana," including the "Civic Guard." There is a reference in another section to the "Gárda Síochána," or the "Civic Guard." Perhaps the Minister will tell us how that occurred.

Mr. A. BYRNE

I hesitated to speak on this matter, but there is a little point worrying me that I would wish to bring to the notice of the Minister. Some time ago I read in the newspapers that a plain clothes man, in trying to quell a disturbance, went into a house. He was met with resistance by the parties in the house. They were afterwards prosecuted, and explained that when the man showed no authority and had not a badge of any sort they mistook him for a robber, thinking it was some sort of a hold-up, and then attacked the plain clothes man. That story was practically accepted in the court as a likely thing to happen. What I would suggest to the Minister is that when a plain clothes man is called to quell a disturbance or to remove objectionable people from any place, instead of having to fight his way, he would, before he interferes, produce or display a badge of some sort. That would stop resistance or an attack on him by people who might think he was a stranger attacking other people. There was another incident I witnessed myself within the last six weeks. It was the case of a man who was called to remove people. I do not wish to mention the place from which he was called to remove people, but these people looked at him and, in their own minds, wondered who he was. They probably said some strong things and resisted. Within a space of two minutes there was a squabble, and as a result of the squabble I am satisfied from what I saw that there were a number of black eyes the next morning.

In a police force that should not happen. A plain clothes policeman should not be put in that position, that sympathetic strangers, believing he was an intruder, would go to the rescue of the prisoner and attack him, the policeman. I should say that this is not altogether on the one side. They might probably, when attacked, use more force than necessary when they meet with resistance. I would suggest to the Minister that no plain clothes officer should be allowed to go into a private house or a public place to quell a disturbance without showing his authority. When he did show his authority the people would instantly know that he was a plain clothes man and that he had the authority of the police force and of the country behind him. We all know there are times in which people who are engaged in a quarrel are more afraid of the uniform than of the man. If a badge or some authority were shown on the two occasions I have referred to, I am satisfied that the disturbances would be quelled more easily and much more quickly than they actually were.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

Deputy Cooper speaks about this being the third Police Bill before the Dáil. Now, the Dáil has been sitting late these days and I take it that Deputy Cooper had not really had time to consider the Bill, and that these thoughts which occurred to him, are really more or less spur-of-the-moment thoughts and that we should not expect too much profundity in them. But if he considered a moment I think he would not have taken this line of criticism: "This is the third Police Bill before the Dáil. Are we to be always considering Police Bills; why was not a proper police policy put before us long ago instead of chopping at the cherry."

The sequence of the police Bills was a perfectly proper and reasonable sequence. We had, first of all, to pass a hurried and temporary Civic Guard Act to give the new force that was being distributed throughout the country some statutory existence, and that was done. It was Bill No. 1. Then the term of that Act ran out, and after a date the Civic Guard, as they were called in the first Bill, when they went out first, would have just as much and as little power of arrest in the country as Deputy Cooper or myself. Therefore, a permanent Act after some experience of the other Act, was brought forward. Deputy Cooper would, up to that point, be justified in saying: "Well at that stage why not put a considered police policy for the country before the Dáil?" It is not quite so easy and so simple as that. It is not like draughts or chess. There are human factors. Personally I do not believe it would have been possible to introduce a Bill for the amalgamation of these two forces much before the present date. Certainly, I would be inclined to think that six months ago would have been too early. It was something we were moving towards. As a matter of fact, on the last occasion that such a police Bill was before the Dáil I admitted in answer to a challenge from Deputy Johnson that it was not easy to make a case for the existence of two police forces in the country, and I expressed the opinion that I, or someone in my position, would bring forward a Bill for the amalgamation of the two forces, but there were human factors and they had to be watched.

One could easily effect a result that would not be to increase efficiency by bringing forward a Bill of this kind prematurely. As it is, I am satisfied that the net result will be to have efficient police work in the country. In the abstract, it is a bad thing, and it is rather a factor in favour of the criminal that you have two separate self-contained police jurisdictions. In these days of Ford motor cars crime has very often its roots and its conception in the capital, and its results down the country, and the man who strikes down the country slips back from the area of jurisdiction of the Gárda Síochána into the capital. Alternately, the rural criminal drifts up to Dublin to sink his identity there and generally, I think it is a matter that does not require very much arguing, that you need to face crime in the present day, with a unified system of police intelligence and administration. The Border will always be another factor in favour of the lawbreaker because of the separation of jurisdictions.

