The reason why we asked that the Dáil should refer back for reconsideration by the Minister the Estimate for the Gárda Síochána is because in our opinion the estimated cost of the force is in excess of the amount which the country can afford to spend on policing. Each year for a number of years past the expenditure on the Gárda Síochána has shown an increase and instead of there being any genuine attempt on the part of the Ministry to effect economy they appear to be moving altogether in the opposite direction. It was stated here yesterday by Deputies belonging to all Parties that in their opinion the number of Guards was excessive in relation to the duties which they are asked to perform. But we find that this year, instead of there being any attempt to reduce the number of Guards, it is actually proposed to increase them by over 300. It is apparent from the details of the Estimate that the increased charges are required mainly for detective duty, though why that should be I do not know. In any case, the amount it is proposed to expend on allowances for officers and men employed on detective duty and for other members employed on plain clothes duty shows a substantial increase over the amount provided last year. It is our opinion that the fact that the number of Guards exceeds the minimum required for the proper policing of the country tends to bring discredit on the whole force, because it is obvious that the spectacle of a number of able-bodied men with nothing very much to do could not inspire public admiration. Deputy Wolfe and Deputy O'Kelly referred yesterday to the difference in the method of policing rural areas in this country and in Great Britain. It was pointed out that an area of 25 square miles in the rural portion of Great Britain is very frequently policed by one constable, whereas in a similar area in this country there would be eight or ten barracks with four or five men in each.
In Committee on Finance. - Vote 32.—Gárda Síochána—(Resumed).
What I said when alluding to that matter was that, of course, it was as Deputy O'Kelly remarked, but that the conditions of the two countries are entirely different.
I was about to refer to that. Deputy Wolfe said that that was due to the fact that the conditions in this country are entirely different from the conditions in Great Britain. It is not correct to say that there is more crime in this country than in Great Britain, or that the criminal tendencies of our people are more fully developed than they are on the other side of the Irish Sea. In fact, I say that the very reverse is the case. It is true, however, that the attitude of the people towards the police here is different and that there is an unwillingness to give information which might lead to the detection of criminals. The existence of that attitude is due mainly to historical causes, but I think it has been perpetuated because of the fact that there are too many Guards. I know that the general attitude that one finds among the people throughout the country is that the Guards have nothing else to do and that they should find these things out for themselves. I say that if the Government took the other course, reduced the number of Guards, and endeavoured to reproduce here the English system, they would find that the attitude of the people towards the giving of information relating to crime would be altered. I certainly do not think it will be altered while the present conditions continue. The people will be prepared to assist the Guards when it is made clear to them that the Guards require their assistance. If, however, the people feel that they are being called upon to pay an excessive amount to maintain a police force, then the natural attitude for them to adopt is that that police force should be quite competent to deal with the maintenance of law and order and that it requires no assistance from them. The total amount which it is proposed to expend on the service this year is £1,900,000, which, as has been stated, is almost one-tenth of the total tax revenue of the country, and that amount is altogether in excess of the proportion of our revenue which we can afford to spend upon a service of this kind.
The difficulty will not, in my opinion, be overcome by increasing the non-police duties which the Guards are asked to perform. Deputy Hennessy made a number of interesting suggestions which, undoubtedly, if put into operation, would increase the duties which the Guards are asked to perform, and, as pointed out, would simultaneously disemploy a number of men now engaged in performing the duties which Deputy Hennessy suggested should be transferred to the Guards. To suggest a remedy of that kind is only tinkering with the situation——
It is not true to say that the others would be disemployed.
Perhaps Deputy Hennessy thinks that the existing rate collectors could be continued, and Gárda also be employed in rate collecting, so that the ratepayers would be paying twice.
When vacancies occur they would be filled by the Gárda.
