Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 15 Dec 1971

Vol. 257 No. 11

Committee on Finance. - Vote 43: Defence.

Minister for Defence (Mr. Cronin)

I move:

That a sum not exceeding £19,165,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1972, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Defence, including certain services administered by that Office; for the pay and expenses of the Defence Forces; and for payment of a grant-in-aid.

The Estimate for Defence is for a sum of £19,165,000. By way of comparison, the total amount voted for the financial year 1970-71 was £18,788,010. Deputies are aware that already in July of this year a Supplementary Estimate was agreed to enable the Government to make £10,000 available to the Irish Red Cross Society as part of our contribution towards the international efforts for the relief of distress in India and in East Pakistan. A further Supplementary Estimate will be introduced later this year. Final figures and costings are not yet available, but I can say at this stage that it will be of the order of £3,000,000. It will include substantial provision for new and increased equipments and for an increase in the strength of the permanent Defence Force. Satisfactory progress is being made in the implementation of these programmes.

The duties of the permanent Defence Force have been exceptionally heavy for some time past. Duties in aid of the civil power arising from the situation in the Six Counties have become more onerous. Special security duties, including Border patrols, are making increasing demands on manpower and equipment. Fortunately, An Fórsa Cosanta Áitiúil are available to shoulder some of the burden; so also is the First Line Reserve, of which 170 members are at present on full-time service. Morale is good, recruitment is satisfactory and the strength of the permanent Defence Force is higher now than at any time in the past decade. The Defence Forces have demonstrated that the high standards of dedication, discipline and efficiency they have always displayed are being well maintained. It is with pleasure and pride that I acknowledge the efficient and zealous manner in which all components of the Defence Forces carry out their duties in the present difficult circumstances.

While, as I have just said, recruitment is satisfactory, I am arranging for an intensive recruiting campaign through the Press and television, beginning about February next. Deputies can also lend a hand by encouraging young men to offer their services. As Deputies are aware, the 25th anniversary of the establishment of the FCA as a component of the Defence Forces was celebrated recently. The force is making a vital contribution to our defence needs, which is particularly appreciated at this difficult time. I ask the members to keep up the good work and to strive for even greater proficiency as soldiers. I ask them, too, to be steadfast in their active membership.

At present an infantry group of approximately 390 officers and men is serving as a contingent of the United Nations peace-keeping force in Cyprus. A total of over 8,800 all ranks have now done duty there. The group does not include an armoured car element and the armoured cars which were in Cyprus have been brought back. I was satisfied that this could be done without detriment to the safety and security of our contingent.

The Secretary-General of the United Nations in a report dated 30th November, 1971, to the Security Council has stated that the overall discipline and bearing of the officers and men of the United Nations Force in Cyprus have continued to be of a high order and reflect credit on the contingent commanders, their staffs and the armed forces of the contributing countries. He also pays tribute to them for continuing to carry out with exemplary efficiency and devotion the important task assigned to them. This confirms the impression I gained during my visit to Cyprus in October, 1970. The morale and health of the troops there continue to be satisfactory.

The present position about the recovery of the extra and extraordinary expenses arising from participation in the Cyprus operation is that claims amounting to £2.94 million have been made on the United Nations; £2.37 million has been refunded leaving a balance of £0.57 million outstanding. That is not satisfactory and strong pressure is being put on the United Nations to effect a substantial improvement in the position.

Twenty-one officers are serving with the United Nations Truce Supervision Organisation in the Middle East; 13 of them are in the Suez Canal sector and the remainder at Damascus, Tiberias and Jerusalem. Deputies are aware of the tense situation existing in this area.

It is a matter of pride for every one of us that this country is making a worthwhile contribution to the United Nations missions in Cyprus and the Middle East and that our Army is playing a significant part in these peace-keeping operations.

The benefits, however, are not all one-way. The experience and training gained by our soldiers in the course of these operations are a very valuable asset and make the effort well worthwhile. There is, too the benefit to morale that overseas service brings. I may say that these troops could be brought home at very short notice if circumstances should ever dictate such a course.

In dealing with last year's Estimates, I mentioned the increase in Army pay and other benefits following on a special review. Recently, following a further review, a total of 63 officer appointments has been upgraded. This should result in a considerable improvement in career prospects for officers generally.

During 1971 to date helicopters took part in 16 missions involving air/sea rescue and 33 ambulance missions conveying emergency medical cases, such as brain injury and spinal injury patients, to Dublin hospitals for special treatment.

