When speaking last night, I was trying to draw special attention to the necessity for housing and coming to the point of difference between our views and those of Fianna Fáil with regard to the strength of the Army. It is true that the Minister referred in his opening speech to the recent recruiting drive, but we nevertheless maintained in the past, and still maintain, that even a small Army, well trained, well equipped and well housed, would be far more beneficial to this small State than the famous 12,500 men whom we never seem to have, although we are always supposed to get them, according to paper returns.
It was distressing on many occasions that, when we tried to express a view which we thought had a certain amount of sense in it, we found members opposed to us going so far as to make suggestions that we in the Labour Party were advocating a small Army for ulterior motives. In view of the fact that every £ spent for the Army must be provided by the State, and in view of the fact that we heard to-day about the necessity of providing funds for other Estimates of equal importance in their own way, we believe it is essential that we should be realists in our approach to this Vote.
If, at the commencement of the emergency period, we were able to build up in a short period a very satisfactory Vounteer Force, we maintain, as we maintained in the past, that the credit for it should go largely to the N.C.O.s of the Army, a body of excellently trained men. We had the men there who were able to make use of the Volunteers that came their way and we still have that solid core of capable men in the Army. I consider, therefore, that if we concentrated more on quality and gave that quality proper conditions, we would be much more successful in our approach than in trying to build an Army on a foundation that may not be as solid or as secure as we would wish it to be.
We did realise the necessity in the 1939-1940 period for the large number of promotions, but why was it — and when we drew attention to it on a number of occasions, we got no satisfaction — that when the emergency was over and so many of our men left the forces, we still found that the number of higher ranks remained high as against the number of privates in the Army?
We had, and still have, the brass hats, and we are providing them with increases which are out of proportion to what is given to the privates in the Army. In the case of pensions, they also get a higher percentage based, of course, on their higher incomes. Perhaps at the conclusion of what I have to say on the Estimate, I may have to draw special attention to that particular matter.
According to the figures in the Book of Estimates, we have 7,582 privates in the Army and 1,193 officers, which represents a very high complement. I think myself that in the past we were afraid to make a move which, perhaps, would be considered drastic by some of those high people in the Army, as regards numbers. I think, however, that for a number of years back, since the emergency period, it was a bit of a joke to find that for every high-ranking officer he had only a couple of privates to keep an eye on. Deputy Traynor, as he was entitled to do, expressed the views of his Party in connection with the reduction, and on various other points in relation to this Estimate. So far as I am concerned, I would be inclined to make greater reductions under certain sub-heads in order to provide an increase for barrack maintenance. That is a matter that I have dealt with in previous years.
I suggest that increase because of its relation to the welfare of the men who are stationed in these barracks. For years past, we have had the men in them living under anything but good conditions. We speak now about the possible dangers of the future and of our high ideals of entering into the field of getting the most modern equipment in relation to jet aeroplanes and so on, but I believe that we should address ourselves more to the question of keeping our barracks in decent repair. That cannot be done unless more money is provided than has been in the past. I think it would be more sensible to spend money on the maintenance of our barracks than on some of the other things which have been mentioned in this debate. It is a grand thing, of course, to hear that our country is amongst the nations of the earth, as it were, in its advancement and in its forms of technique, but I suggest that the cost of even three jet planes, if we could defer their purchase for some time longer, would go a very long way towards bringing about a much needed improvement in the conditions that obtain in our barracks for the men stationed in them. I think that might help, too, towards bringing about greater success in the recruiting drive for the extra men that we need.
I mentioned last year, and should like to repeat, what I said on this question of barrack maintenance. There is this extraordinary situation in regard to the cost of jobs. If a job costs, say, £20, £30, £40 or £100, the barrack foreman will have to put in his sheets showing almost the exact number of nails used on the job and almost the last ounce of cement, gravel and sand that was used. If there is a little bit of waste timber he will have to show that too, but strange to relate, in the case of a job involving the expenditure of thousands of pounds, the whole of the costings go in as a lump sum. I agree that it is essential to keep a proper check on the materials used. If you have an employee who is anxious to put aside material for any ulterior motive, is it not right to say that it is only in the case of big jobs costing perhaps a couple of thousand pounds, on which plenty of materials are available, that he can do that?
