Deputy Luke Belton has given notice that he wishes to raise the subject matter of Question No. 84 on the Order Paper of 19th May.
Adjournment Debate: - Dublin Power Station Incident.
On Tuesday, 18th May, I tabled three questions. One was to the Minister for Transport and Power, one to the Minister for Justice and one to the Minister for Defence. The three questions concerned the arrest of a press photographer at the ESB station in Ringsend on 11th May last.
The Minister for Transport and Power informed me that nobody connected with his Department was concerned with this arrest. Technically, he was correct because it was not a direct employee of the Department of Transport and Power, it was an employee of a subsidiary company — a member of the ESB staff. I should like to quote the Minister's reply to a supplementary question on this matter. It is at column 1729 of the Official Report, Volume 253, No. 12:
Staff of the ESB are involved in this case.
The question to the Minister for Justice was disallowed by you, a Cheann Comhairle. I wanted to know who exactly had powers of arrest and you, in your wisdom and judgment, and I wholeheartedly accept your ruling, said that the Minister had no responsibility to the Dáil for the interpretation of the law in this matter.
On Tuesday we did not reach the question to the Minister for Defence but on Wednesday it came up. I was one of four Deputies who tabled questions to the Minister about this matter on that day. The Minister took the four questions together and I should like to quote his reply from the Official Report, Volume 253, No. 13, column 2008. He said:
I have seen the reports referred to in the questions and have had the incident fully investigated. As a result, I am satisfied that there was no question of the press photographer being arrested by the military personnel on duty at the Ringsend ESB power station and that, in fact, the photographer was informed by the guard commander, in reply to a question, that he was not being placed under arrest.
I have gone to the trouble of looking up the definition of "arrest" in what may not be the last word in a dictionary but it says that to arrest is to "deprive of one's freedom".
There was an article in the Sunday Independent of May 23rd which quoted Mr. John Devine as having said:
I had hoped that it would not be necessary to involve all the journalists in Ireland to pressurise the Government and a semi-State body to bring forth a simple apology to us and to our member who was arrested and detained unlawfully. It now appears that the manliness of both the Ministers and the ESB was over-estimated.
This journalist, according to this report in the Sunday Independent, was approached by two members of the Defence Forces who were fully armed. He was taken off the public highway. I wonder what would have been the reaction if this man had refused to go. It is all very fine for the Minister to say he was not under arrest but I put it to you, a Cheann Comhairle, that if two armed soldiers come to any Member of this House or any member of the public and one gets on either side of him and they ask him to come with them, no interpretation can be put on this except that the man is being deprived of his freedom. He is not a free agent to say “I will not go” and, according to the dictionary, if one is deprived of his freedom he is under arrest.
I think the Deputy should tell us what dictionary he is quoting from.
The one de Valera used to define a "Republic".
(Interruptions.)
I am quoting from the Oxford Concise Dictionary. I am not saying it is the last word but that is what I am quoting from. As Deputy L'Estrange has reminded Deputy Meaney, a previous leader of his party brought in not one dictionary but several and an encyclopaedia as well.
(Interruptions.)
Mr. Devine also stated, according to this article :
The Minister for Defence has implied in the Dáil that there was no arrest.
I think Mr. Devine was being more than fair to the Minister when he said "The Minister has implied". I think the Minister went further than implying because he said there was no question of the photographer being arrested. That is a definite statement.
The ESB official whom this man was brought to had first to verify his bona fides and agree that the man had been acting in good faith and that there was nothing wrong in his taking photographs from the public road. Can anyone argue that the photographer was not under arrest? He was deprived of his freedom until such time as the ESB official verified his bona fides.
This is not the first time press photographers have been interfered with. In fairness to the Minister for Transport and Power, about ten months ago there was a case of a photographer being refused permission to take photographs at Dublin Airport and when I raised the matter the Minister gave a solemn promise that any duly accredited journalist who presented his credentials would be given free access for the taking of photographs which he might think would be of public interest.
What went wrong in this case? We appreciate there have been strange happenings both north and south of the Border and the Government are quite right to take certain precautions in the national interest. Naturally they must take precautions because not alone have they reason to take precautions from the point of view of the public interest but in the past year they have had very good reason to take action within their own party, within the ranks of their Ministers. We do not blame them for taking precautions but at the same time any ordinary member of the ESB staff could have approached this photographer if he had any reason to doubt his bona fides: he could have asked him if he was looking for something. I cannot see how it became necessary for two soldiers, fully armed, to approach this man and, one on either side, to bring him in. By any standard this was arrest.