However that may be, the Minister for Justice has adopted a certain policy in regard to a certain section of the community which seems to give the police force most concern. As a result of that policy a number of members of the detective division have been, in recent months, sued for assault in the courts and subjected to penalties. These Gárda acted in accordance with the orders they received from their superiors, and I think the Minister has put them in a very invidious position by compelling them to carry out orders which directed them to break the law. It will be very hard to get a proper respect for law and order in this country when the Minister who is personally charged with its administration gives an example of disobeying the law when it happens to suit what he believes to be the interests of his Department.
The Minister's policy is, in my opinion, based upon alarmist reports which he receives from secret service agents whose main concern, in preparing their reports, is not to give the Minister a true statement of the fact, but the impression that it is necessary that they should be retained in the positions which they find so remunerative to themselves.
If the Minister would adopt a commonsense outlook in relation to the affairs of this country and frame his policy not on the basis of these mysterious reports which he claims he has, but upon the information relating to the situation which members of his own Party can give him we believe he will find that he can discontinue this illegal policy which he has been putting into operation for the last twelve months.
Does this not arise on Vote 31 and are we going to have it again?
My impression was that all the matters in relation to the Guards and to the use of the Guards would be discussed on this Vote.
There is a motion down to refer back Estimate 31 which is the Office of the Minister and I think there was a suggestion from the Leas-Cheann Comhairle that the Minister's policy might be discussed on Vote 31. If we are going to discuss the matter in either of these Votes it would be reasonable, but I think Deputies will agree that it is obviously unreasonable to discuss both of them in each Estimate. We could not do that.
I had no intention to make reference to the Guards other than on this Vote. There are other matters relating to the Department of the Minister which have no relation to the Guards. Matters dealing with town tenants and other things can be discussed on that Estimate. However, I have said all that I intend to say now on this. I think the Dáil should refer back this Estimate in order that the Minister might be compelled to consider ways and means of effecting economies in the administration of the Guards, £1,900,000 is more than we could spend, more than we need spend, and the money which could be saved on this Vote would provide the full amount required annually to finance many needed measures of social reform such as the Old Age Pensions Bill which was passed in this Dáil only a few weeks ago. If Deputies are anxious that the benefits to the aged poor which that Bill proposed to confer should be made available without additional cost to the taxpayer, then it is by insisting upon economies in Votes like this that they can do so. The saving of a quarter of a million pounds on this Vote is not impossible. It can be made without decreasing the efficiency of the Force in the slightest. It can be made possibly with an increase in the efficiency of the Force, but Deputies who refuse to insist that the Minister should reconsider the Estimate with a view to economies need not talk about their sympathy for the aged poor and the other people of this country who require social benefits which the Government say they cannot now afford to give them.
This debate has divided itself into two parts. The one part has dealt with the general policy with reference to the Guards; the other has dealt with the actual distribution of the expenditure upon the Guards and the total amount of that expenditure. I propose to deal shortly with the first question, and that is the question which was the main note of Deputy Little's speech and the main note of Deputy Lemass's speech this morning. There was last night on the part of certain speakers on behalf of the Fianna Fáil Party what appeared to be the striking of a new note, the reversal of engines, the taking up of a new policy. There certainly seemed to be a more friendly attitude shown towards the Guards in some of the speeches from the Opposition Bench than I have heard in this House up to this. I would be very glad indeed if that were an earnest of better things to come, and that the milder tone which was adopted in certain speeches became not merely the normal tone of the Party opposite but would strengthen and increase until, not only the Guards but every person in this country who is anxious to preserve the peace of this country would know that the full weight of every Party in this House is flung behind the Guards in their efforts to curb, check, and, when committed, detect crime. I am perfectly aware that in a great deal which was said by the Party opposite they were perfectly sincere. I believe that in cases, let me say, of larceny or embezzlement or housebreaking or rape or cases of any other class of crime of that nature their interest is as great as ours in seeing those crimes detected and the perpetrators brought to justice. I wish, however, that the Deputies opposite would go a little further and that they would definitely state that they have changed.
Is the Minister speaking about the Estimate or the Fianna Fáil Party? He need not patronise us quite so much.