Yet, with all the great system of finance that we have, with all the inspectors that we have going around the country, checking stores and everything appertaining to stores, what do we find? That it is only in the case of the small little job that they tinker about. I am not blaming the officials for that. They must spend their days counting the number of blocks and checking stores, whether there are so many bulbs in stock and so on, and yet while all that is going on, there may be far greater losses to the State in the case of one big job if somebody wants to do away with stuff — a bigger loss than all these officials could find out in 12 months.
I find there is provision in the Estimate this year for the Army equitation team. For many years every one of us naturally took a pride in reading in the local newspapers of the successes of our Army jumping teams in various countries in the world. No one begrudged or, I am sure, ever will begrudge, the money that is made available for this important item in our Army. This is an agricultural country which has become famous for the quality of its bloodstock. The Army jumping team won prizes all over the world and these successes brought great distinction to our country. They were the best publicity drive that we could get for our bloodstock. I should like, however, to know what has been happening for some years.
I should like to know what is really going on behind the scenes in relation to the failures which we hear so much about. I am convinced that, if there are failures, they are not due to the men who travel abroad and take part in these competitions. If there is a fault, I think it is due to some hidden hand behind the scenes. We have excellent riders in the Army and I should like to know if it is true whether or not they are getting fair play. If we have excellent bloodstock in the country, why is it not being made available to us? Who makes the purchases and why is it that we are not getting the right stuff? That is an aspect of this question which should be looked into because, if we gain successes in these competitions throughout the world, they will bring credit to the country and will be of advantage to it so far as bloodstock exports in the future are concerned.
There is one other aspect of this Estimate that I should like to refer to. I notice that Deputy Traynor regretted the amount of money which is being allocated for one important part of this Vote, namely, our Navy. It may, perhaps, be because of the fact that I as an individual live in closer proximity to the naval establishments in East Cork and South Cork that I am inclined to take a different view from that of Deputy Traynor and I certainly do.
While I have no intention of being personal towards any one of the personnel concerned in this particular side of the Army, I would ask the Minister closely to examine everything in relation to our Irish Navy. I am not satisfied that all is well and I have not been satisfied about the matter in all the years I have been here. I have always been outspoken in my remarks in relation to our Navy and I believe that the opinion which I have expressed is justified in view of the information which from time to time I have been able to gather in connection with the matter. I should like the Minister to contradict me if what I say is not correct. I am informed that at our naval dockyard in Haulbowline, Cork Harbour, there are at the present time three winches which were purchased in connection with the corvettes but which were never used.
Of course, when we speak in debates on Estimates running into millions of pounds the cost of these three winches may be considered very small but when these items are added together they amount to a nice tidy sum. Is it correct to say that these winches are in cold storage not just for a reasonable time but for some considerable time back or can it be said that they are in use? Furthermore, I have information to the effect that there is a mobile crane there which cost £8,000. After all, some official or officials were responsible for that particular purchase and no Minister can be blamed for it. He is not expected to be responsible for every machine that is purchased, even though he has to take the rub here in this House if anything goes wrong. However, if a mobile crane costing that large sum of money was purchased and was then discovered to be unsuitable simply and solely because it was constructed on solid rubber wheels, which probably meant that it was not suited for the type of work for which it was intended, then I think we are entitled to some explanation. We are told that in our Navy we have people whose responsibility it is to ensure that all the equipment we purchase is of the very best type. I suppose that if some of these things happened in the Army either here in Dublin or in the Curragh Deputies would naturally seek to raise the matter in this House.
I am afraid the headquarters of our Navy is too far removed from the base of operations. I think it is a huge joke to be told that the headquarters of our small little Navy should be here in Dublin instead of in Cork Harbour or in any harbour where our Navy may have certain important installations. It would be just as practical to suggest that the headquarters of some county committee of agriculture down in the country should be located in the Phoenix Park. It is far more suitable and advantageous and correct for the State that the headquarters be based in the harbour itself.