The three existing machines have proved very suitable and so far they have enabled the Air Corps to meet all emergency calls. However, the demands made on them have been increasing. The periods during which they are out of service for maintenance purposes have also been increasing with their age.

There is a provision of £100,000 in the Estimate, Subhead O2, for the purchase of a fourth helicopter, and a contract for the purchase has been placed, delivery to be in March, 1972.

Interested parties sometimes plead for the establishment of additional helicopter centres, particularly near the western and southern coasts, for air/sea rescue and other operations. However, the cost of setting up and maintaining even one further centre would be very great and I feel that the expenditure could not be justified having regard to the marginal advantages it would give compared with the existing arrangements.

We have seen during the past year the inauguration of a new phase in the Naval Service with the introduction of three minesweepers. Work on the construction of the all-weather fishery protection vessel is proceeding on schedule and I expect it to be delivered early in the next financial year.

With the acquisition of the new vessels, it became necessary during the year to secure additional personnel for the Naval Service. A special recruiting campaign for the service resulted in the enlistment of 84 recruits. The number of recruits continuing to come forward is satisfactory, but the position in regard to executive branch officers is not so satisfactory. Two competitions for Naval cadets have already been held in 1971, but the results were disappointing. Efforts are being made to obtain qualified officers on a temporary basis.

The university training of Army cadets and young officers continues in a satisfactory manner. The 14 cadets appointed in 1968 who commenced their university degree courses in October, 1969, have all passed their first and second year university examinations in the faculties of Arts (7), Science (4), Commerce (2) and Engineering (1).

Fifteen cadets of the 1969 class commenced their first year at university in October, 1970, pursuing courses in Arts (4), Commerce (4), Science (7); 12 of them are continuing at university.

Cadets are commissioned after two years service and all those I have just mentioned are now officers.

A further 28 cadets, of the 1970 class, commenced their university studies in October this year and are pursuing courses in arts (12), commerce (12), science (1) and engineering (3).

Thus we have a total of 54 Army students at University College, Galway, at present.

Up to now the students have been accommodated temporarily in existing buildings at Dún Uí Mhaoilíosa. However, their number is expected to increase in the coming years and the existing accommodation at the barracks will no longer be sufficient to cater for them. A provision of £40,000 is included in the Estimate for the first stage of a new building at Dún Uí Mhaoilíosa to provide additional accommodation.

Cadets and officers attending University College, Galway, receive their normal pay and allowances. Their tuition expenses, including fees and books, are paid by my Department. By any standard a cadetship is an extremely attractive proposition for any young man of character and ability seeking a career in the public service. Nevertheless, the Army has been unable to attract the numbers required and this results in an insufficiency of young officers. Consideration is being given to this problem and it may be necessary to vary the minimum educational standard for entry, which for the past few competitions was matriculation or equivalent. The ideal of a university education for every young officer may not be fully realisable in the short term.

In introducing the 1970-71 Supplementary Estimate for Defence I gave the House information in relation to the scheme whereby NCOs and privates of the Permanent Defence Force are given an opportunity of attending courses of one year's duration at vocational schools with a view to their obtaining the day group certificate. I am glad to say that these courses continue to be popular and in October, 1971, 85 men commenced courses at five centres.

The special arrangements, initiated in 1970, whereby men may undertake a two-year course leading to the leaving certificate continue in operation. This year a total of 43 men enrolled for the course at six centres.

The training of apprentices at the Army apprentice school, Naas, and at the Air Corps apprentice school, Baldonnel, continues. Following discussions with representatives of AnCO in connection with the operation of the apprentice school at Baldonnel, two additional vocational teachers have been appointed with a view to raising the standard of instruction at the school. Close liaison with AnCO is maintained in the running of both apprentice schools; 37 apprentices were recruited for the Air Corps school and 53 for the Army apprentice school as a result of the competitions held in 1971.

The sleeping accommodation at present available for the apprentices at the Army apprentice school, Naas, is not satisfactory and I am taking steps to have the position remedied as quickly as possible. A sum of £42,500 to enable a start to be made in the erection of new billets at the school is included in the Estimate. I hope to have the first stage of the work undertaken this year and to have the project completed next year.

Deputies are aware that we have for some time past been providing courses of training at the military college for personnel of the Zambia army. A second group of officer cadets from that country completed their training in June last. A third class of ten cadets arrived in March this year and a further ten arrived recently. The costs of running these training courses are met by the Government of Zambia.

