Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 11 Apr 1956

Vol. 156 No. 2

Committee on Finance. - Vote 56—Defence.

Minister for Defence (General MacEoin)

I move—

That a sum not exceeding £4,688,950 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1957, for the Defence Forces (including certain Grants-in-Aid) under the Defence Act, 1954 (No. 18 of 1954) and for certain administrative Expenses in connection therewith, for certain Expenses under the Offences against the State Acts, 1939 and 1940 (No. 13 of 1939 and No. 2 of 1940) and the Air-Raid Precautions Acts, 1939 and 1946 (No. 21 of 1939 and No. 28 of 1946); for Expenses in connection with the issue of medals, &c.; for Expenses of the Bureau of Military History; and for a Grant-in-Aid of the Irish Red Cross Society (No. 32 of 1938).

The gross Estimate for 1956-57 is £7,263,450 and the net Estimate, after deducting Appropriations-in-Aid, is £7,033,450. This represents a decrease of £217,210 on the net Estimate for 1955-56. In making that comparison, it should be noted that last year's figure includes a sum of £136,430 transferred from the Vote for Remuneration to meet increases in the pay of Army personnel and of the civil staff of the Department of Defence. These increases, which became effective from the 1st November last, will cost in the current year about £330,000.

The major portion of the Estimate is devoted to the pay, allowances and maintenance of the personnel of the permanent Defence Force. Provision for these services is spread over a number of sub-heads and amounts to about £4,300,000 or roughly 60 per cent. of the gross Estimate.

As in previous years, the Estimate, as far as the permanent Defence Force is concerned, is framed on the basis of the full peace establishment, that is, 1,273 officers and 11,542 non-commissioned officers, privates and seamen. Deductions are made in the relevant sub-heads in respect of the numbers by which the actual strength for the year is likely to be below the establishment. The net provisions cater for an average strength of 1,206 officers and 8,000 other ranks. In addition, provision is made for 67 cadets in training, of whom 24 are expected to be commissioned during the year, and also for 39 new cadets to be appointed.

The figure of 8,000 non-commissioned officers, privates and seamen for which this Estimate in effect makes provision is the same as in last year's Estimate. Recruiting was continued during the past year, aided by special recruiting drives. While the intake of recruits was approximately the same as in 1954-55, it was not sufficient to replace the wastage. The strength of other ranks as on 31st March, 1956, stood at 7,554. The efforts to obtain a sufficient and steady flow of recruits, not alone to replace the wastage but to build up the strength as much as possible, will be continued energetically during the present year. I would like to take this opportunity to ask Deputies to join with me in these efforts and to use their influence whenever and wherever they can to get our young men to offer their services. The Army now provides attractive careers, and even for the young man who does not intend to follow a military career, a few years with the Colours will prove a very sound and remunerative start in life. If our efforts in this direction are as successful as I hope they will be, I shall have no hesitation in asking the House to vote more money by way of a Supplementary Estimate.

The Reserve Defence Force has well maintained its strength and activity. There is an increase of 500 in the Reserve of Men (First Line), and it is particularly gratifying to note that the attendance of the F.C.A. at training during the first three months of the current training year, which commenced on the 1st January, has exceeded expectations.

Looking at the individual sub-heads, only a few of them show appreciable increases from last year, and I propose to comment briefly on those. The increase of £111,252 in sub-head A— Pay of Officers, Cadets, N.C.O.s and Privates—is due to the pay increases to which I referred earlier. The increase of £54,444 in sub-head M— Clothing and Equipment—is attributable to the replacement of certain stocks of cloth and uniforms which, due to difficulties surrounding the production of a better quality cloth and slow initial deliveries by the mills, had necessarily to be used to meet current requirements. A provision of £80,000 is made in the sub-head for this purpose. Increased expenditure on the purchase of aircraft accounts for the increase of £58,378 on sub-head O — General Stores.

The principal decrease is in sub-head P—Defensive Equipment—and amounts to £378,000 odd. It is felt possible to reduce the expenditure under this sub-head on account of the substantial quantities of modern equipment purchased during the past four or five years.

It may be helpful to Deputies if I now refer briefly to some of the more important activities and developments in our Defence Forces.

