Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 8 May 1929

Vol. 29 No. 13

Private Deputies Business. - Gárda Síochána Allowances Order, 1929.

Mr. Corish

I move:—

That the Gárda Síochána Allowances Order, 1929, which was laid on the Table of the Dáil on Wednesday, 24th April, 1929, be and is hereby annulled.

In moving this motion to-night, I consider that I am performing a public service, as I am fully conscious of the discontent that prevails in the ranks of the Gárda Síochána since the Government's intentions in this connection were made known. Here we have a force established in the arms of a revolution, showered with praises by every member of the Government from time to time and by a great many members of other Parties, and deservedly so.

Six years after its establishment, the members of it find themselves in the position that they do not yet know when they are going to reach bedrock, or what their future prospects are. They are not certain whether their position in the Gárdaí is tenable, or whether it is worth holding on to or not. Five years ago there was an economy campaign started. One of the first bodies of people which the Minister for Finance or the Minister for Justice attacked was the Gárda Síochána. On that occasion the members of that force suffered a very severe decrease in their rates of pay, as well as a decrease in some of their allowances. To-day they are in the same position, not to the same extent perhaps, but to an extent that they can less afford. Immediately prior to the cut in 1924, a Gárda had an allowance of £6 for his bicycle. It was afterwards reduced to £5, and to-day there is a reduction made from £5 to £2 10s. I think everyone will agree with me in saying that having regard to the increased work which a Gárda has to perform, it is absolutely impossible for him to maintain a bicycle in proper order on the amount of money now laid down by the Government he should receive.

Soon after the force was established, the work which a Gárda was called upon to perform was infinitely greater than the work of an R.I.C. constable, but since then his work has increased at least three-hundredfold. In regard to the administration of the School Attendance Act alone, a Gárda in a rural area is on his bicycle almost from daylight to dark in the effort to see that the Act is properly carried out. It is suggested by the Minister, or by the Executive Council, that ? per week is sufficient to maintain his bicycle as it ought to be maintained.

I think everyone will agree with me when I say that the proposal to take away from the Gárdaí the ? a week boot allowance is not alone very, very mean, but an outrage. When the Gárdaí were being recruited, they were told that they were to be supplied with uniforms. I think Deputies will agree with me that the boots are an essential part of their uniform—just as much as any other part of it. When I tell the House that the Government, or the Commissioner, or whoever is responsible, insists that a standard boot should be procured, and that it is against the regulations for the Gárdai to have a patch on their boots, or boots that are not in a suitable condition, I am sure the Deputies will also agree with me in saying that the proposal to cut down this allowance of ? per week is certainly an outrage. In 1924 when the pay of the Gárdaí was reduced, the late Minister for Justice, Mr. Kevin O'Higgins, met the representative body of the Gárdaí and made them certain promises. He gave them an assurance that there would not be any change in their conditions so long as the cost of living figure varied from 70, at the lower limit, to 100 at the higher limit. In view of the fact that the cost of living figure for the six months ending December, 1928, was 178, and that for the current six months it is 180, I believe that Deputies will agree with me in saying that this is a deliberate breach of faith on the part of the Government, because we must assume that the late Minister for Justice was speaking on behalf of the Government.

During the discussion on the Estimates here in 1926 the Minister for Justice, in answer to some suggestions that were made that some of the allowances of the Gárdaí should be cut, made the same statement and gave the same assurance. That assurance can be found in the records of this House in the debates that took place on the Estimate. I think we are all agreed that if we are to have a police force it should be placed in an independent position. I am not going to suggest that the present force is corrupt in any way, but at the same time a force which is not properly paid and which considers that it is not being properly treated is subject to corruption. The treatment that is being meted out to the Gárdaí now might tend to corrupt, if not the whole force, at least some members of it, and the Government must keep that point of view in mind. In the Six Counties the position, in so far as the Royal Ulster Constabularly is concerned, is the same as was the position of the Gárdaí in 1924. The pay is the same as it was then, in accordance with the deliberations of the Desborough Commission. The members of that force have, I think, a cycle allowance of £3 18s., with a mileage allowance of 2d. per mile. I understand that the rates there are considerably higher in proportion than the rates for the Gárdaí which at the moment are being cut.

When speaking on economies, and when speaking of the Gárdaí Vote, people forget altogether that a great amount of the Estimate—I think it is £1,588,000 this year—is used in the interests of other Departments. The Department of the Minister for Agriculture has used the Gárdaí for taking the various census returns of production, and things of that kind. The Minister for Education has used the Gárdaí practically every day of the week, and in that connection there are perhaps two or three Gárdaí employed in every area. The Minister for Local Government has used them for the compiling and checking of jurors and voters lists. I think it is only common justice that the expenses in that connection should be charged to the particular Department for which the Gárdaí are functioning in any particular way, and when speaking of the Gárdaí Vote being at a certain level we should take that into consideration.

As a disciplinary force the Gárdaí are at the mercy of the Government. They have a representative body, but as far as I understand as regards that representative body, things are cut and dried, and there is a fait accompli before the representative body is allowed to say very much. In that connection, I would say that in my opinion an illegal action has been done by the Government in decreasing these allowances, which are now under consideration. One would think they would have waited until the statutory period of twenty-one days had elapsed, when they knew a motion of the kind I am moving to-night was to be under consideration. I would like to hear what defence the Minister for Justice has to make in that connection. The allowances to the Gárdaí are made to cover unavoidable expenditure. One would like to ask how the Minister expects that the Gárdaí would do the duty they are expected to do in a rural area without a bicycle? I understand that so far as the Gárdaí are concerned there is a regulation preventing them from employing a motor car or any other vehicle inside a twelve-mile radius, so that it is absolutely necessary, especially for Gárdaí in a rural area, that a bicycle should be in use for practically the whole day. It is impossible to expect that a sum of ? a week would be sufficient to maintain it as it should be maintained.

