Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 25 Feb 1927

Vol. 18 No. 10

IN COMMITTEE ON FINANCE ESTIMATES FOR PUBLIC SERVICES. - VOTE 63—ARMY.

I move:—

Go ndeontar Suim Bhreise ná raghaidh thar Dheich bPúint chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1927, chun costas an Airm maraon le Cúltaca an Airm.

That a Supplementary Sum not exceeding ten pounds be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for the cost of the Army, including Army Reserve.

This supplementary estimate follows certain investigations of the Committee of Public Accounts. The items have been paid, and for that the authority of the Dáil is now definitely sought. The items are:— (1) An item of incidental expenses of £483 that arose out of the publication of "An tOglach.""An tOglach" was the organ of the Volunteers pre-Truce. During the period of the civil war it was regarded as of great importance that the publication of "An tOglach" should be continued, and from October, 1922, until August, 1923, it was published by the Stationery Office. From September, 1923, onwards, it was published by the officers of the army as a private venture, they having received a subsidy of £100 from the army vote. While it was published by the Stationery Office any income accruing from advertisements should be paid over to the Stationary Office. At the time that it became a private venture there was a sum of £483 owing to it for advertisements. These advertisements were paid for to the officers who were running the journal, and the money was used by them to extend the journal and for the purpose of the journal. The Army Finance Officer paid over this sum to the Stationery Office in order to put the Stationery Office accounts right, but the Army Finance Officer was not able to recover the amount from the officers who were conducting the journal. These officers had, of course, received no benefits from the money. They used this sum that came from advertisements for the purpose of the journal after it had ceased to be a definite Government publication. Authority is accordingly sought to have this money made good to the army vote out of which it was paid to the Stationery Office.

The next item is the Army Athletic Association Grant-in-Aid. In the middle of 1923 practically peaceful conditions were restored in the country, but we had a very big army of 50,000 to 55,000 men. It was not possible to demobilise them rapidly at that point, and it was regarded as of great consequence that the work of the Army Athletic Association should be forwarded and that the men should be induced to take as great an interest as possible in athletic activities. It was regarded as likely to be good for their health and morale and as likely to save trouble. A sum of £5,000 was paid over to the Army Athletic Association. There was no sub-head under which it could properly be paid. Some of the amounts might have been allocated to other sub-heads, but in point of fact this £5,000 was mixed with other sums obtained by the Army Athletic Association in other ways, by concerts, gate money, and so on, and the whole thing was expended on the ordinary work of running the Athletic Association, in fares, transport, medals, prizes, equipment, rent of grounds, printing and advertising. This sum of £5,000 was paid over in 1923, and the other amount of £483 was paid over to the Stationery Office in June, 1924. These are, of course, unsatisfactory matters, but they are matters which had their origin at the time when we had not got normality in the conduct of affairs, particularly in regard to the army.

There were many matters in regard to the army particularly which were not done just exactly as they should be done. It was impossible when you built up a big organisation like that not to have certain things done in some sort of rough and ready way. These matters did not occur just at the very beginning of things, but they occurred before everything in connection with the army and the Department of Defence had been reduced to absolute order. As far as the £483 is concerned, it was regarded as well worth while to spend State money up until August, 1923, in publishing the journal, and if this £483 went towards helping the journal it must be remembered that there was, perhaps, fairly good value obtained for it.

I have no objection to this vote in the circumstances, either in regard to "An t-Oglach" or in regard to the Army Athletic Association. In neither case are they to be recurrent, as I understand the paper is at present not run as a charge upon the State. It is, no doubt, necessary that a sum of £483 should be voted, and I would like to make it clear that there is to be no suggestion that the officers who collected a sum of money for the advertisements which had appeared during the time that the Stationery Office ran the paper, did not collect that and use it for the furtherance of the paper which was, in fact, a semi-official organ and run for the purpose of promoting Army service, while necessarily, I think, it is run as an independent organ now and does not necessarily represent official policy.

In regard to the Army Athletic Association Grant-in-Aid, I am not opposing that either, but I am not quite sure whether I heard the Minister's statement quite clearly that it might have been possible to allocate the sums to different heads of Army expenditure. I hope he did not say that, because it would appear he was prepared to support the attitude which was taken up at the time when this money was expended or rather when it was being accounted for, and that aspect of the matter received some consideration and disapproval. I hope the Minister did not mean that it would be allowable for these sums to be charged under different sub-heads in different parts of the Army accounts. I would like to have the Minister's disclaimer of that.

I was really intending to indicate that that had been suggested. As the Deputy is aware, it was suggested, but I did not indicate that it was the proper thing.

There have been a great many things in connection with the Army, and the Minister realises that this is the aftermath that would have to be cleared up. Is the Minister clear on this, that the £483 and also this £5,000 are to be non-recurrent? Is he quite clear on that? Assuming, for instance, that it is not a financial success, is it clear to the officers who have taken over the publication and to everybody that they cannot come back and claim any loss that may occur? Likewise the same question arises with regard to the Army Athletic Association which now or in the future may come into operation. May I ask for an assurance that everything that may be provided for in that way will be provided for in the Estimates and not come afterwards as a demand such as this?

The Deputy can take it that nothing like this will occur.

Vote put and agreed to.

resumed the chair.

Top
Share