The training of the permanent Defence Force is aimed at achieving and maintaining the highest possible level of efficiency in all components. In the case of officers and non-commissioned officers, special emphasis is given to training in leadership.

Intensive courses for officers are held at the Military College, refreshing and keeping up-to-date all aspects of their training and concentrating especially on the more advanced features of military science. Last year, in addition to these senior courses, it was found possible to introduce modified courses so that a greater number of officers could have the benefit of up-to-date training.

As has been the practice for many years, a number of selected officers were sent on courses abroad and it is hoped to do likewise this year. At the kind invitation of the Swiss Government, a mission from our Army visited the Swiss Army manoeuvres and training schools last year.

Training of the F.C.A. is carried out on the lines considered best suited to the circumstances of that force. Members are encouraged to attend for periods of full-time training, and last year some 500 officers and 1,500 non-commissioned officers availed themselves of these facilities. This was considered a very satisfactory response. Other new features of F.C.A. training are: Short special courses for potential non-commissioned officers, and combined training of F.C.A. personnel and regular troops in some areas.

Generally, a more active part is being taken by the officers of the F.C.A. in the training and administration of their units.

With regard to the Air Corps, a contract was placed last year for the supply of three jet-engined training aircraft, delivery of which is expected about June next. These are of a type that has been well proved in other air forces. The concrete runways necessary for their operation have been completed at Baldonnel. It is expected that the entire runways project, including the ancillary engineering works, will be completed by the end of the year. The cost is being met from the Vote for Public Works and Buildings. It is intended during this year to order four piston-engined training aircraft, for delivery next year. The Air Corps already has some planes of this type and they have proved very satisfactory for the elementary and intermediate stages of training. The scheme for the training of short-term pilots which was embarked on a few years ago, in conjunction with Aer Lingus, for the joint purpose of building of a reserve of Air Corps pilots and providing crews for the civil air line, is proceeding satisfactorily. Recently, five of these pilots were given employment by Aer Lingus.

Substantial provision is again made for the improvement of quarters, living accommodation and amenities for the troops. Last year I had the pleasure of opening a scheme of 88 new houses for non-commissioned officers and privates at Blackhorse Avenue, Dublin, which my predecessor had initiated. More recently, a fine new billet block, which will provide first-class accommodation for about 200 men, was completed at Custume Barracks, Athlone. This year among a large variety of smaller works, we are building 30 houses at the Curragh Training Camp, and ten houses at Athlone.

A small garrison church, to replace the hut at present in use for the purpose, is being built at McKee Barracks, Dublin. I am glad to say that all the buildings to which I have referred were or are being constructed under the supervision of the Corps of Engineers. In the Curragh Training Camp, where there has not been a proper garrison church since the old structure became dangerous and had to be pulled down some years ago, a new church is also being erected.

The results achieved by the Army Equitation team last year were considered to be very satisfactory. The team attended eight international shows. Two nations' cups—at Harrisburg and Toronto—were won, as well as seven important individual events at Nice, Rotterdam, Harrisburg, New York, Toronto and Dublin. Twenty-six provincial shows were attended during the year.

All young officers, on leaving the military college and before being assigned to units, are now required to undergo an equitation course. They are thus given an introduction to this stimulating form of exercise, and at the same time it will be possible to discover officers who have a particular talent for horsemanship.

The whole problem of civil defence is at present under review in the light of developments in nuclear weapons. Tremendous problems have been revealed as a result of this review and it is now evident that the old concept of civil defence will have to be radically altered. For that reason, therefore, together with other difficulties which I hope soon to overcome, it was found impracticable to proceed with local recruitment and training which had been forecasted in my speech last year. All these problems are being urgently examined at present.

That concludes my statement on the Estimate for Defence. If there are any points on which Deputies require further information, I shall endeavour to supply it when I come to reply to the debate.

Mr. Traynor

The Minister in the course of his statement referred to the fact that the decrease which has been brought about in sub-head P, Defensive Equipment, which amounts to the very large sum of £378,710, is due more or less to the fact that a decision apparently has been taken to cease adding to defensive equipment because over the past four or five years a quantity of defensive equipment has been provided for the Army. I must say that to me is an astonishing statement. If it means that the Minister has come to a decision that the Government is not going to provide additional defensive equipment, all I can say is that it is a very retrograde step.

