I take it that, as agreed before the Dáil went into recess before Christmas, any matter arising on the 1966-67 Estimate for External Affairs can be discussed on this Supplementary Estimate?
Committee on Finance. - Vote 45—External Affairs.
Yes.
In view of the fact that the Minister did not make any detailed statement during the period when the Estimate was presented to the Dáil before Christmas and his promise that he would do so if a Supplementary Estimate were introduced and discussed, I should like to know if the Minister will now make a statement covering his activities over the past 12 months.
We are awaiting the distribution of the White Paper.
We have got our copies now.
I cannot call the Estimate until the White Paper is duly distributed.
Tairgim:
Go ndeonófar suim fhorlíontach nach mó ná £3,230 chun íoctha an mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31ú lá de Mhárta, 1967, le haghaidh Tuarastail agus Costais Oifig an Aire Gnóthaí Eachtracha, agus Seirbhísí áirithe atá faoi riaradh na hOifige sin, lena n-áirítear Deontais-i-g Cabhair áirithe.
Sé an gá atá ann leis an Meastachán Forlíontach ná chun Deontas-igCabhair a sholáthar do Chraobh na hÉireann den Chomhdháil Cheilteach mar chúnamh i leith costais an chruinnithe idirnáisiúnta den Chomhdháil a tionóladh in Éirinn i 1966 agus ina theannta san, chun soláthar a dhéanamh in aghaidh cúitimh ar an díobháil a rinneadh do thigh Attaché Mileata na Breataine i mBaile Átha Cliath.
Maidir leis an gComhdháil Cheilteach tá sé de nós ag mo Roinn deontas-i-gcabhair a chur ar fáil do Chraobh na hÉireann den Chomhdháil mar chúnamh i leith a chostais nuair a tionóltar an Chomhdháil in Éirinn. Tionóladh an Chomhdháil anseo i mí Aibreáin, 1966, ag an am céanna le deasgnátha tosaigh Cuimhneacháin 1916.
I gcás an chúitimh le Attaché Mileata na Breataine cuireadh tigh an Attaché trí thine ar an lú Márta, 1966, ag daoine anaithnideacha. Rinneadh díobháil measartha mór don tigh agus rinneadh do-áitrithe go sealadach é. Dá bhárr bhí ar an Attaché agus a chlann chur fútha i dteach ósta ar feadh trí mhí. De réir nós idirnáisiúnta do mheasamar go raibh de dhualgas orainn cúiteamh a dhéanamh dó ar an chaiteachas breise a cuireadh air dá bhárr. Mar sin tar éis na costais a cuireadh ar an Attaché a iniúcadh deineadh íocadh ex gratia de £400 chun an caiteachas breise a bhí air a ghlanadh.
Maidir leis an díobháil a rinneadh don tigh agus do mhaoin an tighearna talún agus an tionónta íocadh freisin suim de £1,580 mar íoch iomlán in éiric na díobhála sin. Íocadh, leis, suim de £150 mar tháillí dlíthiúla.
Is it intended to take this Supplementary Estimate with the main Estimate?
No. I propose to take this Supplementary Estimate first, and then, having disposed of it, to go on to the Main Estimate.
The general debate then will be on the Main Estimate?
Everything that wants to be said can be said on that.
I was anxious to know just what the procedure was.
May I register a protest? It was our understanding, this being the first discussion in the 18th Dáil on External Affairs, that the Minister would give us details of some of the activities of the United Nations in the period under review. This Supplementary Estimate seems to avoid any account of any kind on that particular aspect of External Affairs. The Minister should have dealt with some, at least, of his activities over the past two years. In this Supplementary Estimate, he is confining himself to a discussion on the Celtic Congress and the British Military Attaché.
The Deputy should know more about procedure. This Supplementary Estimate relates to two minor details of extra expenditure to be met in this financial year. The main Estimate, which I propose to open later today——
For what year?
It is for the coming financial year but, when an Estimate for the coming financial year is under debate, it is usual for the Minister to deal with what happened in the previous year as well as with what he anticipates may happen in the coming year on foot of the expenditure proposed. When this Supplementary Estimate is passed, I propose to make a statement on what happened last year, with reference, perhaps, to some things that had their roots in previous years also. I propose to give some indication as to how the moneys will be spent.