Certainly, the Gárdaí may be costing too much so far as the country is concerned, but I think it would be far better if the Minister, or the Executive Council, were to permit of a certain number of the Gárdaí resigning, as I believe there are parts of the country where there are too many Gárdaí, and treat them as they have treated the officers in the Army. A great number of them are discontented on account of the uncertainty of their position, and I believe that as regards economy the same result could be brought about as in the case of the Army. If we are to have a contented police force the Ministry should announce that we have got down to bed-rock so far as the pay and other conditions of the force are concerned. In that connection, I believe the country would be behind the Gárdaí.

What was the position when the Gárdaí were established? I am not going to refer to political matters. I hope our friends on the left will support me in this matter and not view it from a political viewpoint— because I daresay there is a certain amount of animus in some of their minds—but from the point of view of workman and employer. The country was in the arms of revolution, and every robber and criminal in the country took advantage of the position that prevailed and immediately set himself up as a menace to the country. Robberies were wholesale. As a matter of fact, a great number of people thought we would never reach a normal state of affairs. We know how the Gárdaí worked, and we have given them credit for bringing the country back to a normal state in a shorter period than we thought possible. The Government who established the Gárdaí, and the Party associated with the Government, praised the Gárdaí, and justly so, for what they had done. In this matter they should reconsider their decision and give back to the Gárdaí what they had robbed them of, and I do not think that "robbed" is too strong a word. The Gárdaí are nobody's children. They are a disciplined force, and they cannot take advantage of the channels which would be afforded to the ordinary working people in the State. Because of that I think the Government have taken a very mean advantage of the situation. I urge that members of all Parties, if they are sincere in the praise they have showered on the Gárdaí, should support me in this resolution and get the allowances restored to the Gárdaí at the old rate.

Mr. Anthony

I beg to support the motion. Deputy Corish has made a very good case. I hope the Minister for Justice will take into very serious consideration the effects this reduction may possibly have on the morale of the Gárdaí. Admitting that at their institution there were amongst them some black sheep, after all they were only human, and there are black sheep in every flock. It is said that these have been eliminated, and the force as it stands to-day is one of the finest in the world, and one of which I, as an Irishman, feel particularly proud.

Mr. Fitzgerald - Kenney

Hear, hear.

Mr. Anthony

Many Deputies have no idea, possibly, when discussing the conduct of certain Gárdaí of the contumely with which certain elements of the citizens attempt to treat them at times. The fact that at this particular moment in the history of the country this young, efficient and honourable force have suffered a second reduction in their pay is most unjustifiable, and I say that with all respect for the Department concerned. I know that many decent citizens were considerably perturbed when they heard that the reduction in the force was to take place, apart from the reduction of pay. They were still more chagrined and disappointed when they heard that it was decided to reduce their allowances. I know I could be told there was no reduction in their pay but only in their allowances. After all, that reduction to the Gárdaí meant a very great deal, particularly in the case of married men. These young men have conducted themselves admirably under most extraordinary circumstances. One should have to come into close contact with them and observe them to understand the type of men that have been attracted to the ranks of the Gárdaí Síochána. For a considerable time past they have attracted to their ranks the very best young men in the country, educated, smart young fellows. Many of those are men of education and ability.

They see in the Gárdaí an opportunity for advancement. They see that it is just as well that there is an opportunity at home for them to make a decent living by attention to their duty, that by doing the things that make for a good peace officer there is an avenue for promotion. But could anything be more discouraging to these young men? In many of their cases—I might go so far as to say 90 per cent. of their cases—when they were established they were doing duty under abnormal conditions; they met with hostility in some cases, with discouragement in other cases and if not meeting with active hostility they were getting little or no encouragement. They have now lived down all that, and it is largely due to the activities, the good sense, the courtesy, and the efficiency of the Gárda Síochána that we enjoy the large amount of freedom which we have to-day. It is not altogether due to them but it is largely due to them. I recognise as well as anybody else that the citizens cooperated with the Gárda Síochána, and if it were not for that co-operation we would not be enjoying the peace that we have to-day. I do hope that the appeal which Deputy Corish has made, and in which I join, will have some effect. We were told previously when they had to submit to a cut in their pay or allowances that it would be the last. Again we have had an assurance from the Minister for Finance that this is the last. Let us hope that there will be some finality now. I want to see the cut in pay restored to the Gárdaí, and I would like to get an indication from the Minister, here and now, that the Gárda Síochána will not be subjected to any further reductions. Their pay is the lowest of any police force in Great Britain and Ireland. I might go so far as to say that it is the lowest of any police force in the world, but I am not sure of that, and I want to be sure of my facts before I state them. But certainly their pay is the lowest of any police force in Great Britain and Ireland, and in this State, which can very ill afford to tamper with an institution like the Civic Guards, I think that this is a very unwise step. I hope that the Minister will be able to assure me and the Gárda Síochána that we have seen the last of these reductions.

