asked the Minister for Defence if he will state if he proposes to publish the evidence and findings of the Court of Inquiry into the recent raid on the Magazine.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Report on Magazine Fort Raid.
It is not customary to publish the evidence and findings of military courts of inquiry, and I do not propose to depart from the normal procedure in this case.
Arising out of the Minister's reply, does he consider that this is a normal court of inquiry or that this particular subject is one that happens often?
He thinks it ought not to happen often.
I have not anything to add to my answer.
Has the Minister considered the advisability of setting up a court of inquiry, or a commission of inquiry, appointed by this House, to inquire into a matter of such serious importance?
That is a separate question.
Would the Minister say whether any action has been taken on the report and, if so, what action?
The court of inquiry has finished its work but the consideration of its findings has not yet been concluded.
I submit, Sir, that that is the answer that should have been given to the main question: that the inquiry is not yet completed.
No. I answered the question that was asked. I was asked if I propose to publish the evidence and the findings of the court of inquiry into the recent raid on the Magazine, irrespective of whether or not the court of inquiry has concluded its work, and I have answered the question and said that it is not customary to publish the evidence and findings of such court of inquiry and that I do not propose to publish or give the findings of the court.
Arising out of the question, may I ask if it is because of this that the Chief of Staff has been removed?
No.
That is a separate question.
Will the Minister say if it is his intention, when he is introducing his estimate in this House, to state what are the contents of the report of the Court of Inquiry? Will he indicate how the House is going to determine what a proper provision for his Department is if Deputies do not know how it came about that, despite the provision already made, the simplest duty of the Army was grossly neglected?
Although that is a separate question, I will say this about it, that courts of inquiry have been held on various occasions before; this is not the first court of inquiry to be held, and I might mention that the procedure followed in connection with all former courts of inquiry has been followed in this case. I do not intend to go beyond that procedure.
Does the Minister, in fact, refuse to give the House any information as to the reasons why there was a gross outrage perpetrated perfectly freely upon the armed forces of the State?
That is a separate question.
Is this the position, that the Minister is not going to publish the evidence and findings of the court of inquiry? Is he going to tell the House anything?
Also a separate question.
I submit that it arises out of the major question. Does the Minister propose to clamp down on this matter, to give no information to the House, or does he intend to give us any version of the report made by the court of inquiry?
Will the Government consider giving precedence to a motion, if I put one down, requesting information in connection with the raid?
That, too, is a separate question. Any questions not reached by 4 o'clock will appear on to-morrow's Order Paper.
I give notice that I propose to raise the subject-matter of this question on the adjournment to-night.
I shall consider that.