This year full Army equitation teams competed at Wiesbaden and at Fontainbleau. In addition Army horses and riders competed as part of mixed military/civilian teams at six English and continental shows. Close liaison has been established between my Department and Bord na gCapall and consideration is at present being given to making facilities at the Army Equitation School available to the board for the training of a number of civilian riders and horses. The question of arranging for the trainer employed by Bord na gCapall to train riders and horses of the Army Equitation School is also under consideration.

Since 1969 the Army have been doing a splendid humanitarian job in looking after refugees from Northern Ireland. The peak figure in 1969 was 720 and in 1970 it was 1,558. All these were housed and fed by the Army.

The situation took a dramatic turn for the worse in the second week of August, 1971, when refugees began to arrive over the Border in unprecedented numbers. On the night of 12th August alone 2,825 were received into Gormanston Camp. The military staff there, with assistance from Civil Defence and Red Cross personnel, made heroic efforts to attend to the needs of this great number. What was lacking in physical comforts that night was more than made up for by the humanity, friendship and security these distressed people experienced at Gormanston.

The capacity of Army refugee centres at Gormanston, Finner, Kilworth, Coolmoney, Kildare, Kilkenny, Waterford and Tralee was soon exceeded. It then became necessary to call on local authorities, in exercise of their civil defence functions, to provide accommodation and food for appreciable numbers of refugees. The request met with a ready response. It was school holiday time and religious leaders and communities, in addition to various other organisations and individuals, very generously placed their facilities and services at the disposal of local authorities for the purpose of caring for refugees. The Garda Síochána also helped out by accommodating 600 at the training depot in Templemore. Local authorities, with their Civil Defence services, in Counties Dublin, Meath, Longford, Sligo, Cavan, Leitrim, Laois, Tipperary and Cork were involved in providing accommodation for and looking after refugees. At the peak period 2,695 were being catered for by the Army and 2,714 otherwise.

Thus, the handling of this major influx of refugees was achieved by a combination of military and Civil Defence resources, aided by the Irish Red Cross Society and practical goodwill and sympathy on all sides. We owe a deep debt of gratitude to all who helped directly or indirectly. I should mention particularly the Defence Forces and the local authorities and their Civil Defence organisations. Our sincere thanks are also due to religious leaders and religious communities, regional health boards and the Irish Red Cross Society.

The refugees soon began to return to the North and by mid-September it was possible to close down all the refugee centres run by local authorities and concentrate the remaining people in a few Army camps. At present there is only one refugee centre open, that at Kilworth Camp, where there are approximately 200 refugees.

The worthy part played by Civil Defence in helping to cope with the refugee problem is one more illustration of the peace-time value of that organisation. As Deputies know, however, the primary aim of Civil Defence is to mitigate the effects of war on the civilian population. It is essentially a citizen's service based on the principle of self-help, and practically every country in the world to-day has an organisation of this kind as part of its national defence. Should the necessity ever arise — and we all hope and pray that it never will — Civil Defence would provide considerable protection for the people against the hazards that could threaten their lives and property and perhaps the very existence of the nation. Unless and until we live in a disarmed world, the responsibility remains to provide a Civil Defence service.

Civil Defence is organised on what, to my mind, is the very sensible principle of making full use of such agencies of Government and local and other public authorities as have peace-time functions analogous to the functions that would have to be discharged by Civil Defence in an emergency. On the ground Civil Defence is under the control of the local authorities.

The organisation have as members people of all ages from 17 to 70, of both sexes, of every occupation, religion and social class. The spirit of voluntary service amongst members is high and the example which they have set in preparing themselves for the relief of human suffering and the welfare of their fellow countrymen is most encouraging indeed.

Significant steps have been taken in regard to Civil Defence preparations. In addition to the recruitment and training of volunteer helpers, plans have been made to enhance the individual's ability to survive nuclear hazards. Methods of warning him of the imminence of danger have been established, as well as of monitoring dangerous radiation and of instructing him in ways to protect himself against it. County and regional control centres are being set up from which Civil Defence operations would be directed and co-ordinated. Once again I would like to stress the importance of the Civil Defence householders' handbook which should be in every home and carefully preserved. I would also commend to every householder the short 20-minute Civil Defence film Dangerous Dust which is being shown free to the public in local halls around the country.

I would like to express my gratitude to the members of Civil Defence and my appreciation of the co-operation which exists between the Civil Defence organisation and the voluntary aid societies, the Irish Red Cross Society, the Order of Malta and the St. John Ambulance Brigade. It has always been the ideal that there should be the fullest possible involvement of the members of the voluntary aid societies —wherever these exist locally—in Civil Defence casualty plans.

