asked the Minister for Defence if he will investigate and state whether it is a fact that (1) in October, 1952, a young junior Army officer, a native of County Kerry, and stationed within the Curragh Command, submitted to his next superior officer an application for a week-end pass which was completed in the native language of this country; (2) that because the application was made out in the native language it was rejected by his superior officer in a contemptuous way and in such manner as to cause the young officer to express his feelings strongly and refuse tocomplete the application in any but his native language; (3) that as a result he was charged with insubordination and awarded a severe reprimand; (4) that immediately upon receiving this punishment the young Army officer submitted his resignation; and (5) if the Minister is aware that within a week of acceptance of this young officer's resignation he had left the country.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Army Officer's Resignation.
I have had the matters referred to by the Deputy investigated and have found that the position was as follows: In October, 1952, a junior officer, presumably the one in question, submitted a document in Irish to his next superior officer. This officer, who received his commission during the period of the emergency and not through the medium of a cadetship, not having an adequate knowledge of Irish, returned the document to the junior officer. There is no evidence that he returned it in a contemptuous manner. The junior officer was subsequently tried for having used insubordinate and obscene language to the superior officer in the presence of a third officer and two noncommissioned officers on the occasion and he was found guilty and awarded a severe reprimand. The junior officer tendered his resignation on the date of the trial. I am not aware of his movements since he left the Forces.
Does the Minister not think that this is a very serious matter and worthy of more thorough investigation and action than the Minister has undertaken? Is he not aware that the senior Army officer who received the application for the pass out in Irish made extremely abusive comments concerning the Irish language and told the applicant for the pass out what he thought of the Irish language and what he should do with an application written in the Irish language? Might I ask the Minister to have action taken to have this man removed if he has not a competent knowledge of the Irish language and if he is not able to deal with applications in Irish?
Do I take it that one of the excuses made by the Minister in connection with this particular officer is that he was an emergency officer and that—due to the fact that he had no regular officer training—he is going to be excused in these circumstances? Is that an attempt to cast a slur on emergency officers by the regular officers?
The statement that it was a senior officer is not true. It was a junior officer and, as I have stated, he was awarded a commission not through the ordinary means of a cadetship in which case they must have a competent knowledge of Irish, both oral and written. In the case of the emergency officer that was not required, and I can give this assurance that as far as the officer was concerned he merely returned the form to ask for information which was contained in it so that he could deal with it. It might have been more sensible if he had referred the document to an officer with a thorough knowledge of Irish and dealt with it in that way, but, having investigated the case, I am satisfied that there is nothing whatever in it.
Is the Minister not aware that there are many regular officers who have been in the Army for the last 15 and 20 years, and who have a very limited knowledge of Irish, as a matter of fact, whose knowledge of Irish is much less than that possessed by officers who served in a temporary capacity during the emergency?
That is a separate question.
The question arises out of the reply of the Minister that this officer, who insulted another officer, did so because his knowledge of the Irish language was limited.
The Minister has stated the reason why he referred to him as an emergency officer. The question of Irish does not arise.
With due respect of the Chair, is it not a fact that the Minister stated that this man was an emergency officer, the suggestion there being that his knowledge of Irish was not as good as that of regular officers in the army?
The Minister stated why he referred to him as an emergency officer—that, otherwise, he would have had a competent oral and written knowledge of Irish.
I am putting it to you that there are many regular officers in the army who have very little knowledge of Irish.