If we make a comparison between the Book of Estimates for the current year and that of last year, we find very little change and in the circumstances one feels it rather difficult to discuss an Estimate of a kind that is practically a replica of that which we discussed 12 months ago. What is much more unfortunate is that whatever change there is in the Estimate is a change for the worse.

According to the Book of Estimates there is a net decrease of £217,210 in the Estimate but when we look through the various sub-heads we find a decrease of £30,553 under sub-head C, which covers the pay of the civilians attached to units. Under sub-head P, that is, Defensive Equipment, the decrease shown is £378,710, that is, £161,500 in excess of the actual net decrease which is given in the Book of Estimates. If we go on further we find that under sub-head P (2), Naval Service, there is a further decrease of £45,237. We could go on even further and find that under Barrack Maintenance and New Works, although the Minister made some reference to the fact that they were actively participating in further construction work, there is the peculiar state of affairs that there is a decrease of £18,337. That may seem somewhat paradoxical but these very formidable decreases have been offset by the figures to which the Minister himself referred, increases in the pay of the Army and Civil Service staff, increases in compensation payments, the extra cost of fuel, light, and so on. Were it not for these, the net decrease would be very much higher than is shown in the Book of Estimates.

When speaking on the Vote on Account, I referred to the fact that out of the 66 Estimates contained in the Book of Estimates, 12 were reduced and amongst those reduced was the Department of Defence Estimate. I know that the Government has very little interest in defence and when it comes to a question of using the economy axe and they look around to see where they can utilise it, Defence is usually one of the first Departments to suffer. In the discussion on the Vote on Account I said that there were also cuts in items under the Office of Public Works, in which case there was a cut of something more than £300,000. Now I see that the Minister for Defence is himself emulating the action of the Office of Public Works by reducing the Vote in respect of barrack maintenance, by something like £18,337. He is making a decrease of £30,553 in the pay of civilians attached to units and we all know that the civilians who are attached to that type of work and who are going to suffer in this respect—if we examine the Estimate we see that there is a decrease of about 142 in the number of that type of tradesmen and labourer—are mainly Old I.R.A. men. I hope that when the economy push is being made the first men to be sacrificed will not be found amongst the Old I.R.A. who gave service to this nation of a type which we know.

The sum to which I referred in regard to the Office of Public Works was £350,000-odd which, of course, was an astonishing figure because there again the Government gave no examination to the situation that exists at the present time in regard to unemployment, emigration, and so on. Yet, the Minister for Defence follows the example there.

I do not think anyone will dispute that, when the Fianna Fáil Government were in office, they did everything it was possible to do to provide the Army with the means by which they could carry out the very heavy responsibility which rests on their shoulders, the responsibility of preserving the State and providing protection for the people. The Army authorities at all times, to my personal knowledge and, I am sure, to the knowledge of the Minister, because I am sure they press him in the same way as they pressed me, were anxious to be provided not only with the men but with the equipment. As far as we were concerned, we did our utmost to provide them with the men. We did it to the extent of increasing the strength of the Army, shortly after we came in, by 4,500 men in a period of roughly 12 months. That was secured as a result of the active recruiting campaign which was undertaken and which was prosecuted with all the vigour the Department of Defence and the Army itself could produce. I am afraid that, in the present circumstances, that effort is not being encouraged and that any failure to secure recruits at the present time may not be due to lack of desire on the part of young people to enter Army life, but rather to the fact that the proper effort is not being put into a recruiting campaign.

I think I can speak on behalf of every member of our Party when I say that in anything the Minister or the Department of Defence can do to bring about the necessary addition to the Army strength, we will be prepared to co-operate and will be behind any action or campaign which the Minister may be prepared to undertake.

During the term of office of the first Coalition Government—1948 to 1951— we did everything we could to help the then Minister for Defence, the late Deputy Dr. O'Higgins, to secure equipment that we knew the Army were seeking and, as I said a few minutes ago, we did everything we could before that to secure equipment. I remember the Leader of the Opposition making a speech in this House on the occasion of an Army Estimate and, in reply, the then Minister made a statement to the effect that if any member of the Opposition or any Deputy from any other part of the House could tell him where he could get equipment, money would be no barrier to the securing of that equipment, that he would be prepared to go after it and place it in the hands of the Army. Having regard to that, it seems to me to be an extraordinary state of affairs that the present Minister, apparently, is not now going to look for additional defensive equipment because, apparently, we have bought sufficient over the period of the past few years.