I am speaking about the speeches which were made by the Party which the Deputy represents yesterday. Possibly the Deputy was not in the House when they were being made. I wish, however, that as an earnest of its sincerity that Party would reverse the policy which they have heretofore adopted and that the Party would deliberately state now what they certainly have not stated up to this, in fact the opposite to which they have stated up to this, that they are absolutely opposed to the use of physical force by any person in this country and state that physical force, used by the persons who wished to upset the existing institutions in this country, must be kept down. They must go back upon what they have stated quite recently, that they approve of physical force.
I would like to ask the Minister where they have stated that.
Has it been stated in this debate?
It was stated quite recently.
Was it stated in this debate?
Not in this debate.
The Minister ought to keep to this debate.
It will probably arise and it can be debated again on my Estimate, and possibly on my Estimate we may get an answer to that question, because yesterday we had speeches declaring how anxious persons in the Opposition were for the preservation of peace in this country and I would like to have it certainly from them. Of course they need not do so if they do not like.
Exactly.
Very likely they do not wish to state their attitude to the physical force party or take back what they have already stated. A great deal of capital is made out of court decrees which were made against members of the Civic Guard. Let us examine what those cases were. In one of those cases the Guard who was decreed was not in a position to state the information upon which he acted.
It must be obvious to everybody that Guards cannot always state the information upon which they act. Very excellent information and very excellent sources of information are at their disposal, but they cannot always make known the sources of that information. If they did the stream of information would dry up or would certainly be in danger of drying up. In one of those cases which was alluded to by Deputy Little last night the Guard was not in a position to state the information upon which he had acted. In another of these cases it was held that the Guards were perfectly right in the arrest which they made, but a decree was given against them because though they were right in arresting the persons whom they arrested they had detained them over long. They saw that an illegal association was about to take place. They arrested the persons and kept them in custody for what they considered to be a sufficient time to prevent the reassembly anywhere else of that illegal body. It was held, however, by the jury that they had held them in detention for an unnecessary length of time, that they could have been released earlier, and damages were awarded. What are the charges that are being made against the Guards? It is simply this, that in carrying out one of the most important duties to the State that any men in the State have to carry out they have shown slight errors of judgment. That is what the whole thing comes down to. Guards are always in a very difficult position. Guards are confronted with a certain problem; they have to act there and then; they have no time to consider, no time to make up their minds; they must act immediately, and Guards do occasionally make errors of judgment. It seems to me that it certainly does not show a very good disposition towards the Guards that these errors of judgment should be exploited as they have been exploited by the Deputies in this debate.
And by judges and juries.
There is another point of view, however, which appears to me to show that the net result of these cases has been excellent from the point of view of this country because it has shown, to begin with, that these persons, these soldiers of the Irish Republican Army, have come into Court. That is one thing. Deputy Little finds excuses for them and Deputy Little's excuse is a very extraordinary excuse. He said it was not their excuse, but it occurred to him to be an excuse for them, that they were acting precisely as Cardinal Mercier advised the Belgians to act when the Germans were in occupation of the country. That is a very nice statement to come from a gentleman sitting in the Front Opposition Bench.
I think it occurred to the Ceann Comhairle that Deputy Little was out of order at that point.
I have no recollection.
On a point of personal explanation, I was stating their point of view in the best way I could, in discussing the trial of certain Guards.
I feel on this particular Estimate that we are not under any obligation to discuss the attitude of certain people towards the Courts.
Of course, a Chinn Comhairle, these charges were made again and again and I am anxious to deal with them the first opportunity I get.
Charges against the Guards?
Yes. Surely when charges are made against the Guards and a question is raised as to how the decrees against them are to be paid, as I was asked, I should have thought that I would be able to go into the matter and to express my view upon these cases. But I accept your ruling.
The Minister can express his views upon the cases, certainly.
What about the decrees?