The Irish Red Cross Society continue to assist in the care of the 200 or so refugees being maintained at present by the Army in Kilworth Camp. Generous public subscriptions to the society's relief funds have enabled them to provide valuable ancillary facilities for the refugees, such as clothing, baby foods, travel expenses and pocket money.

The society in co-operation with the International Committee of the Red Cross have assisted in the alleviation of distress abroad by the prompt dispatch of aid. The £10,000 voted in July as additional grant-in-aid was disbursed through the League of Red Cross Societies for the relief of distress in India and in Pakistan. The society also made available further sums totalling £13,000 to the league, as well as dispatching blankets and medical supplies valued at over £5,000 to the Indian Red Cross Society. I thank the society for their good work.

A sad event during the year was the untimely death last July of Major-General Patrick Delaney, chief of staff. This was made all the more tragic by reason of the fact that he had been in office only since the 1st April. Ar dheis Dé go raibh a anam. Our deepest sympathy goes out to his widow and family.

As regards Army pensions, the Estimate is for a net sum of £4,299,000, an increase of £185,110 on last year's vote. This net figure does not include provision for some important new concessions arising from this year's Budget. The first of these is the award to widows of military service pensioners of an annual allowance equal to one-half of the late husband's pension as at 1st October, 1971, with a minimum allowance of £52.20 a year. As a direct consequence of this, the minimum military service pension has also been raised to £52.20 a year. The cost of these concessions is expected to be about £280,000 in a full year. Deputies, I am sure, would like to know that as on the 22nd November approximately 2,100 widows had been awarded allowances and of these 2,000 had received the initial payment. The remaining 100 will receive payment this week. There were on the same date some 110 cases in course of investigation and those qualified in this group will be paid their entitlement as soon as possible.

Further, as announced in the Budget statement, military service pensions, special allowances, disability pensions and allowances, and pensions and retired pay of former members of the Permanent Defence Force were increased from the 1st October last. The increases were to bring the pensions, et cetera, up to the levels appropriate to pay rates generally in force on the 1st June, 1969 and were broadly of the order of 10.5 per cent. The cost of these Budget concessions this year will be met from the Vote for Increases in Pensions. In a full year the cost will be £550,000.

There are two items in this year's Estimate to which I wish to call special attention. The provision of free travel for veterans of the War of Independence has proved to be a facility which is being availed of to a much greater extent than was envisaged. Because of the popularity of the scheme, and because of increases in the charges by CIE, the cost of free travel this year will require a Supplementary Estimate of some £260,000. This brings the cost of free travel this year to £320,000. Secondly, the past year saw some very significant improvements in benefits under the Defence Forces (Pensions) Schemes. This House approved of the relevant Statutory Instrument last December. The principal beneficiaries are married officers retiring on reaching the age limit or within five years of it, and married long-service soldiers discharged on pension. The improvements resulted in more men taking their discharge than would otherwise be the case. This, of course, is not a bad thing as it assists towards the maintenance of a balanced age and career structure. However, a Supplementary Estimate of £124,000 will be required later to meet the short-fall in the provision of £1,723,500 for the Defence Forces (Pensions) Schemes.

Before I conclude I would like to make a few general remarks on defence expenditure. I mentioned earlier that this year's outgoing will run to about £22 million, a fairly significant sum in terms of our economy. We have often been accused of spending too little on the Defence Forces and of neglecting this basic institution of the State. In fact this has become almost an obsession with some commentators and writers on defence topics. In passing, may I say that I welcome this concern with defence even if I would wish the subject to be approached in a more balanced and deliberative way and without preconceived notions.

Defence is one of many State services that have to be maintained from the limited and hard-won revenue. What is allocated to each service is determined by a difficult, even painful, balancing process, in the knowledge that if more is given to one, the others must do with less — unless, of course, extra revenue can be procured. Money is really the nub of the matter, and these critical decisions are taken by Ministers and, in the final analysis, by the Government.

Whatever about the past, I believe that in the current situation it is prudent to strengthen the Defence Forces. What we want to ensure is that the security forces will be strong enough to deter and defeat any violent attack, no matter from what quarter, on the institutions of this State and its democratic way of life.

I do not think it is necessary for me to say more at this stage. I shall of course do my best to give Deputies any further information they require.

Mr. Clinton

I move:

That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration.

I do so in order to give the Members of the House the widest possible scope to discuss this Estimate at an extremely critical time in our history, a time when the security of the State and the role of the Army have never been more important.