We purchased something over and above £2,000,000 worth of equipment for the Army. So anxious were we that the Army should be properly equipped to carry out the duties entrusted to them, that we sent a special team of ordnance experts to the Continent to inspect in the various munition works the type of equipment then available and to make their own selection of the equipment that would be most suitable to the circumstances most likely to prevail in any action likely to take place in this country. The experts went to the Continent and made their own selection, after long and careful inspection, of the type of defensive equipment which, in their opinion, would be most suitable in the circumstances likely to be met here. The sum that involved was in the nature of £2,000,000 odd.

That was not enough. That related only to the type of equipment that would be likely to be useful to the ground force. There was a good deal of other equipment they were seeking. There was, naturally, air equipment. According to the newspapers—the only information. I have—some training planes have recently been purchased. That is a step forward. That is something that I am personally very glad to see being provided for the air force. We all know that the equipment available to the air force is not of a type that would be of any use in any circumstances which would be likely to bring them into conflict with enemy forces.

Another reduction in the Estimates that I regret very much to see is the reduction in sub-head P (2)—the Naval Service. To me, that is an extraordinary state of affairs. There is a decrease of £45,237 under sub-head P (2). Last year, there was a reduction of £28,678 and I made an appeal to the Minister to do something to provide equipment in the form of vessels for the Naval Service. His reply this year to that is to bring about a further reduction of £45,237. It seems to me to be an extraordinary state of affairs that a native Government is not prepared to encourage the building up of a native naval service. We have a great sea tradition in this country; we are an island people. When we had no boats of our own to sail, we sailed the boats of almost every nation in the world. We have it to our credit, too, that we established at least two of the great naval services of other nations. Yet, instead of giving encouragement to the building up of a native naval service, we are decreasing the amount of money available to it each year. That, to my mind, is an astonishing state of affairs, especially in view of the fact that we are building up in this country an extremely valuable and very useful mercantile marine, and doing it very successfully.

I think that with a strong, well-equipped and well-trained naval service, we would provide the ways and means towards a growing mercantile marine, providing not alone officers to command that mercantile marine, but also ordinary personnel to work it. We are not doing this at the present time, I suppose, because we have not got the men with the necessary experience. I know that the building up of a naval service is a very costly affair. We have got a good start; we have at least established it, we have three vessels, vessels which, I am sorry to say, must be now coming near the end of their useful career, and from that point of view alone, it would be very necessary and desirable to consider the whole question of their replacement.

I think it would be good policy for any Government, no matter what Government may be in power, to provide at least one vessel per year over the next ten years, and at the end of that period we could then re-examine the situation, with a view to seeing what it was necessary to do still further to improve that service. If we are sincere about our policy of neutrality, we should at least be prepared to build up an army and a naval service that will convince those interested parties that we are not only capable of protecting ourselves, but quite prepared to do it. If we are not able to convince those interested parties of that fact, the next thing that will happen is that we will be given their protection—something which I think should be avoided.

A further consideration arises by reason of the fact that this nation has been accepted into membership of the United Nations Organisation. This nation must have some commitments to that organisation, and I have a fair idea of what they are, because I have read up the articles. There are commitments, both monetary and physical, and I am pretty certain at the present time, with a dwindling Army, we could not meet these requirements, if we were asked to do so. I would like the Minister to tell us what the position is in that regard. In regard to the naval service, there would also be a very valuable service provided for the protection of the fishery industry here, a thing we have never been able to provide hitherto by reason of the fact that we have never had the necessary number of vessels to do it.

I am satisfied if we had the necessary number of vessels to provide protection for our fishing industry, it would give valuable training, in addition to giving the protection the industry needs. I believe that the industry would prosper greatly as a result of that protection. We expend quite a large amount of money on the School of Equitation and I am pretty certain that it brings in quite a large amount of invisible returns. I am also certain that whatever moneys were spent on our naval service would also bring in returns, not perhaps invisible, but returns, nevertheless, of the kind that the Army Equitation School brings to this nation. With that in mind, we should look on these things from a broader point of view than we appear to be doing at the present time.

