Deputy Breen has given notice that he wishes to raise on the Adjournment the subject-matters of Questions Nos. 11 and 12 on to-day's Order Paper.
Committee on Finance. - Adjournment Debate—Airport Personnel and Regulations.
I put down some questions to the Minister for Industry and Commerce about the position at our airports and I will deal with No. 12 first. I asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether in the selection of personnel for Shannon and Dublin airports special consideration is given to persons who served in the British Forces in Ireland from 1916 to 1921, and if so, to what extent. The Minister replied that the answer was in the negative and I want the Minister to realise that this is not a personal matter between the Minister and myself or between the Government of the day and myself. I know that the Minister is wrongly informed when he tells me the answer is in the negative. I know that at both Shannon and Collinstown there are certain men in control who would not employ any other only men who served the enemy of this country from 1916 to 1921 and they make no bones about stating it.
I would ask the Minister to give a guarantee if it is possible for him to do so to certain employees both in Shannon and Collinstown. I would not risk being in the positions of those men even if the Minister did give me a guarantee that those people would not be penalised, and when they are employed at Shannon and at Dublin, the only reason that they are employed is that they were members of the R.A.F. The man who told them that was no less a person than Captain Saul who told them: "Remember, it is only because you are a product of the R.A.F. that you are getting this job. The Irish are a lazy and a useless lot." It is a poor bird that soils its own nest and it is a poor Irishman who comments to such an extent on other Irishmen. When we have to go outside this country and get men because they served against this country from 1916 to 1921 to run our airports and make a living in this country — well, then, why should we hold commemorations for 1916?
I will now deal with the other question. I asked the Minister if he would tell me the regulations and by-laws in force after May, 1954, in the Dublin and Shannon Airports relating to the admission of visitors meeting and seeing off friends and relatives and whether special consideration is given to certain classes of people; and if so, if he would indicate the process in question and state what provisions were in force for dealing with members of the Oireachtas. I hold—the Minister may not agree with me—that members of the Oireachtas are entitled to go into any State or semi-State-controlled industry or place in this country. The Minister may not agree with me on that, but I hold that when a man is elected to this House and when he comes in here with all the responsibilities of a Deputy he should not be treated as I was treated when I went out to Collinstown and when an employee of Aer Lingus told me he would throw me out because through some oversight on my part 1 overstepped a boundary.
I never asked for any privileges in this country; I never got any, but I do not think it is fitting that a civil servant in the employment of this State should be in a position to tell me that he would throw me out. No man was ever yet born that would throw me out of any place, old and all as I am. I want no privileges from this Government or any other Government that will come here, but when that stuff is dealt out to me what must be the treatment given to ordinary citizens of this country? I made inquiries afterwards and I found that the orders were given from the top to have me insulted. I was seeing away a boy I raised, a boy I will never see again, and through some oversight on my part I was walking along and did not observe a boundary that I should have observed, but it was no way to treat me. It was not that the official did not know me because he called me by name and told me that he would throw me out and would get help to throw me out. Of course he did not throw me out, and no one, while I have breath in me, will throw me anywhere, although I may be getting on in years.
I raised this matter here because I think it is a shocking thing that men elected to this House are treated in such a manner. I have been in airports in most parts of the world and I was treated with respect because I was a Deputy. Surely a Deputy should be treated with equal respect in his own airport. If a Deputy will not conduct himself at the airport this House can deal with him. I am asking the Minister to think over the matter and not to let it be said that rules and regulations governing this and that are applicable to Deputies of this House.
I would like to support Deputy Breen. I think it is a scandalous state of affairs that a man like Deputy Breen, or any other Deputy, should be treated in this manner. I think it is up to the Minister to do something about this. I know it would not be Deputy Breen's wish to dismiss the man but I think it is up to the Minister to have this case thoroughly investigated and find out who is responsible for this insult to a man who deserves better from this country.
I was in Cobh recently seeing off a relative on the liner, America, and I returned by Shannon Airport and visited the airport as an ordinary individual with a few friends. I remember some time ago that on the approach road to the airport there was a hut where you were halted and you had to pay a nominal fee. On this occasion—it was Holy Thursday when I was returning—as I approached the hut there was another car being checked-on there and when I went to park my car I was challenged by the official in charge and he asked me how I entered the place. I told him politely that I went round by the hut and just parked my car. He was rather abusive and insulting but at no time did I divulge who I was. He demanded the fee of 2/-, I think it was, which I paid but I left the airport without anybody knowing who I was except just myself and my friends.
I want to make myself clear that I would not like anybody to be received there as I was. The official just took it for granted that I was just somebody that came along, but as an ordinary citizen I resented that treatment. It would give a bad impression to anybody. He charged me with failing to observe certain rules that I was to pull up there. I did not know I should pull up at this particular point. I am not comparing my case with Deputy Breen's. He is a man with a great national record and I certainly do not want to put myself on the same plane as Deputy Breen or set myself up as doing anything like Deputy Breen has done in his time; I would never be able to do so for that matter, but I think it creates a very bad impression that even the ordinary citizen should be treated in such a discourteous way and the Minister should take steps to prevent this. Let me say that I am not complaining in my own case as a member of the Dáil but I take this opportunity of mentioning it.
As a private citizen you are entitled to respect.