My view upon these cases is that they have been most beneficial in their result to this country because they have, to begin with, brought in these gentlemen who regard this Government as the Government of Germans in Belgium, and secondly, it has had this excellent result, that those gentlemen—big men in the organisation, some of them—have shown that the action of the Guards has instilled the fear of the law into them. It shows that those gentlemen, put in the witness box, denying, claiming privilege and not answering the question as to whether they belonged to the army that they are supposed to be proud to belong to, have openly, in Court, admitted the strength of the law and that the law is a thing to be obeyed.
It is lawlessness in this case.
I said it has had a very useful purpose, because it has had this result, that it has shown the whole country that these gentlemen are not great heroes and not great martyrs, and that these gentlemen are not willing when they are asked to express the faith which they believe to be in them. For that reason, as I say, the net result of these cases has gone a long way to show the country the type of persons these plaintiffs are. These cases have gone a long way indeed to prevent young men being fooled by those particular individuals.
As far as the general question is concerned, I may tell Deputies opposite that when men do their duty honestly and bona-fide these men will not be deserted by this State.
So you are going to pay for their lawlessness.
They will not be deserted by the State when they act bona-fide and in the discharge of their duties.
Even though they break the law.
So much for the general question. I understand that the Deputies opposite will give me an opportunity on my own Vote of dealing with it at considerably greater length. I hope they will.
The Chair was hoping not.
Turning back to what I suppose is really germane, because I am not the person who introduced the irrelevancies if I may say so, a Chinn Comhairle, I would come first to Deputy Ruttledge's speech. Deputy Ruttledge stated that the Estimate was disappointing, that the Guards were out of proportion to what the country could afford, and that the economies promised by me last year were not effected. I am sorry Deputy Ruttledge is not in his place now, because I would like very much to know what statement or what promise I made to the Dáil last year of economies which have not been carried out. As a matter of fact, I find what I did state about the future of the Guards last year is on page 159 of volume 30. It is as follows:—
"In the present condition of the country, and taking into account the various and manifold duties which the Guards have to perform, it is almost impossible to shut up any of the existing stations, because as soon as an attempt is made to do so, the inhabitants get into a state of fever and excitement, every single one of them complaining that they have not got the proper protection which they should have, that small pilfering can go on, that their turf, eggs and little bits of property are not safe unless the district is regularly patrolled by Guards from the vicinity. I do not anticipate in the near future any large reduction in the strength of the Guards, or any large diminution in the number of stations."
That is precisely the position in which I am now.
Deputy Lemass showed, to my mind, most extraordinary ignorance about everything connected with this Vote. He made the most astonishing statements. He said that every year the Estimate had been increased. One would imagine that before the Deputy made a statement of that nature he would make some little effort to ascertain whether it was accurate or inaccurate, true or false. Of course it is absolutely inaccurate. The Estimate last year showed a reduction of £29,000 on the Estimate of the year before, and though the Deputy ought to be able to carry back his memory for a year, yet he deliberately stated that the Estimate had shown an increase every year. But that is not all. The Deputy said that the Estimate showed an increase of, I think, 300 men. That indicates that the Deputy has not given a moment's thought to this question. It is a very excellent thing for a fluent, facile speaker like the Deputy to make interesting speeches, but when he speaks ex tempore he should not trust to his imagination for his facts. The force was 7,200 men up to last year. Last year we stopped recruiting, and the Estimate, as I stated, was that 7,000 men or under would be the force for this year. Therefore, if you reduce 7,200 to 7,000 it becomes an increase of 300! That is the sort of mathematics in which Deputy Lemass indulges, so that I do not think he need be taken very seriously when he comes to deal with facts. For instance, when he says that in every twenty-five miles of the country one will see eight or ten barracks he allows that poetic imagination of his to take an even more fanciful flight than usual. The Deputy attempted to deal severely with what Deputy Hennessy said. Deputy Hennessy did indeed suggest putting an extraordinary amount of work upon the shoulders of the Guards, but he did not suggest putting anything like as hard work on them as Deputy Lemass suggested. Deputy Hennessy suggested that they might act as postmen when vacancies occurred, and that they might be rate collectors when vacancies occurred, but he did not suggest that they should do the impossible; he did not suggest, as Deputy Lemass did, that they should be put to see grass growing in a bog. I am sure that Deputy Lemass is not familiar with bogs.