Mr. O'Connor

I rise to support what the last two Deputies have said, and I would appeal to the Minister to consider this matter. I think that the members of the Gárda Síochána are well deserving of the pay which they are receiving. If you want to get good service, and if you want to get a worker in the pay of the Government to give his best work, he must feel that he is getting adequate pay for it. We know the feeling that there is all over the country, that a great number of people are not in sympathy with the Civic Guards, for the simple reason that the Guards are trying to put down crime and to preserve law and order. We all remember, when the Civic Guards were instituted, the difficulty that there was in getting recruits. We know that down in Munster recruits coming up to join the Civic Guards were pulled out of the trains by supporters of Document No. 2; they were intimidated, and attempts were made to prevent the formation of the force, as those people had an idea that with the Civic Guards law and order would be maintained. I appeal to the Minister to take those things into consideration, and also to consider the hostility towards the Guards that exists. When we were discussing the Civic Guards on the last Estimate, we heard them attacked even for going to Rome. In their own holiday time and at their own expense, they went to Rome, headed by their officers, and it was hinted that the money which took them to Rome was money taken from the funds of the British widows and orphans. That is the kind of hostility we find trotted out to this decent set of Irishmen. Therefore, I again appeal to the Minister to give careful consideration to the way in which he deals with the Civic Guards.

Minister for Justice (Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney)

I heard with considerable pleasure the tone of the three speeches which have been delivered. As Deputy O'Connor pointed out, it is so common in this House to hear so many, such injust and such unfair attacks upon that fine body of men, that to hear them spoken of as they have been spoken of to-night is a real pleasure. But when I come to the main part of their speeches, I cannot find myself in agreement with them. It has been stated that a definite promise was given to the Civic Guards that their allowances would not be cut down.

Mr. Corish

Their conditions.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I have before me the memorandum which accompanied the penultimate order, and it is this:—"It is not proposed that the rates of pay of the force should be subject to variation to meet trifling or temporary fluctuations in the cost of living, and the rates now proposed are based on a cost of living figure of 85 (above prewar) and are intended to be applicable while the cost of living figure varies from 70 at the lower limit to 100 at the higher limit (above prewar). These rates will accordingly be subject to readjustment if the cost of living figure passes outside that range." It has not passed outside that range. That is the promise made by my predecessor. That is a promise, as I have told the representative body of the Civic Guard, that will be honourably observed. The rates of pay of the Civic Guards will not be altered, and I take it that since that is a promise made by a responsible Executive, that promise must be binding on all future Executives.

Deputy Corish said that the Guards are in a state of doubt, that they do not know if they have reached bedrock yet. They have received the clearest undertakings that until there is an alteration in the cost of living their pay will not be varied, and they have been told that their allowances are now on what we consider to be the correct and proper scale. Unless there is some very considerable alteration, the bicycle allowance and the other allowances now in existence will remain the same. The Deputy says that it is impossible for them to do with the bicycle allowance fixed at the present rate. I cannot agree with him. I went into the matter very carefully and heard everything that the representative body had to say and, by the way, when Deputy Corish made the statement that the Guards were at the mercy of the Government, that the order was a fait accompli before it reached the representative body, that the whole conversation was a mere farce—that is what I gathered he said——

Mr. Corish

I said that it appeared to be.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

Well, the representative body themselves know that is not the case, because a certain other reduction in an allowance was proposed, but I was convinced by the representations made to me by that body that, in justice to the Guards, that reduction, which was with regard to housing, should not be made and consequently it was struck out of the draft order. On the question of the bicycle allowance, I am satisfied, having gone into the matter fully, that £2 10s. a year is a sufficient sum to enable a man to keep a bicycle. After all, bicycles have fallen very much in value lately, very much since the rate of cycling allowance was fixed, and I believe that £2 10s. per annum is as much as a man could reasonably expect to get for the upkeep of a bicycle, if you consider its ordinary life. You must also consider that very often the Guards use bicycles for their own private purposes. It is only for the purposes of their duty as Guards that they are entitled to the allowance.

To come to the question of the boot allowance, there was an allowance started many years ago in the Royal Irish Constabulary, who received 6d. per week. That continued up to 1919. A rate was fixed as a boot allowance for the Guards exactly the same as the Royal Irish Constabulary rate eventually was. That was subsequently reduced and now it has been abolished altogether. The reason why there was a boot allowance at all was simply because the R.I.C. were, of course, a very badly-paid force some years ago. They received a very small rate of pay, and instead of getting an increase of pay on one occasion, the boot allowance was given to them as a sort of sop. There is no reason why there should be a boot allowance rather than a shirt allowance, a sock allowance, or any other sort of allowance. The question really is as to whether the Guards are reasonably paid at present. Every single one of us would like to be lavish in the expenditure of money, but we cannot be lavish. I hold as high an opinion as, in fact I think I hold a higher opinion of the Guards than any Deputy, because I know the Guards better; I have more opportunities of appreciating their work, and I am strongly of opinion that the Guards should not be underpaid. But I cannot say that by taking off their boot allowance the Guards are underpaid.

Consider the rate of wages at which they begin. A man, for instance, after being trained in the Depot, goes out to a station and gets £3 a week, less 1/6 pension deduction. He gets free lodgings, free uniform, and if he is married, or when he gets married, he receives a rent allowance varying from £13 to £30, according to the locality in which he is stationed. He has a bicycle allowance of £2 10s. If he is a plain clothes man he receives plain clothes allowance. If he becomes ill he receives full pay for six months, and half pay after that, while there is a reasonable chance of recovery, and he has very generous pension rights.

Mr. Corish

He has to pay the doctor.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

No, he does not pay the doctor. The doctor attends the barracks and looks after the Guards. He does not look after their relatives. I remember the Deputy put a question to me on that matter.

Mr. Corish

My information is that the doctor only prescribes or certifies.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

The doctor attends the Guards.

Mr. Corish

"Attends."

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

He gets paid for attending the Guards.