On a point of order, may I say I am amazed by the statement just made by the Minister in view of the fact that he was not present here when his Estimate came before the House just prior to Christmas? The House agreed on that occasion that the Estimate would be passed without discussion, on condition that the Minister would come before the House at a later stage and make a full statement.
If requested.
The Minister would come before the House and make a full statement.
If requested.
If the Minister will allow me to finish, he can then say what he likes. I am in possession. The Minister would come before the House and make a full statement on the Estimate which will expire on 31st March next. On behalf of the Labour Party, I now request the Minister to do that. I understood a Supplementary Estimate would be introduced on which all matters could be fully discussed. I understood the Minister would make a statement. I am amazed that he should attempt to insult Deputy O'Leary, saying that he should know more about procedure, when, in fact, it is the Minister who does not know enough about procedure to carry out the arrangements made by the House in his absence.
Would the Minister oblige us now by giving us even a short summary of his activities over the past year? It is our contention that External Affairs, under the present Minister, has brought us to a new low in the eyes of the world. We can measure that new low by the absence of diplomatic representatives from the Distinguished Strangers' Gallery today. They apparently did not think it worth their while to come here.
If the Deputy wants to discuss policy, I suggest he can do that on the Main Estimate.
The Minister for External Affairs was away in New York from September to December of last year. In order to facilitate him, the Whips on this side of the House decided to keep postponing his Estimate until he would be available. It was postponed for so long that there was no time left before Christmas to discuss the Estimate and the understanding was that the Estimate would come before the House first thing when the Dáil resumed after Christmas Recess and there would be a separate discussion on the Estimate for 1967-68. It will be a bad thing for this Parliament if this constitutes a precedent under which the main Estimates for two different years are taken together. If that occurs now, then the Minister will be getting away with it, so to speak, until about this time next year. I am not really concerned with whether or not he does get away. What I am concerned about is that we should not engage, or appear to engage, in sharp practice under which Estimates for two different years will be dovetailed into the one discussion. Deputy O'Leary is, I think, perfectly right in asking the Minister for External Affairs to give an account of his stewardship over the past 12 months. At some future date in this session, let us discuss the Estimate for 1967-68. We are requesting now that the Minister give us a review of the activities over the past year of his Department.
What happened last time was that I could not get back in time to take my Estimate and it was agreed that the Estimates for my Department would be passed and, if I were requested, I would introduce a token Estimate early in this session in order to give an opportunity for discussion. The Estimates were passed. I have now introduced a small Supplementary Estimate. If the Deputy wants to raise any matter on this, provided the Ceann Comhairle permits it, that will be all right with me. I suggest it would be more orderly to deal first with this Supplementary Estimate and then allow me to make the usual statement a Minister makes when introducing his main Estimate. Such a discussion is not confined to days or months, or even to a year. It can go back ten years or forward 100 years, if the Deputy so wishes. The statement I propose to make later will give the Deputy every opportunity for comment on what happened last year or the year before.
I think the Minister should appreciate that the idea of the Supplementary Estimate was in order to give an opportunity of discussing the 1966-67 Estimate. There was no intention of associating next year's Estimate with it. This seems to be bordering on sharp practice on someone's part. An attempt should not be made to dovetail the two years.
The Chair will understand our predicament. We understood we would have an opportunity of discussing the events of the past year. We are concerned first and foremost with the dignity of the House. We consider it would be a bad thing for the standing of the House to ignore our rights as members of Dáil Éireann in regard to raising matters that occurred in the past year under this Supplementary Estimate. Bearing that in mind, I propose to ask the Minister now—I am sure he appreciates our position—about some matters that have arisen on which he might perhaps give us some information. I should like to ask if, arising out of his recent visits to Europe, he has observed any new developments which he thinks may be hopeful or helpful regarding our entry into the Common Market?
It is only fitting that we should not pass subhead K— Compensation—without making some comment. I feel the people are with me in this, in condemning the action of those responsible for this incident. We have the Paisleyite mentality on this side of the Border also, and extremists on both sides who are not helpful in developing the friendship which we should be developing and we should not dismiss this action lightly.