I was sorry to see a decrease in sub-head A (1), the military educational courses abroad. The Minister referred to the fact that these courses were going ahead, but, unfortunately, I see here a decrease of something like £4,500. I hope that does not mean any lessening in the desire to send our officers abroad to get all the up-to-date training and current information of a military kind that is always made available to officers attending these courses. From that point of view, I should be very sorry to think that there would be any restriction on the sending of Army officers on those very valuable and useful courses.

I notice that under sub-head W, which deals with insurance, there appears to be a reduction of employer's contributions to an extent amounting to about £834. The employer's contribution in that case, I must assume, is the State's, and that can only suggest that there is a dwindling Army rather than a growing one at the present time.

I think I have gone over most of the matters it would be possible to talk about on an Estimate like this, which, as I said at the beginning, is practically a replica of the Estimate of last year. It is very difficult to talk on matters other than those of a general kind, but, before I sit down, I should again like to make a special appeal to the Minister in regard to this question of the knocking off of these men, the reduction of that maintenance staff by something like 142 men. That would be a very grave disruption of their domestic life and I feel sure that there are other means of effecting such economies than by the method intended by the Minister under this sub-head. There are many other channels which could be explored. I strongly appeal to the Minister not to enforce this economy.

I was glad to hear the Minister's references to the training of the F.C.A. and to the improvement which appears to be taking place. I tried to do something of the same kind, unsuccessfully, during my period in order to get the F.C.A. to train themselves—not only to train themselves but to take control of themselves. They seemed to be rather shy of doing that, preferring to having themselves placed under regular Army officers. I am aware of the fact that Army officers themselves were most anxious that the F.C.A. would take control of their own organisation from the point of view of training, of managing their own manoeuvres and other matters of that kind. I am aware that Army officers would be prepared to give whatever advice and assistance is required and to keep in touch with the F.C.A.

Mr. S. Collins

I think it is nearly time we came to grips with some of the problems besetting the Army. These problems in the main do not spring from reductions in the Vote for the purchase of equipment or in the various sub-heads of the Estimate. This is a small Army and it is time the Minister and the Department recognised the fact that, as a small Army, it has a lot too much to do, that the Army is involved too much in fatigue duty and the various other duties that go with the maintenance of too many barracks by too few troops. Most of the recruiting troubles that we face to-day can be traced to the fact that we have less than 8,000 men occupying myriads of barracks throughout the country, involving as it does all the various chores and fatigues attendant upon the maintenance of those barracks.

It is time we faced the fact that the efficiency of the Army is tied up with the fact that you have to give all ranks in the Army reasonable facilities, not only for effective Army training but for normal life. I know that in many sections of the Army there is a complete overdose of fatigues and guard duties. That is not the way to attract young men into the Army. We have suffered from the backwash of the disbandment of the emergency Army. Nothing spreads more quickly throughout an area in which a number of soldiers resign than stories of too many guard duties, too many fatigues and things of that nature. I think the Minister and the Department will have to cop themselves on and realise that they can have an infinitely better and more efficient Army if they face the problems of giving them more opportunities to be soldiers and fewer of the multiple fatigue duties involved in the maintenance of too many barracks.

I am very keenly interested in the Army. I can rank among some of my best friends many Army officers. We have seen recently a campaign in another Army to eradicate what is termed in Army language as "the bull". It is time we too got to grips with that problem. If we are to be in earnest about stepping up recruiting we must go beyond the provision of colourful posters and colourful pictures. We must get to grips with some of the difficulties besetting the normal soldier's life—the difficulties of married quarters and the difficulty of personnel separated from their wives and families. Even though that is being minimised, it still remains sticking out like a sore tongue.

Let us review in a practical way the situation in the Curragh where the Minister says in the forthcoming year it is proposed to build 30 houses. The fact of the matter is that in the Curragh there are seven barracks occupied by a number of soldiers who could be adequately accommodated in one and a half barracks. It might be well for the Minister and his corps of engineers to consider whether there would not be an effective way of converting many of the fine buildings in the Curragh into married quarters.

Mr. McQuillan

Hear, hear!