Mr. Corish

Treating and attending are two different things.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I do not know what you mean, but attending and prescribing I consider treating. Taking all that into consideration, I cannot consider that the Guards are an underpaid force. I do not say that they are an overpaid force, but I cannot say that they are an underpaid force. I say they are paid just as highly as we can pay them in the present economic circumstances. It must be borne in mind that the Vote for the Guards is increasing yearly. It is a Vote that will increase every year owing to increments. As a matter of fact, if you leave out the savings effected by cutting down recruiting the amount this year will be as large as last year. I would like it to be known that the cutting down of recruiting can only be carried on to a very limited extent indeed. I think every Deputy knows that anywhere there has been a suggestion that barracks should be shut up there have been storms of protests from the inhabitants. The abolition of the boot allowance saves some £27,000 a year, and of the cycling allowance, £13,500 a year. Even with these savings, if you leave out economies effected by the stoppage of recruiting, and the consequent reduction in the numbers, the actual sum required this year will be as great as the actual sum paid last year. That is to say, that what the Guards are receiving this year in extra pay, owing to increments, is larger than the amount which will be actually saved by the reduction in these allowances. Considering the present condition of this country, and the necessity for economy, and having regard to the fact that civil servants and other persons have also had their rates cut down, and travelling and subsistence allowances substantially reduced, no injustice is being done to the Guards. No promise to the Guards is being broken, and I cannot see that they are being in any way unjustly treated. I would be sorry to hear anyone say they were unjustly treated. I do not think there is any discontent, and I am perfectly satisfied that there will be no real discontent in the Guards, as a result of the promulgation of this order. The Guards are a highly-disciplined body of men; they are a highly patriotic body of men; the Guards are men who are willing to serve this country in future, just as they have served it in the past, and I have no fear that any sort of discontent will enter into that force. I have no fear that any sort of disloyalty will enter into the force. I have no fear that the Guards will cease at any time to do their duty.

Mr. MacEntee

I only wish to ask one question, and that is through you, sir, to ask Deputy O'Connor whether he is going to back up his speech by his vote. That is the only thing I want to know.

Mr. T. Murphy

I have rarely heard a less convincing speech than the one the Minister has made on this motion. I entirely deprecate the line he has taken in suggesting that no cut has been made in the Guards' pay. The Minister suggested that, because their basic wage has not been interfered with, there has been no interference with their wages. In my opinion that is a mere subterfuge and does not carry the Minister very far in the very bad case he has made against this motion. The Minister suggests that the wages and allowances of the Guards have now reached bedrock, unless something happens. There again the door is left open for furthere interference with the position of the Guards. That is neither good for the Guards nor for the country as a whole.

The Minister met the representative body of the Gárda and Deputies have had an opportunity of reading what took place at the interview. I think the general feeling is one of satisfaction at the manner in which the case was put by the representative body. I do not think very many of us who read the Minister's reply were any more convinced by it than we have been by his speech this evening. It has been stated that as a result of the manner in which the views of the representative body were met, and their case disregarded, the representative body actually thought of resigning, and that were it not for the fact that certain pressure was brought to bear upon them they would have ceased to function. It is also suggested—and I should like to hear what the Minister has to say on the matter—that the higher officers agreed to a reduction if the lower ranks were spared. I do not know what truth there was in that statement. If there is any truth in it, then there is even less reason for the action taken. All of us, I think, no matter what Party we belong to, are very jealous of the impartiality and honour of the Gárda. We have seen clear evidence of that impartiality during elections and in many other ways in connection with our work in the country. If any influence is directed towards sapping the integrity of the force, or if any incentive is given to men to travel a different path, then the consequences will be serious for the country, and the time may come when we will be in a far less enviable position with regard to our police force.

I am keenly interested in this matter, because I was one of a number of Deputies who, during the discussion of the Estimates last year, expressed the hope that there would not be any further reduction in the pay of the Gárda, and I do not think we can consider this anything but a reduction. I am sorry that the Minister has not put down his foot and insisted that this reduction should not come about. The saving has been indicated in figures, but the value in content and discipline, and all that goes to make for a perfect police force, cannot be estimated as lightly and casually as the Minister indicated by his figures. The Minister states that the Gárda are a highly disciplined force. We are asked to infer from their discipline that they are quite prepared to accept reductions in pay and go on doing their duty, and that, even if there are further reductions they will be expected to bear them, because they are highly disciplined and patriotic. I do not think that is a fair way to meet the case. I hope the House will agree with the motion, which has been very well put by Deputy Corish, and throw out this Order, which I do not think is worthy of the House or of the Government. I support very strongly the motion that the Order be annulled.

Mr. T.J. O'Connell

It seems to me that this is one further proof of what the Government call economy. To my mind, it is false economy. There is a certain type of employer in this and some neighbouring countries who seem to think of economy always in terms of a reduction in the wages of employees. They are prepared to put a certain sum of money, plus discontentment and uncertainty, in the balance against honest, faithful, contented, and even enthusiastic service. I have no hesitation in saying which would be the better. It is, of course, only playing with facts for the Minister to say that you will not have discontent as a result of this Order. You are bound to have it—you have it already. I have just been reading over a debate which took place here on the 13th May, 1926, when the question of boot allowance was brought up, I think, by Deputy Cooper, and when there was a question of reducing it from 1/6 to 1/-. The late Minister for Justice on that occasion defended the allowance, and pointed out that they did not reduce the allowance because the Gárda had received a cut in their pay. He said that a reduction took place here and not in the neighbouring countries, and that the police here were paid something like 14 or 15 per cent. lower than in the neighbouring countries. He went on to make this very remarkable statement: "If we felt the remuneration was too high, I would prefer that we faced a reduction in pay rather than approach it along the lines of reducing this allowance."