Not at all.
I will refer to one other remark made by Deputy Lemass. He said that about the only sign of activity one could see about a Gárda barracks was a Guard and a sergeant playing handball against the gable of the house. I do not suppose that Deputy Lemass has seen that sight.
I did, last Saturday. I saw it in the village of Rathowen.
He has seen that sight and he concludes that that is the only thing that they have got to do. Like a great many other people, Deputy Lemass seems to think that the Guards should work twenty-four hours a day, and that if ever you see a Guard taking exercise, relaxing, playing handball or football or, if you like, sitting quietly at the door of his house, that Guard has obviously no work to do, and that therefore there are too many Guards. The Guards are expected to work seven days a week, but they are expected to do only a certain number of hours' work in the day—it is eight hours in Dublin, but in the country districts of necessity it is not and it cannot be so strictly defined—and if after their work, or before they go out to do their work, they proceed to commit the mortal sin of playing handball, it is immediately assumed that they have done no work or that they are not going to do any work. I daresay it is an honest bit of reasoning on Deputy Lemass's part that because you see men taking exercise during their spare time they are not doing any work, but it is a very defective bit of reasoning.
Would the Minister say that they are hard worked?
I say that they are fully worked.
Very hard worked.
Yes, quite. On the general question of the duties of the Guards, it would be utterly impossible to impose upon them duties such as Deputy Hennessy suggested. It would be equally impossible to put upon them duties such as Deputy Anthony suggested—that they should go out with a chain to measure how many acres were under wheat or how many acres were not under wheat. If there are ever to be inspectors of that kind they will have to be a separate body of inspectors. It would be impossible for the Guards to do it.
The Guards are doing it at present.
Who supplies statistics with regard to tillage?
They merely collect statistics. They go to a person and ask him how many acres he has under potatoes, oats, etc., and they take a general view to see that the information they are given is, roughly, correct. But it would be quite a different thing to ask them to see whether a man had an acre and a rood or an acre and two roods under wheat, which of course would have to be gone into with the greatest accuracy and measured with a chain. I am sure Deputy O'Connell has read the Vocational Education Bill, and under that Bill further duties are to be imposed upon the Guards. My view is that the amount of extra duties which can now be imposed upon the Guards is very trivial indeed, that the Guards are doing as much non-police duties as they can reasonably be asked to do, without impairing their efficiency as policemen and as guardians of the public peace. We are told by Deputy Ruttledge that the number of the Guards is altogether out of proportion to what the country can afford. One of the things which a country must afford is an adequate police force, because it is the foundation of everything. You can have no progress unless you have an adequate police force. You may spend money on education, you may spend money on encouraging industries, on anything you like, but unless you have got an adequate police force, unless a man has got a complete sense of personal security and a sense that his property will be secure, you may give up all hope of economic progress. Therefore, the primary consideration must not be what the country can afford; the real question is what is the lowest figure at which the country can have adequate police protection, and in present circumstances there is no possibility of reducing the force to a large extent without destroying, in every district from which the Guards would be removed, that sense of security which, as I say, is necessary for progress.
Deputy Little, who seems to have learned more than Deputy Ruttledge from the Committee of which they are both members, frankly admitted that he could not form any opinion as to whether the Guards could or could not be reduced. I am not quoting him exactly, but I think I am accurately representing the sense of what he meant by saying that before he would definitely tie himself to the statement that the Guards should be reduced, he would like to have before him all the necessary facts and figures upon which he could form a mature judgment. I think he was right in that.
Would the Minister give us an inquiry of that sort?
No, I think it is perfectly unnecessary. We have all the facts and figures which are necessary before us. They are ascertainable from the police statistics. There is no further evidence which we require, and from the police statistics of the amount of work the Guards do, and the number of stations in the country, we can form a complete conclusion as to the force which is adequate for the protection of the country, and adequate for carrying out police duties.