Mr. S. Collins

It is time for us to realise that we are dealing with an Army of between 7,000 and 8,000 men, not with problems attendant upon the maintenance of division upon division. In the circumstances of the limited number in our Army it is vital that we get the maximum possible efficiency out of the personnel and we will get that only by giving them a contented and reasonable standard of living within the Army. When driving from here back to my constituency on innumerable occasions, I have taken the trouble to notice the various Army installations at the Curragh, at Kilworth and at Fermoy and I think that the very diffusion of the troops in small units all over the country has led to unnecessary hardships for personnel. The average soldier does not mind his fair share of fatigue duties and his normal tour of guard duty but when it becomes a daily routine of menial duties it discourages personnel.

I am not saying this in any spirit other than one of anxiety to see that we get the best out of our Army and give the best to it. There are many features of our Army in which I want to see substantial changes. The one gratifying feature in the Minister's presentation of the problem to-day is the increase of interest and the improvement shown in An Forsa Cosanta Aitiúil. I was privileged to watch that body, with the Minister, in the recent parade in Cork. I was amazed at the improvement that has taken place even from one Easter parade to another.

With regard to the L.D.F., there again we want a lot of "the bull" cut out. The time has come when we must vary the training of the L.D.F. as much as possible and keep that body as up-to-date as possible, trained in the use of the most modern equipment that the Army has. It is time that the relics of the 1914-18 war were stored away in some museum rather than have them carried around on the shoulders of our Army personnel. Remember, the L.D.F. can be a source of tremendous strength to the regular Army. I notice the Minister made no reference in his speech to the Reserve.

General MacEoin

Oh, yes.

Mr. S. Collins

Is that because the situation continues to deteriorate, as it has been deteriorating for years past? Is it because we still have the chaotic position that a member of the Reserve, in order to be promoted from lieutenant to captain, has his number of days calculated by some Civil Service arithmetical method, over some outrageous period of years, in order that he will have the same service as a man promoted in the Regular Army? Let us have some reality in our approach to these matters.

I am quite sure the reductions in the Estimate can be reasonably accounted for. The Minister has said the Army has a good deal of equipment. It may have a tremendous amount of equipment, but I am not at all too happy as to the kind of equipment. I would not urge the Minister to enter the field to buy more of the same type of equipment, equipment of which we already have a surfeit. Are we getting down to reality at all in this matter? The concept of war has radically changed within the last ten years. Surely the time has come when we should not have just an empty report as to the potential of training in civil defence. Surely the time has come when we should have active spearheads throughout the country dealing with air raid precautions under nuclear warfare conditions. No matter how much we may respect the Army, no matter how proud we may be of our Army—and we are all proud of an Army born from a great tradition and living up to that tradition—we are not naïve enough to try to hide the dangers that may confront us as a nation standing behind this small, but highly efficient, force.

What has been done about learning the principles of air raid precautions under nuclear warfare conditions? What courses have been attended and by what number of personnel? What type of training has been given? To whom, if anybody, has the knowledge gained in that training been imparted? This is a very substantial Estimate. The cost of the Army, the cost of the civil servants who run the Army and the maintenance of the various barracks, etc., throughout the country, runs into a very considerable sum. We all want to see our Army, from the Chief of Staff down to the rawest recruit, given proper and adequate remuneration and the best possible conditions but, at the same time, we are entitled to ask what is being done in relation to a very vital aspect of our defence problem—one which will be the most vital of all if another catastrophe descends upon the world, namely, nuclear warfare and civil defence?

I think, if we were being frank and honest with ourselves, we should be talking here to-night about the provision of money for the purchase of equipment very different from the type of equipment to which Deputy Traynor referred. It is essential that we should keep our Air Corps in touch with modern development. If the Minister is turning over to the turbo-jet fighter trainer, can he give us any explanation as to why, this year, he has reverted to ordering piston engines? Whatever justification there might have been for ordering piston engines when one could not get the jet trainer, there is hardly any justification now. If we intend to equip the Air Force for any purpose, even if it is only for screen reconnaissance, piston engines will be an outmoded form of flight. Surely jets of some description will be essential for effective reconnaissance, contact or break away.