The Minister for Justice tried to have the argument both ways, in my opinion. He first made the point that this is not a reduction in pay, that it is merely a reduction of allowances, and that, therefore, they have kept their promise that the pay of the Gárda would not be reduced. Later on he said something to the effect that there was really no justification for these allowances at all, that they were given when the pay of the constable was small. Therefore, they were given as part of the remuneration, and it does not very much matter to the constable whether they were given by way of allowance or came with his monthly cheque and were called pay. It is remuneration, in any case, to the servants concerned. He makes the point that as the pay was increased there is no justification for the allowances. But we must remember that when the rates were being increased, or even when the cut was being made, the fact that these allowances were there was taken into account. If they were not taken into account, the pay would have been higher, or the cut would have been less. I have no doubt that they were taken into account. I am sure that when the case was being made by the police representatives, when the rates were fixed, and when they were possibly asking for higher rates, it was pointed out to them that they had bicycle and boot allowances. Now the Minister comes along and says it is not pay at all. I feel generally that it is good economy for this State or any other State, or for any employer, to get good, faithful, enthusiastic service. This policy of chopping and changing and creating uncertainty and undue discontent is not good economy and is not good business for the State. The better policy would be to proceed along the lines of giving them more duties to discharge. You cannot do that and at the same time reduce their allowances or their pay. I believe it would be a good thing for the State if this House agreed to annul this Order, because, to sum up, it is not worth all that is gained in the name of economy, which, in our opinion, is nothing but false economy.

Mr. O'Doherty

I thoroughly agree with the remarks which have been made by the Leader of the Labour Party on this question and with the reasons which he has given. I am not going to argue the case. In portion of the County Donegal there has been a combination against the payment of debts, amongst others, land debts, in the shape of land annuities. The Gárdaí, as I know well from my residence in the County Donegal, do extraordinarily hard work. They had the misfortune to get hammered, having no arms. They got badly beaten several times and they behaved with the greatest consideration. As a result, in one case six unfortunate people that combined in that direction were sent to jail for six months. In the midst of that trouble and turmoil this Order reducing the pay of the Guards was adopted. As Deputy O'Connell says, even those allowances are part of their pay; there is no getting away from it. The amount which the State will be able to economise by this Order is so infinitesimal that it is not worth going to the trouble of collecting. It is, certainly, not worth the danger of estranging some of the best servants of the State. I personally do a great deal of travelling through the County of Donegal especially. I am constantly coming into contact with the Guards and it is the rarest exception to find in any part of the county any of those men not perfectly well-conducted and restrained. They are popular, they are leaders in the Gaelic athletic movement and in other ways, and they make admirable citizens. It is a very poor return to make them, that for the sake of a miserable sum of 1/6 they are not to be given an allowance towards providing themselves, in a county with very bad roads, with boots, and so on. I appeal to the Minister to withdraw this Order, and to allow the Gárda the remuneration which was fixed for them when the cut came.

Professor Thrift

I find myself in some difficulty about this matter. I am just as strong for economy as probably any member of the Government, but when a motion for economy and a diminution of expenditure is proposed, I want to be perfectly satisfied that it is not merely a diminution of expenditure but that it is economy that can be effected without any loss of efficiency. I have a great admiration, speaking in general terms, for the Gárda Síochána as a body, and with the Minister for Justice I do not believe that this proposal is going to turn the force, which was loyal to the State, into a force that is disloyal to the State. But I think that there is quite a considerable risk that it will produce a feeling of uncertainty which will more than counterbalance the saving in expenditure that is effected. With reference to one of the proposed reductions, although in the face of it, it seems a fairly large allowance for a bicycle—namely, £5 a year—I feel that the proposal to cut that sum down to £2 10s. 0d. a year may lead to a great deal less work being done by individual members of the force in the future than they have been able to do in the past. I read through the debate on the Estimates for the Gárda in 1926, when the proposal to reduce these allowances was made and, just as I was convinced then by the late Kevin O'Higgins that that reduction of allowances was not a wise thing to carry into effect, in view of the very large reduction in their pay which had been effected by the order of March 1st, 1924, of something like 14 or 15 per cent., so I confess that I am not entirely satisfied by the Minister's reply to-night, taken along with the revival of my memory as to what was said in 1926. I think the first essential, in the case of a body like this, is that they should be satisfied they are in a definitely fixed position with regard to the State and to their pay, unless some big changes take place in the cost of living figures which was the line which Mr. Kevin O'Higgins took two years ago. If anything like a feeling of uncertainty was produced in the force, which would lead to even a small number of resignations, I think the loss to the State that would accrue would more than counter-balance the saving of £40,000 indicated by the Minister.

I am very 10th to oppose—and I have not gone so far as to say that I shall oppose—the Minister in the matter, but I think we ought to hear something more in favour of the proposed diminution before accepting it. I might stress the very great importance of giving this body, to whom the State as a whole is so largely and deeply indebted for the work they have done throughout the country, a feeling of stability which is worthy of their record amongst us.

Mr. Esmonde

I am glad that a member of the Labour Party has brought forward this motion. I think that it is a very hopeful sign for the stability of the State that a member of the Labour Party should champion the rights of the police in this country. I do not wish to deal extensively with the various arguments brought forward, but I notice that Deputy Thrift is supporting this motion. The sum involved is a fairly considerable one. I myself am more than anxious that the police should be relieved of the necessity of paying for these things in order that the Budget should balance. I do not know whether Deputy Thrift has any suggestion as to what other sections of the community should pay in order that the Budget should balance. Perhaps he has got some suggestion in his mind. I hope the Minister, even if this year's Budget is fixed and this year's scale of salaries is fixed, will bear in mind in the coming year that the police have some rights and that in spite of a popular cry against them, which is not really a popular cry, but is only a popular cry in this House, he will reconsider his decision and give them satisfaction in the next financial year.