Therefore I moved the permanent Act for the Gárda Síochána, still watching the possibility of the fusion of the two forces. There have been developments since, some developments which we neither expected nor desired. As I say, somewhat over 1,100 men were transferred. Out of these 558 retired under an Article of the Treaty which was intended to cover the case of men to whom the new regime would be utterly obnoxious, or alternately those who would be so obnoxious to the new regime that it would not be desirable to retain their services. Some 558 of the D.M.P. went out under that Article, professedly because they objected to serving after the change of Government. The lure of the pension was there and it was too great. That creates a new situation.

Seven-elevenths of the Dublin Metropolitan Police as it now exists, is new and has been recruited within the last years out of substantially the same material as the Gárda Síochána. Four hundred odd of the old Dublin Metropolitan Police, the transferred force, remain. I do not like to discuss here a matter which Deputy Cooper raised, and still, I have no doubt, it is of public importance and public interest. do not like to discuss the case of an individual officer here. Shortly after we took over the Dublin Metropolitan Police it was intimated to the Commissioner of the day, Col. Johnstone, that he scarcely fitted in, and I think he more or less appreciated that himself. He retired, getting his rights under the Treaty. Mr. Barrett was at that time kept on. The one factor in my mind at the time was that it might help to steady the force and to hold members of the force, if Mr. Barrett, who was Assistant Commissioner, were retained. Now, almost 558 men have left the force since that date.

The disappearance of these 558 men is a new factor in the situation. With the going of these men the raison d'etre for retaining Mr. Barrett's services disappeared. I have seen him on the matter. I have informed him that it is not proposed to take him over into the amalgamated force. There would be difficulties in connection with that step which I do not want to stress or elaborate too much, but which none the less exist, and it is eminently a kind of case which that particular article of the Treaty was intended to cover. It is not a question of personality or a question of not liking the colour of a man's hair, but factors do exist which render it difficult to bring over this particular officer into the amalgamated force. If he were brought over it would prejudice the prospects of a successful fusion, and, after all, it is that that one aims at—efficient police administration, an efficient service for the people in return for the money which they pay.

I deprecate the arguments of Deputy Cooper in connection with the matter of placing an additional burden on the pension list, but from my side I can only put it up that it is a sound case and that I could not feel the same confidence that the new departure would be a success and would work smoothly if I made the experiment of taking that particular officer into the amalgamated force. I do not want to deal further with that particular point. In a way, it is not the kind of point that one likes to discuss in public at all. The point has been made that this Bill repeals sections of the Dublin Police Act and the Gárda Síochána Act. This Bill repeals certain sections of those Acts. The Deputies will appreciate that a particularly difficult task will have to be accomplished, the merging of two forces on equal terms and in such a way that it would not have the effect of abolition of either force but amalgamation in the fullest sense of the word. That involves a certain amount of difficulty in draftsmanship. The sections repealed which were useful were re-enacted.

I rather deprecate the superficial criticism of bad staff work. It is not bad staff work that first of all gave us the temporary Act enabling the Gárda Síochána to function for a year, and then a permanent Act based on our observations and experience of the temporary one that brought the position of the Dublin Police Act, which became difficult of administration owing to the change of Government, up to date and finally gave us this Bill which amalgamates the two forces under one Act. So far from being bad staff work, it is a feat of staff work of which I feel legitimately proud and of which the Department can be legitimately proud. The point I expected some opposition on, which did not come, was the matter of the continuance of the special police rates here in Dublin, and although it was not challenged, I would like, in a way, to make a case for its continuance for a period. To abolish it now would mean throwing on the Exchequer a burden of upwards of £50,000 a year, and that is something we could not face at the moment. The police service of Dublin will continue substantially the same, and this rate will disappear over a period of eight years. It gives a little time to the Treasury to adjust themselves to the situation, and I think it is not too much to ask that this contribution which has been levied for a period of 50 years will continue in a diminishing proportion for 7 or 8 years.