I want to raise another matter now in connection with our Navy which I consider so important that I must mention it on this occasion. It concerns the suggested purchase of three seaworthy defence boats. What has happened in the matter I do not know. According to the information which has been given to me and which I have checked to the best of my ability, we were prepared to buy two obsolete junk boats from across the water and to spend, between the purchase and the possible amount of money allocated for reconstruction, anything from £120,000 to £130,000. Who was responsible for that? What advisers in the Department will admit that, in spite of their ability and technical knowledge, they would ask the Minister for Defence — a man responsible to his Department and to this State — to buy these old junks? They might as well buy some of the old Chinese junks in the Yellow River that we read about.
We cannot stand for these things. We cannot stand for a policy whereby these people refuse the right even to Irish boatyards to tender a price in this connection and, even if a price is tendered, refuse to consider it. I have been given to understand that these people believe they have a moral obligation or contract in connection with the matter. I am given to understand that, in law, a contract is something that is in writing. Now people in charge of the Navy in our country, for some purpose — I have my own views as to what the purpose may be — are so interested in their moral obligations that they are buying old junks of boats from Britain and want to impose a huge burden on the taxpayers of this State.
I have confidence in the present Minister as, indeed, I had confidence in his predecessor. It could not be otherwise in view of their record in the past. I would appeal to have the whole question of our Irish Navy examined and very closely examined. Whatever we may say about the Army and the question of recruitment — coming, as I do, from a seaboard area — I am convinced that there would be no difficulty whatsoever in securing recruits for an Irish Navy. Whether or not they are wanted, I do not know. With the present system of operation in relation to our Navy, I am afraid that many young Irishmen living along the coastal areas of South and West Cork and other seaboard areas will find there is no place for them and that they are not inclined to be wanted by those who are in control of our naval section.
I will conclude on this note and again it is in relation to the first point I mentioned about the number of officers and privates. I am sure that our present Minister for Defence will probably have occasion to go down the country, like the rest of us, in connection with the local elections. I feel sure that he will go to a Midland town. My remarks in this connection would apply also to his predecessor in office. If the Minister feels like having a light meal while he is down the country there is nothing to stop him from going into a hotel or restaurant and it is only right that he should do so if he wants to. Why is it that we have to follow the headlines of the British and other armies where our own Army is concerned in this connection? Take, for instance, a young man who may have only a few shillings left in his pocket to keep him going for the rest of the week. If he finds himself in a strange town and feels very hungry he is not permitted to go anywhere but into the best hotels.
Why is it that we have that system in our Army and that many of our young men must suffer from time to time because of it? We may differ in our outlook on various matters in this House and, if we do, we speak out openly and frankly. I want to know who is responsible for that system. There are men sitting on both sides of this House who were good soldiers and good officers in their time — men who were as good as ever this country will produce. While they were serving, there was none of this damned nonsense as to where they were entitled to go for a meal. I believe there is too much autocracy and a touch of snobbery in relation to our Army. The system and the method of approach of the men who were in control of our Volunteer or armed forces pre-1920 or in the 1920 period was good enough for the country then and it should be every bit as good for us now.
It is well that our views should be expressed. If we want decent living conditions for our Army and if we are going to have a huge Army, we may be faced with demands for finances that we have not available. We want homes built for these men, who are now forced to live in many parts of the country in bad houses. We want decent conditions, a sensible solid Army, an Army which may be hard to get into, rather than be trying to drive men into it.
Let it be an Army with such conditions and payments that young men will be anxious to enter it, not just for a couple of years but to make a career out of it. Let it be something on a basis where a young man can enter for 20 years and get a pension out of it, knowing that he is going into a service where conditions are good. Do not let us have to depend on advertisements in our papers — cheap advertisements, showing pictures of soldiers, as it were, playing all sorts of games, an enticement to young fellows of 18 and 19, to bring them off the road, as if it were the case that we were hoping to reduce the number of unemployed by getting them into the Army. We will never make a success of our Army if we aim to make it a depot for unemployed men. We will make it a success if we get sensible young men into it who will be a credit to it and a credit to themselves and who eventually, by settling down and rearing a young family, will build up a tradition in relation to their service. In that way, we will have an Army composed of those N.C.O.s and men I have spoken of, who were responsible for the training of many Volunteers in the 1940 period.
Finally, I hope the Minister will keep an eye on the Navy. I hope the time will come shortly when we will be brave enough to see that if Irishmen were able to build up the navies of America and even of Japan, as Cork-men did, there is room for Irishmen at the head of an Irish Navy.
