Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 26 Mar 1958

Vol. 166 No. 8

Committee on Finance. - Vote 57—Defence (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the motion:—

That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration. —(Deputy McQuillan.)

Mr. Booth

When we adjourned last night I was drawing attention to the fact that the Soldiers' Pay Section comprises a staff of 105, which is responsible for the pay of something over 11,000 personnel. On that basis, one civil servant is employed for each 100 of the other ranks of the forces, despite the fact that the pay is actually distributed by the officers of the units and the pay sheets setting out the full details are prepared by the clerical staff in the units themselves. This appears to me entirely unnecessary.

Reference was made last night by Deputy O'Higgins to the public relations aspect of the Defence Forces and he commented, I think rightly, on the fact that a closer contact was necessary between the public and the members of the forces. Such closer contact could be achieved if the forces were allowed to co-operate more with civilians in functions such as regattas, motor races and so on where the soldiers from the Corps of Signals could be used for communications work. This would enable members of the public to see the wireless equipment which is now being used by the forces and would also, in my opinion, give very valuable practice to the members of the forces. All too often, Army training is confined to stimulating certain conditions. If members of the forces were made freely available to civilian committees or bodies running functions it would be possible for them to demonstrate to the public the equipment used and, at the same time, get valuable training. It might be possible also to use the Corps of Engineers for bridge exercises and so forth. I would hope that the Air Corps would give displays from time to time. Nobody knows what aircraft we have. To most of us Baldonnel might be hundreds of thousands of miles away. There might be less misinterpretation in relation to the forces if the public were allowed to go into barracks on certain specified occasions to see demonstrations of Army equipment, preferably, of course, with something actually happening.

Mention was made last night by the Minister for External Affairs of our support for the forces of the United Nations. I would be happy to think that some opportunity might be given to members of our forces to serve with the United Nations overseas. If we really wish to co-operate, and we are doing so financially, we could reap a double benefit by sending our men to serve as observers and so forth, as legal advisers or professional officers. Such experience overseas with the troops of other countries could not be anything but advantageous.

Deputy O'Higgins, too, also suggested last night that public relations could be improved by more Army parades. I disagree with him entirely on that. First of all, we have not sufficient troops to put on a very big-scale parade and a small-scale parade is discouraging for everyone. Apart from anything else, it is just marching past and I would very much prefer that the troops should be seen doing the jobs for which they are being trained. Marching in sixes down O'Connell Street is not their main aim or object.

I recently came in contact with an interesting group who have formed an association of parachutists who operate out at Western Aerodrome. I am glad to say that they are now training with the Civil Defence units. I would hope that the Minister would keep this group under review from time to time because these are men who are training voluntarily and entirely from their own expenses. They are also training for the emergency dropping of supplies to people who may be marooned due to flooding or other disasters.

They are doing a dangerous job. They are all volunteers. They are paying for their training, for their parachutes and for the hire of aircraft when they are jumping. I should like to give some publicity to this very public-spirited group and ask the Minister to keep them in mind and give them any assistance in the future for which they may ask. They are not asking for any assistance at the moment. They are working under the supervision of the Department of Industry and Commerce, who actually issue licences in this regard, but I feel that the Minister for Defence also should be kept fully informed. I would be glad to inform him of any future information which may come my way.

Mr. Casey

It has been my experience, since the publication of the Book of Estimates, that no Estimate has provoked so much adverse criticism as the Estimate on Defence. In fairness to the Minister and the present Government, I should say my experience has been the same over some years past. The feeling is rife throughout the country that the amount of money expended annually on defence is unwarranted. I know there is an extreme view held by a minority that we should make little or no provision at all, that we should have no Army, Navy or Air Force, because in modern times they would be ineffective.

I do not share that view, nor do the majority of the people, I think. There is unanimity—or as near to it as makes no difference—that the desirable policy for us is to have a good nucleus of Defence Forces which would be capable of absorbing recruits in times of emergency and capable of training them in the shortest possible time. But having made a decision that it is impracticable, for financial and other reasons, to maintain permanent Defence Forces here capable of resisting invasion, we should then confine ourselves to the main expenditure, to maintaining the nucleus to which I refer.