If the press here are to be censored either in the matter of writing or photographs the Government are doing a bad day's work for the country. This has been the attitude of all dictatorial governments throughout the world — to try to suppress the freedom of the press, to disallow newspapers to publish what is in the public interest. They allow them to publish only what suits the Government. There is a danger that this Government are heading in the same direction.
Did not Fine Gael suppress the press at their Ard Fheis?
What about the bull fight at your Ard Fheis? What about the four-letter words that were used?
Deputy Wyse could have made the interruption himself and not be prompting Deputy Meaney.
I do not have to prompt Deputy Meaney.
The Deputy did prompt him.
You kept the press out of your Ard Fheis.
Your Ard Fheis was a disgrace to the party, to your Leader and to the entire country.
Let the press into your Ard Fheis.
Ordinarily, I look on the Minister for Defence as being quite a reasonable man. He is a big man in stature——
And that is all.
——and I had hoped he would be big in mind as well.
Deputy L'Estrange has a low mind.
One of your Ministers had to talk about low standards in high places.
Would Deputies please allow Deputy Belton to continue on the Adjournment Debate?
I had hoped the Minister would realise that those two members of the Defence Forces acted hastily but in a manner which they believed was in the interests of security. Perhaps they were quite correct but they were a little overzealous. All that is necessary is that the Minister should be big enough to admit that a mistake was made. The problem could have been overcome if the Minister had been big enough to admit that a mistake was made and if he had apologised to the photographer whose freedom, though only for a short time, was interfered with. To err is human, to forgive is divine; and all I am asking is that even at this eleventh hour the Minister would admit that a mistake was made and that he would apologise for it. I appeal to him now, in the interests of peace and harmony, to admit that though the two members of the Defence Forces were activated in the best interests of the nation, they made a mistake in depriving this man of his freedom. The Minister should apologise to this man and guarantee to him that this will not happen again. The Minister would be doing a good day's work.
I have already given a full reply to questions on the matter last week and there is in fact little more I can inform the House about this incident. My function in the matter concerns the behaviour of the military guard on duty on that occasion. As I indicated last week I fully investigated the incident and I am quite satisfied, contrary to the claim of Deputy Belton, that in fact no arrest was made and the individual concerned was not deprived of his freedom.
Who interrogated him?
He was invited into the office.
By two armed men.
Will the Deputy please cease interrupting? I am sure he wishes to hear the Minister's reply.
As I said, I have made a full investigation of this case and I am quite satisfied that in fact no arrest was made. The individual concerned went voluntarily with the military guard to the gate lodge where he supplied the information that was required. At no time was he deprived of his freedom. This question is really making a mountain out of a molehill and I cannot interpret the Opposition's comments other than criticism of the performance of the military on duty guarding this very vital installation and there is no point in making half-hearted apologies for that criticism. It is an open criticism of the manner in which the military were doing their very important work in guarding this very vital installation.
I have the utmost confidence in the military and in their capacity to do their work. I compliment them on their vigilance on this occasion. Apologies are sought but there is nothing to apologise for. The guard commander acted correctly and most courteously towards the photographer. It is superfluous asking me to apologise in respect of an incident like that. I can assure the Press that they will continue to receive every reasonable facility from my Department. Our relations in the past have been excellent and they shall continue to be so. We have an important job to do. The members of the Defence Forces have very important work to do in difficult times and sometimes in difficult circumstances. Even if the public must suffer a little inconvenience I think in the circumstances they should be prepared to bear with it. Where the Press seek facilities for newsmen or photographers it would be desirable and it would minimise any possibility of inconvenience if they contacted the appropriate authorities in advance in regard to their requirements relating to installations under military guard.
Even on the public highway.
The Deputy is being quite unreasonable. The normal precautions were exercised and the photographer was treated most courteously. There is nothing to apologise for. I repeat that I am quite happy and confident in the capacity of our men to perform this vital work and it is a pity that the Deputy should drag through this House condemnation and criticism of what our loyal soldiers are doing in the present situation.
I did not condemn it. I said a mistake had been made.
They did not always think that of the Army.
This is all I have to say. There is no apology called for and no apology is forthcoming.
The Dáil adjourned at 11.5 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 27th May, 1971.