Mr. ALFRED BYRNE

Will it reduce year by year?

Mr. O'HIGGINS

Yes, at the rate of a penny a year; it will be gone in eight years. Deputy Cooper asked me to whom may the citizens of Dublin and the surrounding districts look for police administration. There will be a senior officer, a chief superintendent of the amalgamated force, in charge of the metropolitan division. In addition to that, one of the deputy commissioners under the Bill, most probably it will be the present Chief Commissioner of the D.M.P., will have a special interest in and a special responsibility for the metropolitan division. The line of responsibility to me will be through the Chief Commissioner of the amalgamated force, but ordinary common sense and tact will suggest that the present Chief Commissioner of the D.M.P. will continue to take a particular interest in and responsibility for, the metropolitan division. I do not believe that the citizens of Dublin and the surrounding districts will have any cause to complain. Once before some Senators and others came to me deprecating a particular police change, the abolition of Oriel House, and of a fusion of the best of Oriel House with the detective division of the Metropolitan Police.

I think if I had an opportunity of discussing the matter now with those Senators who came to me at the time they would admit that the change did not result in any lesser security in the capital. On the contrary, it gave a higher pitch of security and better discipline without at all impairing the efficiency. I feel the same about this particular change, that it is a proper step to take. I believe that six months ago would be too early, and six months ahead would be too late, in as much as the idea of the two forces would have become stereotyped. You have now 700 out of 1,100 who came in new within the last two years, and the time to make the change is before the idea of two separate forces becomes stereotyped in this State. We have all along been watching the situation with a view to trying to appreciate the right time to bring about the change.

I would, in spite of the objections that have been raised, and of representations from some Deputies, press for the Second Reading of this Bill to-night. It is not that I will do anything, having got the Second Reading, which I could not have legally done yesterday, but the human difficulties are there. It would have been looking for trouble and friction—to have attempted to do what, as a matter of fact, I had legal power to do—to attempt to send detective members of the Metropolitan Police down the country. They would not have got—and I say it making every allowance for the fact that an organised force tends to develop an esprit de corps and a morale of its own —from the officers of the Gárda Síochána the good will and the cooperation necessary to secure results. After the principle of the Bill, purporting to effect amalgamation is approved by the Dáil, you have a different situation. Members of each force begin to realise that they are members of one force in future and those other difficulties disappear. I would, therefore, if the principle of this Bill were approved, proceed to spread out a bit with the detective branch and certainly be looking for personnel for the increased membership of that branch. I would proceed to take certain administrative steps with the kind of confidence that, perhaps, with a change here and there, substantially, the Bill was approved and likely to become law while not doing anything beyond my legal powers at the moment. It is not exactly sprung on the Dáil or the public. The knowledge of my intention to introduce a Bill of this kind has been public knowledge for some considerable time back. Some enterprising Press man got a hold of it and it appeared even sooner for the public than I would have wished. Thus it became accepted as a matter of course and has been constantly referred to in the Press for the last couple of weeks and even a couple of months.

I rather deprecate the suggestion that the Bill should be simply left as it is, and that Deputies would be able to reflect on it over the Recess. Deputy Johnson urged this step last June, and more or less invited me to show cause for having two distinct forces. I said then that I did not really see the cause beyond the fact that the two forces existed and that I hoped for the speedy amalgamation of these forces. This Bill represents the considered judgment of my Department, recognised from the start as desirable. The principle of it has been for some time before the public. There have been protests and representations made to me that I ought to desist, and if Deputies think that it represents something that is desirable administratively and makes for greater efficiency, then they ought to trust me and my Department that we have sized up the right time for its introduction. I do hope the Bill will receive its Second Reading to-night.

Mr. A. BYRNE

As a Dublin citizen, I wish to pay my small tribute to the excellence of the Dublin police for the last couple of years. They are a magnificent type of men. The traffic regulations have been marvellously improved recently.

Mr. JOHNSON

Can the Minister tell us if this Bill abolishes the franchise for policemen?

Question put and agreed to.

Committee Stage fixed for Wednesday, February 4th.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.20 p.m. until Friday, 19th December, at 12 o'clock.