There is serious doubt as to whether over £6,000,000 per annum is needed in that regard. There is a widespread belief that we could maintain and finance a reasonable nucleus for much less than that sum. Looking over the details of the Estimate, we may say that the various provisions there are reasonable enough and, perhaps, in different circumstances, even desirable for a country of our size and resources. But at present when we are being exhorted on all sides to tighten our belts and to do with less than might be desirable under other circumstances, we are entitled to ask can we afford to vote £6,208,000 for defence?

We are particularly charged with asking ourselves can we afford, not alone the amount that was voted last year, but an increase in the Estimate for the coming year. Bearing in mind the exhortations which have been issued from various Ministers and the Government generally in regard to the need for economy, the people are justified in asking can we afford to budget for an increase of £37,000 on this particular Estimate?

We are all aware that there are financuial difficulties. It was pointed out by Deputies on all sides during the debate on the Vote on Account that there are many desirable projects which we cannot undertake at the moment because of the lack of finance. We must examine this increase in the Estimate in the light of those circumstances. We must ask ourselves are we justified in this increased expenditure for defence at a time when we have chronic unemployment and mass emigration, when so many sections of our people are living on mere pittances of social welfare benefits, at a time when we say to the aged, the unemployed, the widows, the orphans, the blind and disabled that unfortunately, because of our financial position, we cannot afford anything extra for them by way of social benefit. Can we then at the same time say: "We cannot afford it for you, but we will provide £37,000 extra for defence"? I do not think we can do that.

You cannot have the Minister for Defence defending that policy when, on the other hand, you have the Minister for Health explaining in the House and up and down the country that very many desirable hospital projects, new buildings, extensions, nurses' homes and so on, cannot be proceeded with under present circumstances. You cannot have the Minister for Education saying that while he is pressing forward the new school building programme in many areas, he is not going at the speed that either he or we would like. In those circumstances, I do not think the Government is justified in presenting to the House and the country a bill for defence in the coming year of £6,208,560.

The stage has been reached when we must examine the whole Estimate and ask ourselves can we afford the various provisions outlined there. I would ask the Minister to look at the provisions made for the F.C.A. and An Sluagh Muirí. The public generally do not appreciate the amount of money that has to be voted for that section of our Defence Forces. We find in the Estimate there are three large headings dealing with the F.C.A. and An Sluagh Muirí. In Y (2) we are asked to vote £372,659. In Y (3) we are asked to vote £19,000. Under another sub-head, not particularly earmarked as moneys for the F.C.A. and An Sluagh Muirí, we find in sub-head G a sum of £47,000 being subsistence allowances to officers, N.C.O.s and privates on duty with the F.C.A. That gives us a total under these three headings of £438,682.

Many people will be amazed to hear that figure. We are entitled to ask is that money well spent, is it money that we can afford in this particular branch of the Defence services?

Mr. Haughey

That is for 20,000 men.

Mr. Casey

I know that when Deputy Haughey was speaking yesterday, he felt it was money well spent. I do not believe, and I do not think that Deputy Haughey believes, that there are 20,000 men taking an active interest in the F.C.A.

Mr. K. Boland

There are more.

Mr. Casey

There may be names on a roll. You may have them when there is a whip-up on certain occasions. But I am speaking about the F.C.A. who are expected to attend their normal weekly parades and so on. I do not think that the 20,000 men mentioned in the Estimate is a true figure. Very often, many of these men are in the force of avail of a fortnight's holiday in the summer and very many of them regard it as being in the nature of a relief scheme. I do not wish to reflect in any way on the members of the F.C.A. Probably, like myself, most Deputies were in the F.C.A. during the emergency. The F.C.A. served a very useful purpose during that period but, in peace time, particularly in times like these, when there is such financial stringency, we must have another look at the F.C.A. We have a new Minister for Defence, a young man with a fresh mind on these matters, and he should not allow himself to be driven along or voluntarily go along the groove in which we have been moving in the post-emergency years as far as this particular service is concerned.