Could the Minister inform us about the present position of our troops in Cyprus? He may remember that early last year he made a statement here that an agreement had been reached under which the financial expenses incurred by this country as a result of sending troops to Cyprus would be met by the United Nations in a certain way. He assured the House that there would be no financial loss to the nation as a result of the troops remaining in Cyprus. We in the Labour Party made it very clear at the time that while we believed Ireland should take part in peace keeping operations anywhere our troops were needed there was such a thing as too much of a good thing. We were reaching the stage where we felt that other people might be leaning too heavily on small nations like ours and asking them to supply more troops than they might reasonably be expected to supply, particularly if it would result in financial loss, not to the Minister for External Affairs, or to the Minister for Defence, but to the taxpayers. At that stage the Minister for External Affairs assured us that no loss would be incurred and the exact amount of money would be refunded to the nation.
I should like to know whether or not this has happened and also for how much longer it will be necessary to supply troops to Cyprus. The previous Taoiseach made a statement to the effect that after the first tour of duty of these people in Cyprus, the Dáil would be consulted before sending further troops abroad. Could the Minister say, following the recent visit of the Minister for Defence to Cyprus, if in fact the allegations made that Irish troops were being asked to do things which troops of other nations were not being asked to do were true —in regard to longer tours of duty, camping under unfavourable weather conditions and so on? I am sure the Minister does not want to delay on last year's Estimate but these are small points about which the country is entitled to know.
Deputy O'Leary asked about the Common Market. I think there is a better chance now of additional members being admitted to the Six than some years ago. We will have to await the passage of time and events to see whether or not our hopes will be fulfilled.
Deputy Tully referred to the Minister for Defence and his recent visit to Cyprus and the Middle East. He found all our troops in good form. At this time of year the weather is usually cold and wet in Cyprus but notwithstanding the hardships which soldiers have to undergo when on active duty, they were all in good form. Everything it is possible to do for their comfort under conditions of active service is being done. The Minister will be introducing his Estimate in a very short time and I am sure he will give a very full account of his visit to Cyprus and Jordan.
Would the Minister answer the first question, regarding the refund of moneys due?
I have the most up to date figures in my next statement and I can give them to the Deputy now but I will be repeating them in five minutes time.
I have a Whips' meeting and I should like to know them now.
Very well. The total cost incurred by us since March 1964 in regard to additional expenses paid to troops was £1,600,000 odd. I need not go into the odd pounds, shillings and pence. The amount which we have claimed to date, for which we have sent in bills, is £1,293,000 odd. The amount refunded to us to date is £664,000 odd. We have still to send in bills for £316,000 and the amount outstanding, claimed but not paid, is £629,000. I will be dealing with those figures again in a few minutes.
Could the Minister say why the complete claim has not been met? Is it being met?
This has been explained three or four times already but I do not mind explaining it now and again in a few minutes if it will satisfy the Deputy. We first went to Cyprus on an invitation to supply troops for three months. We were dissatisfied with the condition that expenses were to be met out of voluntary funds and for that reason the Government decided that they would not accept payment out of the voluntary fund for those three months, for the extra pay for our troops. That was early in 1964. Shortly afterwards we were asked to go for another three months and then for another three months and then for another three months, until the amount of money that we should have got if this operation had been financed in the ordinary way, by a mandatory assessment on all members, became very big indeed.
The question then before the Government was whether we should withdraw from the Cyprus operation altogether or ask the Secretary General to meet our past expenses out of whatever funds he had. We decided that we should ask the Secretary General, if he wanted our troops to continue, to undertake to pay this sum of money that was due to us. The Secretary General said that he would use his best endeavours. He has already paid us £664,000 and I feel that the best endeavours of the Secretary-General will result in our being paid what is due.
A sum of £664,000 was paid some time ago. Has there not been quite a lapse since payment was made?
I have not got the date of that payment. It is not quite some time ago, because the last payment on foot of that was in December, 1966.
The Minister says the balance is around £300,000, but is it not nearer £1,000,000? It was £1,600,000 and now there is £664,000 from that.
We claim £1,293,000 and we have to date been paid £664,000.
Vote put and agreed to.
Vote reported and agreed to.