Mr. Blythe

I do not think that the Minister for Justice made any suggestion that this was a reduction in the remuneration of the police. He was just simply drawing attention to the fact that pay and allowances have been governed by separate orders. There was a pay order; that is in existence, and there is an allowance order. Some years ago, in 1924, the pay order was altered and a very substantial reduction made in the pay of the police. It was then stated that unless there were very big alterations in the cost of living bonus, the pay of the police would not be further reduced. The allowances were not considered at that time, and I do not think that any person on the Government side would have cared to touch the allowances in the next year or so, even if he had been fully convinced that the allowances were in excess of what was required.

This year, in order to avoid an increase in taxation we had to look round to see where expenditure could be reduced, and many of the cuts that were carried out were cuts that were disliked very much by the Ministers who had anything to do with them. But the alternative was to carry out these cuts or the imposition of additional taxation. An attempt was made to make cuts where it was justifiable to make them, and to make them, as far as possible, in such a way as to do the least damage. It was in that atmosphere that the question of the police allowance which had not really been considered previously came up. It was obvious that some of the allowances were certainly very much higher than was required for the purpose. For instance, the one and sixpence boot allowance was clearly altogether excessive. A man, allowing for the walking which he might do in his private capacity off duty, would not require the amount that was then given in order to provide himself with shoes.

There was the cycling allowance, which was also excessive, because it was not a question of paying a man for the labour of cycling, but it was really the question of having him provided with a bicycle. Bicycles are now cheap, and there is no doubt that the amount that was allowed was excessive. There were certain other small points, subsistence allowances, which were reduced parallel with the reduction made in the case of civil servants, and there were one or two small changes in these. The main changes were reductions in the cycling allowances and the wiping out of the boot allowances. When we considered the boot allowances further, we came to the conclusion, as the Minister for Justice has already stated, that there was no good reason for having a boot allowance at all. As the Minister said, there was no reason why there should not be a shirt allowance or a sock allowance, as well as a boot allowance, and the boots were in a different category from the tunic and other articles of uniform that the Gárda wear. We then had to consider in the situation whether we would leave the Gárda Síochána entire remuneration at too low a rate if boot allowances were struck off, in addition to this reduction of the cycling allowances. We came to the conclusion that it would not be too low.

We were satisfied, however, that we could not have an efficient police force if there were going to be periodic reductions, that some sort of stability was absolutely necessary, and the Minister was not keeping the door open when he stated that these allowances now would not be reduced unless something extraordinary happened. He was not keeping the door open. But, obviously, if something occurred which caused the cost of living to come down 25 or 30 points, a new situation would be created and the value of the pay on the present scales would be very considerably increased if that happened. I do not see any prospect of that happening, and it may be left out of account.

What the Minister for Justice said may be taken as a repetition of what I said in my Budget statement, that so far as this Government is concerned at any rate, and so far as we, individually, are concerned, the pay of the Gárda Síochána is down to bedrock. We do not propose that their pay should be touched, or that any of their allowances should be touched. Any change does bring some measure of temporary discontent. One cannot help that. Any change at all that has some disadvantage for the individual is bound to annoy him to some extent. There is that factor in the situation. But I believe that if the Gárda Síochána are assured what their position is for the future, without any doubt or without any matter being left out of account, then no harm at all will be done to the force. I want to be quite specific about it, that so far as the present revision is concerned, everything which the Gárda have has been taken into account—the rate of pay, the rates at which the increments are given, the allowances of every description. Rents and all the other allowances have been taken into account, and we are of opinion that nothing should be done that would disadvantage the Gárda Síochána, or any member of the Gárda, financially in the future.

With regard to the rates of pay, I think it is unfortunate, from the police point of view, that either this cut or any other cut had to be effected. It would have been better if they had been recruited originally at a rate of pay which would have needed no reduction. But Deputies remember well the circumstances in which the Gárda were recruited, and the rate of pay which prevailed then in adjacent countries were taken into consideration. These rates of pay have been maintained, I think, with very minor changes in Great Britain and Northern Ireland. But that is a matter for the Governments there. I think that at present the Gárda Síochána, considering the conditions in the country, considering the opportunities of employment in the country, and considering, if you like, the numbers of people who at reduced rates would be very anxious to get into the force now——

Mr. Davin

Ah! ah! that is the point.

Mr. Corish

Shame! shame!

Mr. Anthony

I would like to ask the Minister where were those people when he was forming the Gárda? Now when most of the danger is over they are prepared to go in at reduced pay.

Mr. Davin

Cheap labour and cheap policemen.

Mr. Blythe

Considering all these things, the present is not a bad rate of pay. On the other hand, as I said before, we cannot altogether leave out of account what is being paid over the Border or what is being paid across the Channel. Even if we could get Guards at very much less than what is being paid at present, it does not follow that we could reduce the pay. We could not. We have the pay, I believe, certainly as much below what the pay is across the Channel as it could be without danger and without ultimate disadvantage to the country. While I say that, and while I acknowledge that there is force in what the Deputies say when they talk to the Minister of rates across the Border and in Great Britain, we have also got to take into account the factors here, and, taking into account all the factors here, I do not think that the Civic Guards' rate of pay is bad.

I think, taking everything into account, this Order leaves their remuneration at a level that is fairly satisfactory, and I think all that requires to be done, therefore, is to assure them in the most formal and explicit manner possible that their position is stabilised, that they need fear nothing for the future. There is, I think, no strong argument against the Order which has been put into force. If the Order were to be thrown out, taxes would certainly have to be imposed and there would be all sorts of undesirable consequences.

Mr. Nolan

We all sympathise with the Minister for Finance in trying to economise and balance his Budget. If we do not support him in his attitude now he will say that we want it both ways—we want economies and we want at the same time to encourage expenditure in different directions.