Notwithstanding the feelings of Deputy Haughey on the matter, who, I am sure, is quite genuine about it, my own personal opinion is that to vote almost £500,000 for the F.C.A. is a waste of public funds. I say that without reflecting in any way on the officers and men in that force who have the best will in the world and the intention of serving their country to the best of their ability. I have no doubt that they are bona fide in that regard but, I maintain that it is a waste of public funds and is a matter that the Minister should review.

Mr. Moloney

My remarks will be confined to the Army as a whole. I am glad that I can congratulate the Minister on the efficient and excellent manner in which he has administered the Department in the past 12 months. I should also like to join with Deputy MacEoin in paying tribute to the Minister and the Army authorities for the fact that politics have been kept out of the Army during that period. That is a very satisfactory state of affairs and augurs well for the future.

A recruitment campaign has been initiated recently. Generally, these campaigns have lacked in the past that drive that is necessary to achieve satisfactory results. The usual practice is to advertise the fact that a recruiting officer will arrive in a particular district on a particular date for the purpose of enlisting men. That type of appeal is not generally effective. I would respectfully suggest to the Minister that the recruiting personnel might take advantage of the secondary schools and colleges and make a direct approach, to the principals of those educational establishments with a view to getting the senior boys to take an interest in recruitment. The census of population might also be utilised.

Information is available to the Army authorities and Government Departments from official statistics as to the families in which there are boys between, the ages of 18 and 20 years. The parents of such families might be circularised by the recruiting authorities and asked to make a contribution to the recruiting campaign. That might produce very satisfactory results. It has to be brought home to parents that the Army is an essential part of our military and indeed too our economic life and that we are all expected to make a contribution by way of personnel to that force, just as we would make a contribution to any of the voluntary organisations, such as the Red Cross, that exist for the general good of the State.

In the years gone by recruitment for the Army was regarded in a different light and it was usually the useless members of the family who were encouraged to join the Army. Since we achieved our freedom, and more particularly recently, the Army has come to be regarded as something more than it was a quarter of century ago. Probably the experience people had during the emergency was helpful in that regard. Now that we have made some progress in establishing what the Army should be it would be disastrous if we fell down on the job, and I would suggest that employers, particularly industrial employers who give work to large numbers of young people, should be asked to urge on their staff the desirability of joining the Defence Forces for a year or two. I appreciate that a shortage of manpower exists so far as youth is concerned at present and that is bound to militate against the success of the recruiting campaign.

That brings me to another question, the encouragement of the F.C.A. which now numbers 20,000. Last year's strength is given in the Book of Estimates as being the same as in the previous year and the last speaker doubted that there was that number in actual service. The Minister appears to be satisfied that such a number is in active service. I accept that is so.

I have some personal knowledge of the work that the F.C.A. is doing and I am anxious to take the opportunity to pay tribute to the Minister in the first instance and to the director in charge of the F.C.A. for the excellent manner in which the force conducted itself during the year. A good deal of lip service is given by all the powers-that-be to the advantages of the F.C.A. but in general none of us gives sufficient recognition to the personnel constituting that force. This creates a certain strain on those in charge of the force. Members have not been able to get the desired recognition on retirement and in cases where they seek public appointments.

I feel the system which existed many years ago whereby Army personnel got some additional marks when competing for certain public appointments was a good one. For obvious reasons we had different opinions about it at that time but since then we are almost unanimous as regards the Defence Forces in general.

To my own knowledge the men in that force are good, energetic and patriotic young men devoting their free time to parades and taking part in the prescribed exercises. They manage to get time off, if employed, or permission from parents otherwise, and go to the annual camps to improve their training. They make big sacrifices and, while some people may suggest that if they were not paid for that particular service they would not be prepared to co-operate, I do not agree with that at all. The amount paid to the volunteer in the F.C.A. is very small, and nowadays young people tend to put leisure first.

We should be proud that we still have boys prepared to put their country first. It is not fair that when they apply for jobs, whether in agriculture, in industry or public works, they get no preference at all. I think a good case can be made for some small preference. I would not expect very much and it would not be right that it should be very much because when one embarks on a policy of that kind many people are ready to complain and make a good case against it. I think we may have to depend on a voluntary force like this in the future because it is doubtful with the present shortage of manpower, if any Government in our circumstances will be able to secure the number of men required in a regular army.