Why are things in the Army in the state in which they seem to be? The answer is a simple one, and I think it is one the Minister should take seriously to heart. There are 7,500 odd men in the Army. Let us work out the number of barracks, stations, posts and outposts that they occupy. Let us ask ourselves then how could it be otherwise than that they would have far too little soldiering and far too much drudgery? In the modern army the soldier wants to do his soldiering and, having done it, he is then entitled to have his normal leisure hours and recreation like everybody else. Unless something is done about that situation, I regret to say to the Minister and to the members of this House that we will have very little improvement, if any, in recruiting.

Let the Department of Defence and the Army Corps of Engineers, who are now doing something about Army housing—I have been advocating that for years because I felt it was rather extraordinary that we should have a highly skilled corps of engineers, with everybody from architects and engineers down to various skilled tradesmen doing everything but building houses for the Army—have a look at much of the property the Army has in various barracks all over the country and see what they can do to make reasonably comfortable married quarters out of them for much of the Army personnel who are seeking married quarters. Some of the barracks are so old and so out of date that I cannot understand why they are being maintained as Army posts at all, because the difficulty of maintenance and the amount of fatigue attached to them is extraordinary.

Let us be frank and let us realise that the problem of keeping up the strength of our Army is not one that is going to be solved whether or not we have a cut of £378 in goods for warlike stores or a £45,000 cut in the money for naval services. The position is that recruits are not coming in to pick up the wastage in these sections. While Deputy Traynor urges we should buy a vessel every year for the naval service, I would say to the Minister: Buy no vessels, if we cannot get something better than what we started with. We would be far better off, if we want to deal with fishery protection, to have a couple of decently-equipped helicopters for armed reconnaissance patrols, rather than have lumbering ships which are generally 150 or 200 miles away from the trawler poaching in our waters.

Because of the equipment the modern trawler has, slow-moving, lumbering vessels such as our naval service possesses are no effective fishery patrol at all. Deputy Traynor seems to forget the fact that the modern trawler is equipped with all types of radio apparatus, radio telephone and so on, and they have a camaraderie and freemasonry all their own that enables them to pass on the tip very quickly if the Maeve or the Macha are around. We saw in to-day's Press how ineffective the fishery protection service of a bigger nation was when a trawler landed one of their sailors aboard a lightship and beat a hasty retreat back to the Continent, even though, technically, she was under arrest.

We have got to realise—and the Minister and his Department must face up to the fact—that the first and vital necessity for the continuation and maintenance of our Defence Forces at home is the contentment of the man. If they get down to grapple in earnest with that problem, they will find a lot of the recruiting difficulty solved, and will find that there is not so much waste of public money. The thing that sickens me about the Army Vote is the waste of public money in it. If you have your Army personnel properly and comfortably housed, maintained, not in an unlimited number of barracks but in a reasonable number, and given reasonable hours of duty and a reasonable amount of fatigue, instead of overloading them, you will have an infinitely better-run army and an army maintained infinitely cheaper than the one we have at present.

I know that there would be murder amongst Deputies if the Minister suggested closing barracks here and there; but if the Minister, his Department, the Army Council, the Quartermaster General, and the various responsible officers of the Army do not get down to grappling with this problem, the stage will be reached where you will have a very large band of officers and N.C.O.s in this Army surrounding very few privates. The difficulty is not the cuts that are occurring in the Army Vote. Soldiers, like anybody in any other walk of life, are looking for better conditions. Army pay is better than ever it was before and, compared with the days when we were putting out our hands for 13/2, can be described as vastly improved. But conditions, which are a vital factor in the mentality of the man and the intake of men into the Army, are worsening. Let the Minister and his Department face that problem and we will not be worrying next year on the issue of recruits.

I should like, through the Minister and his Department, to compliment the Army Equitation School on the performance they gave last year. I wish them more and more success in their fields of endeavour. It is a good thing to see that we can compete with the cream of the world; it is a very good earnest of what is within the potential of our own Army if we cut out the "bull" and get down to business. There is nothing as good as the good soldier and there is nothing as troublesome, and nothing a greater source of potential disruption, than the discontented one. Train them right, make their conditions worth while, cut out the fatigues and chores, and let them be soldiers and they will be proud of their job. If the Minister does that, he will find very little difficulty with the recruiting drive.