Mr. de Valera

On a point of order, will there be a vote taken on this to-night?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I understand there is agreement on the point of taking a vote at 10.30 p.m.

Mr. Nolan

I will not keep the House many minutes. The Minister stated the pay of the Guards compared very favourably with other police forces and was in keeping with the general conditions in the country. Nobody denies that. There is many a progressive farmer with good land who would willingly exchange positions with a Civic Guard. That is perfectly true, but at the same time I think that this is rather too cheeseparing, particularly with a force such as the Civic Guards. They are able-bodied men and they have done their duties well and impartially. I do not think any Deputy here will deny that.

Mr. Anthony

Vote for the motion so.

Mr. Nolan

I am not going to take dictation from Deputy Anthony as to how I should vote. I appreciate Deputy Anthony's speeches here; they have been constructive and helpful, and so have been the speeches of his Party. I have great respect for Deputy Anthony, but at the moment I am not going to take dictation from him. If the Minister for Finance wants me to do it, I will support his attitude. I would refer the Minister and the Executive Council to the action taken a few days ago when they dismissed nine inspectors in the Land Commission on grounds of economy. They would not keep these men who had salaries of nine pounds or ten pounds and now they are actually taking the laces out of the boots of men with three pounds or four pounds. It should be remembered that these men have no guns to defend themselves with. We are passing a Bill for the protection of jurors. The police are unarmed and they have to carry out dangerous duties. Some four years ago I made the suggestion that economies could be brought about in connection with the erection of barracks for the Civic Guard. I suggested there might be fewer but better barracks, and that considerable economy could be effected in that direction. I gave as one instance that in an area with a radius of ten miles, in one of the most peaceable and thinly populated parts of the country, there were four barracks. In another district the nearest barrack was eight miles away. The cut now proposed is only £28,000 in all, and, in my opinion, a reduction of one barrack in each county would make up the difference.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

The estimated saving is £40,000.

Mr. Nolan

Well, to meet that, three barracks in two counties would do. It would be easy to do that if they would place the Guards properly and cease recruiting for the time being. I have mentioned that while it is necessary to concentrate on the administration of the Land Act, they have actually dismissed inspectors from the Land Commission instead of reducing their salaries of ten pounds or twelve pounds a week. Now they want to cut the men with four pounds.

Mr. Davin

Three pounds.

Mr. Nolan

The Minister also referred to medical attendance in connection with the Civic Guard. Very often the doctor appointed lives ten or twelve miles from the barrack and the men are obliged to consult the local doctor and they have to pay his fees. I am going to support the Minister in this matter if he requests me, but at the same time I was anxious to draw attention to the inconsistent manner in which economies are being carried out.

Mr. de Valera

The members of our Party have approached this question with a very open mind. Like the Deputy who has just spoken, the first impression this cut makes upon us is that it is typical of the economies that the Minister and other members of the Executive Council are fond of. When they wanted to bring about economies before, we remember that in one instance there was a cut in the old age pensions. At other times when they wanted reductions they attacked the people with the lower salaries and very conveniently ignored the people with the higher salaries. It will be said, of course, by the Minister for Finance and those who will speak with him that the higher salaries, if reduced, would not give a very substantial amount. But, they do not hesitate to save £40,000 here. We indicated on many other occasions directions in which £40,000 could be saved with far less danger of any kind. As far as we are concerned, if we had anything to do with economies we would not seek to make them in this particular direction.

The speech made by the last Deputy dealt with one important matter. He pointed out that the Government had no hesitation in dismissing men needed for the continuation of the programme of land purchase. I would have to have the staff examined in order to realise to what extent those men could be spared, but at first sight, without examining the matter as it should be examined before one could be secure in one's opinion, I say it looks very bad that the same policy could not be applied to the police force. If reductions were required they could be effected by getting rid of those men who are unnecessary. I believe it is much better to keep in any force only the number of men for whom there is reasonable work. All the men in the force should have work to do and no member of the police force should be idle. Let us look at the circumstances in the country. People along the countryside who find it very difficult to live will think that it is not fair to the community that a number of young men should be sitting on barrack walls knocking their heels against them.

That is the abuse. The Minister for Justice, of course, always tries to make every question a political party question. He wants to suggest, of course, as he suggested in his speech, that we can never look at any of these questions impartially at all. I say that so far as we are concerned, we believe that it is of great importance to the country that there should be established in it a police force that would have the respect of the people, and any attempt to have such a force will get support from us, but I do not think that the methods of the Minister for Justice are exactly the methods to get a force that will have the respect of the people. When we have attacked irregularities and abuses, we know that what we were doing was defending what I call the respectable men in this force, the men who will do their duty impartially.

Mr. Davin

The ordinary Guards.

Mr. de Valera

Yes. I believe that the ordinary Guards were put into the position at an extraordinarily difficult period. I know that a number of these men were asked to take the position so that they would be there as a national force to be used again by those who were in favour of the stepping-stone policy. They found themselves in a certain position, a position that they could not get out of afterwards if they wanted. I believe that the one statesmanlike thing that was done by the present Executive was when they decided that the Guards would not be an armed force. I believe, if the Minister for Justice did not condone the actions of those in the force who should be disciplined, that out of the Civic Guard you could possibly form a force that would have the respect of all the community, even though we know that in times past a number of them had been unfairly used by the Executive for party purposes.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That is irrelevant to this motion.

Mr. de Valera

In any case, I think that I should let Deputy Corish conclude, as the hour is getting late. Our attitude on this matter is that we believe that allowances ought not to be separate from salaries. The whole thing ought to be an inclusive amount, except, perhaps, in the case of bicycles. I am not in a position to state whether £2 10s. is a fair allowance for a bicycle or not. What we do say is that the method which the Executive is choosing is not the right method, but, at the same time, we say that a salary of £3 a week for a young man in the country, considering the circumstances of the people around him, is not unfair. We will therefore not support Deputy Corish's motion.