I think the number in the F.C.A. is far too low. The figure I already mentioned represents only 800 men in each county. During the emergency the number was at least four times what it is to-day. Perhaps some of those then were not very fit for active service and the 20,000 to-day could be reckoned as more effective than the 50,000 during the period 1939-1945. Nevertheless, there is room for a big increase in the strength of the force now.

I take it it is Government policy to try to increase that number, that there is no maximum. All of us should do everything in our power to encourage young men of military age to come into the F.C.A. if they cannot join the permanent force. It is better that they should be in the volunteer force than in no force. Many of our young people are lacking in national discipline and possibly domestic discipline, and the best way they can get it is in the Army, if they have not got it in the secondary schools or similar establishments.

One of the great drawbacks as regards the F.C.A., I suggest, is the shortage of suitable halls. In a number of areas local councils have been able to provide halls but they are few and far between. It is rather a pity that the Department of Defence cannot work out some scheme with the Department of Local Government whereby local authorities could be encouraged to provide grants for the erection of halls, for which there is provision in the Local Government Act of 1946. The difficulty, of course, is that of getting the revenue to pay off the loan charges, but I believe the Department of Defence would find it good business to pay a reasonable rent for the use of any training centre, more particularly where suitable accommodation would be available in a local hall.

During the emergency period the biggest difficulty that those of us who were then associated with the forces experienced was trying to get suitable hall accommodation. In those days the number of public community halls available in my part of the country was very small. There has been some improvement in that connection since but I am afraid things are at a standstill again owing to the high cost of building.

Those halls could be used effectively as training centres for our voluntary forces, not alone the F.C.A. but other organisations such as the Red Cross, and so on. It is important now that we should take some positive steps in training personnel in civil defence, and halls for that purpose are needed for every type of personnel. I hope the Minister for Defence will work out some scheme with the Minister for Local Government whereby the local authorities will be encouraged to provide these halls for the purpose of training our military and civil defence organisations and as a secondary consideration, to provide accommodation for the holding of lectures and other social activities which are so desirable.

Mr. Coogan

I rise to express my disappointment on once again seeing that in this Estimate there is no provision for acquiring such useful aircraft as the helicopter. This has become a joke as far as the West is concerned. We are told: "It would not serve its purpose. It would not pay," and so on. Representations have been made by bodies all over the country for the provision of this type of aircraft. I wonder if we put the running cost of the helicopter against those of some of our jet aircraft which would prove the more useful in the long run, and more worthy of being invested in.

Another purpose to which the helicopter could be put—although you might argue that it is not the function of the Department—is the spotting of shoals of fish off our coasts. It would help our fishermen and repay indirectly any money spent on it. It would also deal with the foreign trawler menace off our coasts. More important still it would not be the threat to life which the jet aircraft represents as it flies so fast over us. When our naval service are approaching an area where these foreign trawlers are engaged they are at the disadvantage that the tip-off is given to the foreign trawlers and they are outside the limit by the time the naval vessel arrives there. In that way our three mile limit laws are flouted daily.

Another question on which I would like the Minister to lay more emphasis is that of encouraging voluntary effort throughout the country. I agree totally with the last speaker that it would be a good thing if the F.C.A., the Red Cross, the Order of Malta and other voluntary services were given more encouragement. It would be good economy, a healthy sign and would prove beneficial to some of our youth.

In relation to our Army bands, there are areas throughout the country that have never heard them. In a big town such as Galway we hardly ever hear an Army band. That is a tourist centre and it is reasonable to request that if one of these bands could not be stationed there for the summer season, they should pay a visit now and then.

For a number of years back the Galway Corporation have been burdened with having to provide houses for Army personnel. Our county medical officer has condemned the living conditions in Renmore Barracks in Galway and it is most unfair that the burden should be passed on to the corporation. I hope the Minister will bear in mind the points I am raising, especially to provide accommodation worthy of soldiers to live in and which will not have any stigma attached to it.