Deputy Little alluded to another matter. Dealing with the speech made by the Minister for Finance, he said that if ever they came into power earnest and conscientious men in the Guards would be safe. That is not in accordance with speeches that have been made, because we had speeches published in the newspapers, in which it was stated that if the Fianna Fáil Party came into power a certain number of Guards, who were earnest and conscientious men would be dismissed and tried. We had also the speech of Deputy Ruttledge, saying that possibly there would be wholesale dismissals from the Guards, other positions being found for them.
I do not like to interrupt the Minister, but I think he must have misunderstood me. I quoted words actually from the speech of the Minister.
That is what I said. The Deputy quoted words and stated they were inaccurate. I say that the Deputy made statements that were inaccurate, and that other speeches which have been made have been completely the other way. However, I am perfectly convinced that there is no danger of the Guards being reduced if Fianna Fáil comes into power, for this reason, that I am perfectly satisfied there is no conceivable danger to this State of Fianna Fáil ever coming into power. Deputy Little stated that with the normal life of the country there would be a change of Government, and that the Opposition would come into power. If Deputy Little studied history I think he would find that countries staple for generations may be anxious to change, but countries that are only getting into stability are not. He referred to England. Might I inform the Deputy that when England had a revolution, immediately afterwards, when there was any danger of the Jacobite Party becoming strong and a danger to the existing institutions, they kept their Prime Minister in power for twenty years. At a later period they did exactly the same thing. America kept the same Party in power for years and years, so that talk about the swing of the pendulum is nonsense, because there is no pendulum here to swing.
You are swinging the lead.
Is the Minister going to write a history?
It is only a preface.
Deputy O'Connell talked about the Guards turning a blind eye on petty offences. The Guards, when there are trivial offences, in fact do what they are expected to do, first give a warning. The Guards do not jump on people when they commit trivial offences for the first time. It is a regular, a wise, and a proper practice when a trivial offence is committed to give warning first. If the offender persists he gets a summons. In trivial offences it is right that a warning should be given first, and that cases should not always be brought to Court. That is the principle upon which the Guards act.
Deputy Ruttledge alluded to the size of the Guards. He said that it appeared perfectly clear from what I stated that I believe the number of Guards to be too high. I was not able to follow his reasoning at all, and I certainly do not know what statement of mine he referred to. Recruiting for the Guards was stopped for a year, and the number was brought down by 200, as anticipated. The strength of the Gárda at present is just under 7,000 men. As to whether it will be possible for us to do with less than 7,000 I cannot state, but it would certainly be impossible to carry on with 6,800, unless by closing down a very large number of stations.
Deputy O'Kelly also talked about the number of Guards, and rather suggested that they were too numerous. I do not think I would be wronging Deputy O'Kelly if I said that, probably, he has not got a very intimate knowledge of conditions in the country, and I think I would not be flattering him if I said he has or ought to have, a very accurate knowledge, based on years of experience of conditions in Dublin. I am sure when he comes to consider that the strength of the Guards in Dublin is the same as the old Dublin Metropolitan Police, he will begin to wonder how the work is done, because, to begin with, there is a terrible weight on the shoulders of the Guards in controlling traffic, which is, probably, not police duty at all, but which the Guards are carrying out. I do not think that traffic control can be strictly described as police duty, but it is a duty which the Guards, in fact, are carrying out, and which takes up the whole time of a very substantial number of men.
It must also be within Deputy O'Kelly's knowledge that the city of Dublin has grown and extended enormously, and that the area to be policed now is a very much larger area than the area which had to be policed ten or twelve years ago, so much so that from various parts of the city, especially from the Drumcondra and Glasnevin areas and around there, strong requests have come, and very strong representations have been made, that a new Gárda barracks should be opened in that part of the city. The people complain that the Guards are not able, from fairly distant stations, to keep that part of the city in proper order. I am sure that any Deputy who knows Dublin will quite understand that, and also that, as far as Dublin is concerned, the problem is not how to decrease the number of the Dublin Guards, but rather what is the smallest extent to which we must increase them.