I think every Party in this House will see at once that Deputy Dan Breen occupies a unique position not merely as a Deputy of the House but in the esteem and affection of all members of this House. That goes irrespective of his political views because in his own personality and in his own sufferings for this country he has epitomised the struggle of a nation for its freedom. I am quite certain I speak for every member of the House, those on the Opposition Benches as well as those on the Government Benches, in expressing regret that Deputy Breen should have been treated in any discourteous way on the occasion of his visit to Dublin Airport.
This incident happened many months ago and when Deputy Breen wrote to me on the matter, obviously very annoyed, I asked him to come and see me so that I might have the matter investigated and appropriate atonement made. Deputy Breen said then that he did not blame me in any way for the incident and made allegations that it was people who did not like his political views who were mainly responsible for this incident, directed, he alleged, against himself. At the same time he wrote to the chairman of Aer Lingus. I discussed the matter with the chairman and asked him to have the whole situation investigated. The chairman had the whole matter investigated and I was subsequently informed that he tendered an apology to Deputy Breen for the incident that morning and expressed regret that it should have occurred. I think in doing that the chairman of Aer Lingus went as far as, in the circumstances, one would reasonably expect him to go.
If he had not quoted rules and regulations that applied to me before he apologised I might have accepted the apology but I would not accept the apology when he told me the rules and regulations were there and that I should have complied with them.
He should have fired the man.
Deputy Breen did not desire the person concerned dismissed.
I did not ask for any privileges. If the chairman had apologised I would have accepted the apology but he quoted rules and regulations to me which, I think, should not have been brought into it at all.
I cannot judge the facts because I was not there.
I never experienced a more ignorant attempt at an apology from anyone than from your respected chairman. I do not know who he is and I do not want to meet him.
I understand the position was explained to Deputy Breen that the particular official had instructions. The instructions were that all persons, whether they were Deputies or not, with the exception, I think, of diplomats, Ministers and members of the Hierarchy, were not permitted to go into the inwards or outwards customs halls. That was the instruction which the person had. In interpreting an instruction of that kind the person was apparently unduly rigid and inflexible——
And insulting.
——when he was dealing with such a well-known member of the Oireachtas as Deputy Breen. That is the kind of thing that happens from time to time when people get instructions to carry out. Sometimes they interpret them in a way that leaves much ground for complaint as to the manner in which they carry out their duties. I understand that the chairman pointed out to Deputy Breen that this person was bound by particular instructions that were issued to him but they were not interpreted by him in a flexible kind of way, with the result that the incident of which Deputy Breen complains took place. I said to Deputy Breen I was sorry that such a distinguished member of the Oireachtas, or indeed any member of the Oireachtas or any citizen, should have been treated in any way that left even the slightest ground for feeling that discourtesy was intended, because, after all, it is a national airline and people employed by a national airline are expected to give good service to the whole community which they serve.
Deputy Breen's questions, however, travel outside the scope of the particular incident with which he was concerned that morning. The position is that at the airports, both Dublin and Shannon, there are two broad categories of staff employed by the Minister for Industry and Commerce. The bulk of them, of course, were all recruited before I came to office. I have nothing to do with the recruitment of staff. One category is the general service and technical officers; the other is composed of subordinate grades. The general service and technical officers have been recruited through the Civil Service Commissioners. No preference is given in the relevant competitions to persons who have had service in the British Forces. Incidentally, the chairman of the Civil Service Commission is the Ceann Comhairle of this House. The usual concessions to members of the Irish Defence Forces given in the Civil Service Commissioners' competitions apply.
In respect of those persons recruited to the subordinate grades who are employed at Shannon only, for example, airport security officers, cleaners, messengers, drivers, etc., they are recruited departmentally mainly by advertisement of vacancies in the Press and through local employment exchanges. Consideration is not given to service in the British Forces in filling these posts but Irish Army service is considered in the same way as for Civil Service Commissioners' competitions.
The Minister for Industry and Commerce is not responsible for the recruitment of the large block of staff employed by the catering manager at Shannon Airport. The catering manager states that in selecting staff no special consideration is given to persons who served in the British Forces. The Minister is not responsible for the recruitment of staff employed by Aer Rianta in the management of Dublin Airport, but I understand from the personnel section of the company that in selecting personnel no special consideration is given to persons who have served in the British Forces.
I think Deputy Breen and the House may take these statements as authentic. They represent the actual position so far as the recruitment of staff is concerned. I had nothing to do with the recruitment of a single member of the staff at any of the airports. This represents the facts and it is well the facts should be stated even in connection with an incident of this kind. I do not think there remains anything further for me to add except to say I share with the rest of the House regret that Deputy Breen should have been treated in this way. If I thought Deputy Breen desired to pursue the matter further after I last spoke to him I would have suggested that he might come and discuss the matter with me to see if it could be considered in a wider context. If that is the desire of the House I certainly will undertake to see that it is further considered.
Would the Minister ascertain the number of pilots in the Irish service who are still on the British R.A.F. Reserve and, in the recent promotions, the number of Irish Army pilots who were promoted as against the R.A.F. pilots?
This is clearly widening the scope of the question.
The Minister talked of no preference being given——
That is true, but I would remind the Deputy that it is not an all-Irish Company. It is not an all-Irish Company because the Fianna Fáil Government set it up as a British and Irish Company in which 40 per cent. of the capital is British and 60 per cent. of the capital is Irish. Do not try and pin that on my back. The British directors are there, thanks to the Fianna Fáil Party.
The Dáil adjourned at 10.50 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Thursday, 21st April, 1955.