Mr. Loughman

Deputy Casey was justly concerned with the increase in social benefits. However I believe that 1/- a week increase to every person on the social services benefit list would amount to no less than £2,000,000 in a year. That would be equivalent to practically one-third of the total Army Estimate. I am sure he would not wish that we should sacrifice the Army in order that all the people on the social services list should get 1/- a week extra.

We have already said we would all wish to increase benefits for these people but I think the great majority of the people would wish the men in the Army to get more consideration. Our Army suffers from a number of disadvantages that armies in other countries do not suffer from. We have a small Army and the careers of officers who joined are held up during the time they are in the Army, with no prospect for them except the ordinary stepping stone of promotion.

I should like to recommend to the Minister to consider if it would be possible to make arrangements for Army officers to take courses in the universities. The officers have to retire at some stage but, even if they never retired, I think it undesirable that they should be Army officers and nothing else. They should have some instruction in foreign languages, commerce or a number of the other faculties. Where officers wish to attend the universities every effort should be made to facilitate them. I should like the Minister to consider that idea very closely.

I also think that the men in the Army should be facilitated and encouraged to gain knowledge in occupations that would be useful to them after leaving the Army. They should not simply have to go around looking for jobs without having any training to assist them. While they are in the Army they should be allowed, in their spare time, to take up some form of training and should be encouraged to do so.

Deputy Coogan spoke of the provision of housing facilities for officers and other Army personnel. I think that is a very vital matter. When an Army officer is transferred from one district to another very often he has already purchased a house in the area which he is leaving and he has to leave his wife and family there and start scouting around to find a house in the district to which he is going. I think it is a great hardship to these officers and the same thing applies to the men. The Minister ought to induce the Government to provide more money so that there will be sufficient housing available to ensure that officers and men can obtain houses when they are transferred.

There is another aspect of Army life to which I should like to refer. I am told that recently the country lost the services of an excellent medical officer simply because, when he applied for a dispensary post in the country, his qualifications did not seem to be as good as those of an Army officer who came from England. I think that some special consideration should be given to an Army medical officer when he applies for a post in our dispensary or public health services. If such officers do apply for these posts and are given them they will remain in the country. They will not emigrate. They can be kept on the Army Reserve and will be useful citizens. If what I am told is correct, it would seem that membership of the Army Medical Corps is more of a hindrance than a help when these men apply for a post in the dispensary services.

These are two or three suggestions which I should like the Minister to consider about the Army itself. I think that we ought to be very proud of the Army, both officers and men. I remember a time when we had a British garrison in every town in Ireland. In those years, the reputation we associated with those men was that they were rowdy and that wherever they were there was trouble. In the town in which I live we have an Irish Army unit and I think they are the best behaved people in the town. It is wonderful to have an Army whose officers are top class and the men in which are a credit both to Army and officers.

We still seem to think of men who join the Army as men who took the shilling, got fed and got drunk when they got a little money together. We should regard our Army as affording a career for our men which would give them a reasonable livelihood. I regard the ordinary private soldier as being as good as a tradesman and until we step up the Army to that standard we shall not get the men we wish to join it.

I would not at all join with Deputy Casey in his suggestion that we should consider a reduction in the Army. He did not say that we should reduce it, but he said that we should consider whether the maintenance of the present Army is justified. I think the Army is not big enough and we should aim at a bigger Army, one in which our men would receive remuneration in line with the services they are giving.

Mr. Blowick

There is one point which I want to put strongly before the Minister. That is the provision of some sort of aircraft which might be used by the Army to assist when we have these unfortunate accidents along the south and west coasts. From Donegal to Kerry, across to Wexford and up along the east coast we have had accidents and, unfortunately, we shall have them as long as people go to sea. I speak of one of which I have personal knowledge—the accident off Clare Island during the winter. I feel convinced, from the evidence given at the time, that one life or possibly two would have been saved if we had a helicopter based on Galway or Limerick.