I have been asked some minor matters with reference to this Vote. I was asked by Deputy Ruttledge, and it was upon this that Deputy Lemass based his strange argument, why there is an increase in the allowances to detectives and to plain clothes men this year. The reason for that is that the detective branch was increased after the murder of Mr. Armstrong and the attempted murder of Mr. White. We considered that, to prevent the occurrence of similar crimes of that nature, it was necessary to increase the detective branch. The men best suited were brought from various parts of the country to strengthen and increase in number, as well as in efficiency and power, the detective branch of the Gardaí. That accounts for the increase in the Vote. These men have been drawn from amongst the ordinary members of the Gardaí, the ones most efficient and most suited for carrying out detective work.
On the question of the allowances made to officers for their cars, an alteration has been made in the way in which that is to work this year. Hitherto officers received the sum of sixpence per mile. That was thought not to work out quite equitably amongst the officers themselves as well as to be a sum which might be reduced. The present plan by which officers receive a mileage for their cars is this: each of them receives a bulk sum of £75 per annum to cover what I will call overhead charges, such as the tax upon the car, depreciation and that sort of thing. In addition, they receive a sum of twopence a mile to cover actual running expenses. That works out more fairly amongst the officers themselves and for this reason: if you take the tax alone, an officer in one station may have to run his car very much more than an officer in another station. As the owners of the same type of car both would have to pay precisely the same tax. One man gets back his tax in the shape of sixpence a mile over, let me say, 6,000 miles run for the year. I just take that mileage for the sake of my argument. The other man, who had done only 4,000 miles during the year, would get his tax back at the rate of sixpence a mile on 4,000 miles. The overhead charges in the case of both men— tax, depreciation, rent of garage, etc.—would be the same irrespective of the number of miles which the car ran. We think it is much fairer to pay every officer a bulk sum. We have put that at £75. That is to meet the general overhead charges, and in addition we allow twopence per mile to meet the actual running expenses of the car. I may inform Deputy Little that every journey made by an officer is vouched and checked. I do not think I have anything further to add. I think that I have cleared up every point of detail mentioned in the discussion of the Estimate.
May I ask the Minister whether he will insist that the bicycles the Guards get are Irish-made?
The Guards get a reduced allowance of £2 for a bicycle and they can buy any bicycle they wish. There is no dictation as to what bicycle they should buy.
Is the Minister aware of the practice that existed during some years past—in fact I think it was in existence under the old regime—in certain big firms of British bicycle manufacturers appointing a sergeant or a constable as their agent? The result was that the police bought these British-made bicycles, and that prejudiced the chances of Irish manufacturers. I suggest that a direction should be given from headquarters encouraging policemen to buy Irish-made bicycles.
The Guards are encouraged to buy Irish manufactures. Their uniforms, and all that, are of Irish manufacture. A Guard receives a sum of £2 towards the cost of the purchase and maintenance of a bicycle, and it must be left to himself to decide what kind of bicycle he will buy.
Surely the taxpayers are entitled to have their money used for the purposes of encouraging Irish manufactures, and not to have it spent on foreign material?
The Minister forgot to answer one question, that is, whether the Irish people have to pay for the illegalities of the supposed guardians of the peace—whether they will have to pay the fines imposed on C.I.D. for beating up men and arresting them illegally?
I do not know of any fines that were imposed. I suppose the Deputy means the decrees that were awarded in civil actions?
Yes.
The taxpayer will pay. Every respectable taxpayer in the country will very gladly pay, and see that men who properly discharge their duties——
Illegally.
——who honestly and bona fide discharge their duties.
Illegally discharge them, as found by judge and jury.
With regard to the Minister's policy of not filling up vacancies in the police, will he apply that policy to the higher ranks, because there is a growing disproportion between the numbers in the higher ranks and the lower?