Mr. Corish

The speech delivered by the Minister for Justice in connection with this motion was an indication of innocence of which I did not think he was possessed. He stated that he knows the Civic Guard as well as any Deputy who has spoken on this question, and that no discontent or, as he said, disloyalty prevails in the force. I never suggested, in the course of my speech or at any time, that any disloyalty exists in the ranks of the Civic Guard. I feel sure that if this motion is not adopted there will be no disloyalty, but I stress the point that there is discontent, and that it is growing, because of the fact that the Government have deliberately broken an undertaking given by the responsible Minister in 1924 to the Gárdaí, and also through the medium of this House when the Estimates were under consideration in 1926. I do not care what the Minister for Finance or the Minister for Justice reads into that. In the Official Reports it means that and nothing else, and the fine points which they wish to draw between allowances and pay are merely red herrings drawn across the track of this motion.

The Minister for Finance said that the country is quiet. It is surprising to me how Ministers can reconcile their consciences with any statement they want to make in this House. At one part of the day they talk about the country being in such a state that it is necessary to pack juries, but at another part of the day we are told that the country is absolutely quiet. I think that the Minister will agree with me when I say that when the Civic Guards were established in 1922 or 1923 they had a colossal task. Their pay at that particular time was the same as that of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, whose pay has not been interfered with since. I think that I would be right in saying that a constable in Ulster has a considerably easier job than a member of the Civic Guard, because the people have a greater sense of civic responability in Ulster and in Great Britain than in this country. There is no denying the fact that the people here, because of the revolutions through which we passed, are not prepared to help the Gárdaí in the same way as the citizens of Great Britain and Ulster are prepared to assist their police. Because of that, the position of the Gárdaí is rendered more difficult. I think that the suggestion to cut their boot allowance is very mean, especially in view of the fact that the Executive Council, or whoever was responsible, insisted on a standard boot. I certainly would like to know whether the Commissioner who is responsible for the discipline in the force was consulted before the Government set out on this campaign. I believe that he would not be satisfied, if he were consulted beforehand, and that if his wishes were allowed to prevail the allowances and payments to the Gárdaí would be allowed to remain as they are.

Question put.

The Dáil divided:— Tá: 13; Níl, 84

Tá

• Anthony, Richard.
• Broderick, Henry.
• Cassidy, Archie J.
• Corish, Richard.
• Davin, William.
• Doyle, Edward.
• Everett, James.
• Hogan, Patrick (Clare).
• Kelly, Patrick Michael.
• Morrissey, Daniel.
• Murphy, Timothy Joseph.
• O'Connell, Richard.
• O'Connell, Thomas J.

Níl

• Aird, William P.
• Alton, Ernest Henry.
• Beckett, James Walter.
• Bennett, George Cecil.
• Blythe, Ernest.
• Boland, Gerald.
• Bourke, Daniel.
• Bourke, Séamus A.
• Brady, Seán.
• Briscoe, Robert.
• Buckley, Daniel.
• Byrne, John Joseph.
• Carey, Edmund.
• Carney, Frank.
• Carty, Frank.
• Clery, Michael.
• Cole, John James.
• Collins-O'Driscoll, Mrs. Margt.
• Conlon, Martin.
• Connolly, Michael P.
• Cosgrave, William T.
• Craig, Sir James.
• Daly, John.
• Davis, Michael.
• Derrig, Thomas.
• De Valera, Eamon.
• Doherty, Eugene.
• Dolan, James N.
• Doyle, Peadar Seán.
• Duggan, Edmund John.
• Dwyer, James.
• Esmonde, Osmond Thos. Grattan.
• Fitzgerald, Desmond.
• Fitzgerald-Kenney, James.
• Flinn, Hugo.
• Good, John.
• Gorey, Denis J.
• Goulding, John.
• Haslett, Alexander.
• Heffernan, Michael R.
• Hennessy, Thomas.
• Hennigan, John.
• Henry, Mark.
• Houlihan, Patrick.
• Jordan, Stephen.
• Kennedy, Michael Joseph.
• Keogh, Myles.
• Kerlin, Frank.
• Kilroy, Michael.
• Lemass, Seán F.
• Little, Patrick John.
• Lynch, Finian.
• Mathews, Arthur Patrick.
• McDonogh, Martin.
• McEllistrim, Thomas.
• MacEntee, Seán.
• McFadden, Michael Og.
• Moore, Séamus.
• Mulcahy, Richard.
• Murphy, James E.
• Myles, James Sproule.
• Nolan, John Thomas.
• O'Connor, Bartholomew.
• O'Dowd, Patrick Joseph.
• O'Higgins, Thomas.
• O'Kelly, Seán T.
• O'Leary, Daniel.
• O'Mahony, Dermot Gun.
• O'Sullivan, Gearoid.
• O'Sullivan, John Marcus.
• Powell, Thomas P.
• Rice, Vincent.
• Roddy, Martin.
• Ruttledge, Patrick J.
• Ryan, James.
• Shaw, Patrick W.
• Sheehy, Timothy (West Cork).
• Smith, Patrick.
• Thrift, William Edward.
• Tierney, Michael.
• Walsh, Richard.
• Ward, Francis. C.
• White, John.
• White, Vincent Joseph.

Tellers—Tá: Deputies Anthony and Davin.

Motion declared lost.

Níl: Deputies Duggan and P. Doyle.

Question on adjournment (Deputy Ward) to be raised to-morrow.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.40 p.m. to Thursday, May 9, at 3 p.m.