The Minister for Industry and Commerce told us to-day that this matter did not come within his ambit and I think the Minister for Defence is the appropriate Minister to acquire at least one, if not two or three, aircraft. I should like the Minister to give his views on this matter. I think the helicopter would be the ideal thing. Lifeboats do terrific work when the need arises, but there are certain circumstances in which a helicopter or aircraft of some kind would be much quicker and would be able to spot survivors more quickly. They could save valuable lives in times of storm and danger in frail boats at sea.

I am sure the Minister has got a good deal of information from the experts in his Department on that subject. There may be a better idea than a helicopter. The Minister may say that a helicopter would cost money. Of course it will cost money, but I suggest that some kind of light craft able to ride out a storm or to drop food or lifebelts to people in danger would be of immense value even if it were only called into service once in 12 months.

I should like the Minister when he is replying to tell us what the cost of a helicopter would be, and if there is personnel available to man such craft. I am sure personnel could be made available with a little training. Has the Minister any other ideas on the subject? Something is necessary. It is no use our tearing our hair out every time there is a tragedy. We should make an effort to prevent any recurrence of what has happened in the past and the suggestion I have made is worthy of the Minister's consideration.

Mr. P.J. Burke

This is a very important Estimate, one of the most important coming before this House. Deputies have said that we want a smaller Army and that we can do without an Army. The fact remains that the Army is the only genuine guarantee we have of the preservation of this democratic State and, if the Army fulfils no other rôle but that, it is of tremendous value because it is essential that we should ensure that no group of individuals will be empowered to usurp the functions of the democratically elected representatives of the State. That is why I regard this Estimate as so important.

We are very proud of our Army. I would like to see conditions improved considerably for the rank and file. I know the Minister cannot work miracles. He has not been long in office and so far he has done an excellent job. I should, however, like to see soldiering made attractive for the soldier. I should like to see conditions generally improved and more men encouraged to join the Volunteers and the F.C.A. I know that the State cannot afford to increase pensions, but I hope the day is not too distant when increases will be made. A stocktaking is due.

Deputy Loughman spoke about sending officers to the universities. I would approve of that where men are ambitious and would like to take advantage of a higher education but the ordinary soldier and the N.C.O. is also deserving of higher education. I believe there should be large-scale vocational education within the Army so that men would be equipped to take up positions on leaving the Army. Education, too, would be valuable from the point of view of those who emigrate. Those who have emigrated in the past suffered from a lack of education. Such education would enhance the position of our people who go abroad and bring prestige to the country.

Deputy Blowick spoke about a helicopter service. We have an excellent lifeboat service along the east coast and a reasonably good one on the south coast. But the position is very bad on the west coast generally. The people along the west coast could do a good deal to get a lifeboat service, if they want one. The Department of Defence and the Minister are blamed when accidents happen. Listening to some of the speakers, one would imagine an accident never happened before and that nobody was ever drowned before. I can remember numerous drownings in the sea, in rivers and in lakes. The people who left Clare Island should have taken some precautions that night. The boat was overloaded, and, if people take these risks, then the blame cannot be laid at the door of the Department of Defence. The Minister should not be castigated for his failure to work miracles. He could not know that these people were leaving Clare Island under such conditions. To have a helicopter overhead when a man falls into the sea is not possible. While I would like to see the country able to afford more helicopters, I think we must be realistic in the present situation. We have an excellent lifeboat service along the east coast. If public representatives and other interests on the west coast wanted it, I believe they could have a lifeboat stationed at some central point.

It is farcical to blame everybody when something happens. It reminds me of an old story about a sailor who was pulled out of the sea by a landman. This kindly man brought him to his house and revived him. The following morning he said to the sailor: "I suppose you will never go to sea again." The sailor said: "I will never do another turn of work until I go to sea again." The poor man who pulled him out asked him where his father had died. The sailor said: "My father and grandfather were drowned at sea." The man then put the question: "Is that not a warning that you should never go to sea again?" Then the sailor asked: "Where did your father die?" The kindly man replied: "My father and my grandfather died in bed." The sailor said: "I do not think you should go to bed again."

Mr. Manley

In general the people of this country have become quite conscious of the desirability of a small, well equipped and trained regular force. They do not hesitate or grumble about contributing in a reasonable way towards the maintenance of such a force. We have such a force now in our National Army. We are proud of that Army. We know it is quite efficient and can measure up to modern standards.