Mr. Corry

I am afraid the fatigues the Army have to undergo at present, and of which Deputy Collins has complained, will not be decreased by throwing 100 civilians on the road and making the Army do the work.

Mr. Collins

That is rubbish.

Mr. Corry

No. Those fellows do nothing? I am concerned mainly with another matter Deputy Collins dealt with, that is the housing of our Army and Naval Forces, particularly as far as Cobh and other areas in South Cork are concerned. The moment any houses are built in the South Cork area, you have a horde of applications from Army and Navy personnel for them. It is a problem for any local authority to have to find houses for people who should, in my opinion, be housed by the Department of Defence. The Minister told us about houses in Dublin and the Curragh and he went as far as Athlone but he went no further south than Athlone.

General MacEoin

I will.

Mr. Corry

I suggest the Minister should come to Cork. Army personnel are living to-day in houses in Spike Island into which you would not put a dog. The same condition of affairs exists as regards the Navy in Haulbowline. As I said here previously, we are prepared to meet the Minister in regard to this matter. We put through housing schemes every year in the suburbs of Cobh and we would be prepared to meet the Minister there, both as regards land and helping him out in any way we can.

I think it is unfair of the Department of Defence to place those men in such a position that they have to apply to a local authority for housing accommodation. I think it unfair, that it is a matter they should meet. I do not know much about the readiness of the Army for defence purposes or anything else but if they are as speedy in that connection as they are in preparing a scheme to take half a dozen apprentices into the naval dockyard at Haulbowline, God help us. Their readiness for action must be very slow indeed.

This matter has been going on here since 1948. The Department of Defence have been preparing a scheme to take a half a dozen apprentices into the naval dockyard at Haulbowline from the vocational schools in Cobh since 1948 and the scheme is not ready yet. The town of Cobh has a tradition in that regard. Haulbowline always and at all times took in a large number of civilian apprentices to train them as artisans and so forth. We asked those at the naval dockyard in Haulbowline, which is the headquarters of the Irish Navy, to carry on that tradition and I cannot see any reason why they should not. I cannot see why they should be ten years preparing a scheme for it. I do not like bringing the matter up in this House but I have repeatedly brought it up here by means of question and otherwise year after year and got very little satisfaction. I think it is time we had some finality on the matter and that we might get an affirmative or other reply from the Minister on it.

I cannot help feeling a considerable amount of alarm at the size of the reduction in civilian employees. A considerable number of those men are employed both in the naval department at Haulbowline and in other departments in my constituency. Practically all of them are either Old I.R.A. men or men who gave service during the emergency when the nation required them. They should have a very definite claim on the Department of Defence in that regard. I cannot see any justification for putting them out. Most of those men are married men and have family commitments. I know that the Minister has at least as much regard for the Old I.R.A. as I have and I would ask him to lighten his hand in this regard. I am sure he will.

There is one other matter with which I am anxious to deal. When is the Department of Defence going to hand over the lands of Kilworth to the Land Commission for division amongst the people? That matter was brought up by me quite a few years ago. I was assured then that a special Act was to be passed through this House for the purpose of transferring State lands of that description to a more useful purpose. That Act was brought into the House and passed, I think, by the present Minister for Finance, Deputy Sweetman. That is nearly one and a half years ago now, if not longer. When are we going to have action?

Are those lands going to be left lying there every year and let for grazing? Some 400 or 500 acres of decent arable land are involved which, if handed over to the Land Commission and divided up, would provide a livelihood for several decent families. When will some action be taken in that regard? I think it is the bounden duty of the Minister to speed up that matter at once. I have received repeated appeals from small holders and men who are anxious to earn their livelihood in agriculture in that district, to have that land divided.

General MacEoin

The Deputy would not turn me into a Land Commissioner, would he?

Mr. Corry

No. I am only asking the Minister——

General MacEoin

That is what the Deputy is trying to do.

Mr. Corry

——to do what in my opinion he should do, hand over what he does not want to those who want it. I do not think I am asking too much in that respect. Why should the Department of Defence hold thousands of acres of land, useless to themselves, and let under the most obnoxious system that one could imagine—the 11 months' grazing system—under which every fellow takes out of it what he can and you have nothing left but a few furze bushes in the end?

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 12th April 1956.