There were 7,200 men last year. That number has been reduced by 200. The normal wastage is 200 a year. That cannot be allowed to go on to its full extent this year. Therefore, when the Deputy says there is a policy of not filling up any vacancy in the Guards he is not stating the position correctly. The number of officers in the Guards is the minimum requisite number.
The Minister does not propose any reduction in the number of officers?
Tá
- Aiken, Frank.
- Allen, Denis.
- Blaney, Neal.
- Boland, Patrick.
- Bourke, Daniel.
- Brady, Seán.
- Briscoe, Robert.
- Buckley, Daniel.
- Carney, Frank.
- Carty, Frank.
- Colbert, James.
- Corkery, Dan.
- Crowley, Tadhg.
- Derrig, Thomas.
- Fahy, Frank.
- Fogarty, Andrew.
- Corry, Patrick J.
- O'Reilly, Matthew.
- Powell, Thomas P.
- Ryan, James.
- Sexton, Martin.
- Sheehy, Timothy (Tipp.).
- Goulding, John.
- Hayes, Seán.
- Houlihan, Patrick.
- Jordan, Stephen.
- Kent, William R.
- Kerlin, Frank.
- Killilea, Mark.
- Kilroy, Michael.
- Lemass, Seán F.
- Little, Patrick John.
- Maguire, Ben.
- McEllistrim, Thomas.
- MacEntee, Seán.
- Moore, Séamus.
- Mullins, Thomas.
- O'Dowd, Patrick Joseph.
- O'Kelly, Seán T.
- Smith, Patrick.
- Tubridy, John.
- Walsh, Richard.
- Ward, Francis C.
Níl
- Aird, William P.
- Anthony, Richard.
- Beckett, James Walter.
- Bennett, George Cecil.
- Blythe, Ernest.
- Bourke, Séamus A.
- Brennan, Michael.
- Broderick, Henry.
- Brodrick, Seán.
- Byrne, John Joseph.
- Carey, Edmund.
- Cole, John James.
- Collins-O'Driscoll, Mrs. Margt.
- Colohan, Hugh.
- Conlon, Martin.
- Connolly, Michael P.
- Corish, Richard.
- Craig, Sir James.
- Crowley, James.
- Daly, John.
- Davin, William.
- Davis, Michael.
- De Loughrey, Peter.
- Doherty, Eugene.
- Dolan, James N.
- Doyle, Edward.
- Doyle, Peadar Seán.
- Duggan, Edmund John.
- Dwyer, James.
- Egan, Barry M.
- Everett, James.
- Fitzgerald-Kenney, James.
- Gorey, Denis J.
- Haslett, Alexander.
- Heffernan, Michael R.
- Hennessy, Thomas.
- Hennigan, John.
- Henry, Mark.
- Hogan, Patrick (Galway).
- Holohan, Richard.
- Jordan, Michael.
- Keogh, Myles.
- Law, Hugh Alexander.
- Leonard, Patrick.
- Lynch, Finian.
- Mathews, Arthur Patrick.
- McDonogh, Martin.
- MacEóin, Seán.
- McFadden, Michael Og.
- McGilligan, Patrick.
- Mongan, Joseph W.
- Morrissey, Daniel.
- Mulcahy, Richard.
- Murphy, Timothy Joseph.
- Myles, James Sproule.
- Nally, Martin Michael.
- O'Connell, Richard.
- O'Connell, Thomas J.
- O'Connor, Bartholomew.
- O'Donovan, Timothy Joseph.
- O'Hanlon, John F.
- O'Leary, Daniel.
- O'Mahony, Dermot Gun.
- O'Sullivan, John Marcus.
- Reynolds, Patrick.
- Rice, Vincent.
- Roddy, Martin.
- Shaw, Patrick W.
- Sheehy, Timothy (West Cork).
- Thrift, William Edward.
- Tierney, Michael.
- White, John.
- White, Vincent Joseph.
- Wolfe, George.