The Army was established in this country at a time of great confusion. It was built up during the Civil War. It is a tribute to the men who guided the destiny of the Army down the years that, in spite of all the political upheavals, the Army maintained its independence, its objectivity and its loyalty. As Deputy MacEoin said last night, any Government that came in to replace another got the same spirit of service and loyalty from the Army. That is what we should expect and what we would like to see maintained. I hope that spirit endures.

Recently I heard very caustic comment about retirals and promotions in the Army. I do not know how justified that comment was and I cannot go into the merits here. But in all sincerity I appeal to the Minister to be guided by the principles of seniority and priority if he wants to retain the confidence and loyalty of the forces over which he has charge.

In former days the personnel of the Army was provided by men who went into it from purely national motives, actuated by national ideals. That was the spirit of the Army at its establishment and that was the spirit of the Army during the emergency. In peace time I doubt if we can maintain the same morale, patriotic outlook and spirit in the Army as we had in the past. I think that no one goes into the Army in peace time except those who find that other jobs are closed to them. They only go into the Army as a last resort.

Singularly enough—I may be wrong in this—I think the recruiting campaign is always launched at a time when we have high unemployment. That may be a good thing from the material point of view but I doubt very much if it is a good thing from the point of view of getting the right type of recruit. Perhaps, through lessons and lectures in history while in the Army, the recruit may be taught to have pride in the vocation he has taken up and may be converted from being merely a casual soldier to being a soldier believing he is serving his country and in a position to serve it well.

This Estimate of £6,208,560 is really a rather staggering sum. Let us go back 36 years and realise that in those days with a mere volunteer force the Irish people won their independence. There was no charge on the nation. It was a question of personal sacrifice, and these people even subscribed out of their own meagre means. It is rather ironical to find now that to maintain this freedom we have to spend £6,208,560.

I should like to ask the Minister is this judicious expenditure at a time of high unemployment, at a time of emigration and of general economic depression? I can see no reason why he would not save £1,000,000 on the very Estimates before him without reducing the personnel of the Army or impairing its efficiency. A million pounds saved and converted to some form of national development would give wonderful relief in this country at present, even if the saving on the Army were converted to rehabilitating some of the men who helped to establish the freedom of this country and who to-day find themselves in distress, penury and poor health.

Deputy Casey mentioned the sum spent on the Reserve Forces in the coming year. While the numbers seem big, I am told that the attendances of members of these forces in various places is not very edifying. That is the way always with voluntary forces of that kind. Nevertheless, it takes quite a sum of money to maintain that force. For the transport of troops there is a sum of £57,981; mechanical transport, £86,788; petrol and oils, £85,000, making a total of almost £250,000.

In peace time, it is not easy to maintain an Army up to standard because of the inactivity. Soldiers cannot be all day marching around the barrack square, forming fours, and there is not sufficient activity to attract men into the Army at this period.

I personally believe that the Army in peace time is big enough without further recruitment. I remember, and I am sure Deputy Moher remembers, when the British occupied this country the army of occupation used to march regularly from Cork to Kilworth, a distance of almost 30 miles. Our soldiers to-day do not cross the street unless there is mechanical transport under them. I have heard very trenchant remarks made on that fact around Cork City. When the Army goes out to train its drivers, one Army truck will not do; they must have several. I do not see for what. I do not think it is right to ask the taxpayer to pay for that type of joy-ride. I am the last to cast any aspersions on the Army but there is that tendency nowadays. What is everyone's business is nobody's business and when transport is provided by the taxpayer the individuals in charge of that transport do not take the same care or give it the same attention as they would if it were their own private transport.

In peace time, also, the Army could be associated with national activities of other kinds. We were all horrified last week to read of the disastrous fires in the forests in Leinster when 100,000 trees were destroyed. I put this suggestion to the Minister and I think it is a practical one, that the Army cycling corps should act as wardens of these forests particularly during the summer months. If two of these cyclists went into every forest area and stayed in that area—they could still be paid by the Army and get their subsistence allowance and at the same time get a little contribution from the forestry branch—to maintain vigilance over the forests, which are such a national asset and which would safeguard against their being destroyed by thoughtless people during the dry summer months, that is one way in which some of the Army personnel could be used to bigger national advantage in peace time.

The military police could help the Garda sometimes, especially in the cities and congested areas, in the detection of crime and could co-operate with them so that there would be greater opportunity for capturing culprits at a time when crime is becoming so prevalent in this island of saints and scholars. It would help to promote in these men the conviction that, besides helping the Army, they could do useful work in other Departments of State.

Captain Giles

As an Army man, I, also, would like to pay tribute to the Army of the last 30 or 35 years. The Army deserves the confidence of the nation and has got that, because the Army was established at a very critical time and had very critical work to do. The political situation at the time was fairly dangerous and explosive. Nevertheless, with each succeeding change of Government, the Army remained loyal to tradition and served every Government loyally, faithfully and well. That is something we should appreciate. If our Army had failed us in the hour of danger all would have been over with the nation, but the Army never failed us.

We are at the end of an epoch and starting a new epoch. The old traditional soldiers of the I.R.A. are passing out and we will have a new type of Army manned, more or less, by career men. At present a man makes a career of the Army and would not serve very long if he did not get his commission and did not know the length of service and what he would get on leaving the Army. Originally, those who joined the Army came in response to the call to national service. I never wanted to be a soldier and I answered the call and soldiered when I was needed and then left the Army to pursue my career. I should like the Minister to see that the Army fosters a spirit of patriotism, that it will not be a career Army, but will inculcate a spirit of national service. We want an Army in which we can have full confidence and we can have that if the Army is treated as it should be treated.

I agree with Deputy Manley that there can be great economies in the Army. £6,000,000 or £7,000,000 is too much to spend on a peacetime Army. There should be a very small foundation Army of about 5,000 or 6,000 as a nucleus which could be expanded in an emergency. Now that the British army of occupation has gone from the Twenty-Six Counties, I think there are too many outposts, barracks all over the country, which represent a burden on the taxpayers. The number of barracks should be reduced to four or five. There could be one in Dublin, Cork, Galway, Athlone and, perhaps, one in Dundalk. The Curragh Camp should be sold out and the land should be divided. Officers and men hate to go to the Curragh Camp. It is a most dismal place.

General MacEoin

Shame. There is not a word of truth in that.

Captain Giles

In the old days, the soldiers stationed there would go to Hell to get out of it. The Curragh should be sold and the land should be utilised for the production of food.

General MacEoin

The Racing Board have it.

Captain Giles

There are far too many barracks and their upkeep is too costly. We are not getting full value for the millions spent since 1922. If that money had been spent on developing the country we would not be in the economic position in which we are to-day. It may be good insurance to have 7,000 men standing idle while they are paid and fed but the return to the nation is very small.

Not sufficient attention is being given to the F.C.A., the members of which give their services free, gratis and for nothing. In every parish there should be 30 or 40 men in the F.C.A. but there is nobody trying to work up sufficient spirit to attract them. In every parish there are eight or ten decent men who will make the sacrifice but there may be 30 others who would come in if they were encouraged. Nobody is making an effort to encourage them. Every young man should be equipped in case of national danger to serve with a rifle or in the transport sections or in some other service. There are too many young men fighting shy of giving voluntary service, which shows a very poor spirit in a country of such tradition in soldiering. I would ask the Government to make every effort to get full service out of every young man from the age of 16 to 25 who should be proud to do something for his country. If that were so, there would not be two or three armies in the country. A spirit of national service should be inculcated in the young people and the F.C.A. should be made the foundation of national service. In that way, a great deal would be done to prevent the trouble, turmoil and internal revolt. There is no effort being made to do that.

The F.C.A. should be provided with a better type of uniform. The men hate to appear in public in the uniforms with which they are at present provided. They should be properly fitted out and there is no reason why they should not be when they are giving voluntary service. When we do recruit an Army, we should see to it that there is a future for that Army and that the men know where they stand. Since the Army was first established, there has been the problem of the demobbed soldier. I move to report progress.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.