The very serious and tragic situation which exists in Northern Ireland has placed and continues to place a very great strain on our very limited Army and in my view places a very serious responsibility on the Minister and the Government to increase as a matter of urgency the strength of the Army to the point where it will be equal to the task. I am not thinking only of the present situation in Northern Ireland but I have in mind the possibility of an over-spill of violence and also that we must surely be coming near the point where the British Government will see the light and be convinced that there is no solution to the present Northern Ireland problem that does not involve the unification of Ireland.

I am not the only person convinced of this; there is ample evidence of it. First, the former British premier is now thinking along these lines. But when we reach that point many problems will arise. In my view it must happen in this way, and I think this is acknowledged by all, that when the British begin to move out of Northern Ireland and when they announce, as I believe inevitably they must, that they are going to phase themselves out over a period of five, seven or ten years, we shall then have placed on our shoulders the additional responsibility of defending the North of Ireland and of dealing with irresponsible elements from whatever source they may come.

I do not think the Minister is taking his responsibility seriously. Today he has spoken like a Minister for Defence in cuckoo land who is completely unaware of the dangers so evident to everybody else. We are dealing here with an Estimate in the first instance of £19 million approximately, approximately the same as the amount on Defence last year. The Minister then talks about an additional £3 million for equipment. He does not say what sort of equipment. For the past two years at least I have been drawing attention to the weakness of our Army and its deplorable under-strength, and the Minister's failure to take serious steps to bring it up to the required strength can only be described as irresponsible. It may not be the Minister's fault; perhaps he is not getting Government backing but he must carry the responsibility since he is Minister for Defence.

In referring to the Army being under strength I am not referring only to the number of serving personnel but I am including several other weaknesses. I am talking about the need for more and better equipment, more and better transport, more armoured cars, more armoured personnel carriers and more transport of all sorts and sizes. I went into this in some detail on last year's Estimate and I mentioned that the youngest truck at the Curragh was 15 years old. Since then some trucks have been purchased and, to that extent, the position can be said to have been improved but to buy a few trucks to replace trucks that are 20 years old will not settle this matter. We must bring our Army up to date. We are living in critical and dangerous times but it does not seem to be appreciated that it is not possible to equip the Army adequately when the money available is limited. Our people serving in the armed forces are humiliated continuously because they are underequipped and are unprepared for what is expected of them.

When will we have a policy for the Army? I have asked people serving in the Army what was the defence policy but they have told me they never heard of it. I wonder if the Minister is aware of a defence policy? People in the Army are seriously concerned about the role of the Army. They want someone to define for them the duties they are supposed to carry out and the limits of their responsibilities. Not only are the Army — comprising 8,000 to 9,000 men — expected to carry out the ordinary routine duties they have performed for many years; they are expected to do Border duty and they are expected to guard vital installations in addition to their normal work. There has been no increase in strength and there has been no significant improvement as regards equipping the Army.

Some people imagine that when weaknesses in various sectors of the Army are exposed the people responsible for drawing attention to those weaknesses are acting irresponsibly. I am reluctant to expose such weaknesses but there is a greater evil, namely, the danger of exposing the country to extreme danger and leaving ourselves in the position that we are not prepared to take on responsibilities to meet situations that are likely to confront us.

We are about to enter the EEC but there has been no mention of this matter in the Minister's speech. No reference has been made to the implications of our entry into the Community. These are serious matters and the people would like to know what the Government intend to do. If and when we join the EEC, what will it mean for the Army? Will it mean standardisation of equipment, an interchange of knowledge, ideas and tactics? We know that the terms of entry into the EEC do not entail a commitment to defence, but we accept that the least we would be expected to do would be to defend our own territory. I hope that a small and poor country such as Ireland would not be expected to take on a greater defence commitment. However, I should like to hear the Minister's views on this matter and to give us an assurance that this is the case. The question of who would be our ally in the case of an attack from outside is of interest to many people.

Year after year we talk about the same things and we make complaints about the same defects when we discuss the Estimate for this Department. Recently one newspaper called the discussions on this Estimate as the annual occasion for "codswallop". This is Army language, but perhaps the criticism is justified when one considers that so few improvements have been made even though complaints have been made. Admittedly more money is being spent but this does little more than make up for the increase in costs and prices. There is little upgrading as a result of the increased expenditure.

Have we a more efficient and well-equipped Army? These matters are important and many people would be interested to know the answers. The Minister appears to be complacent and happy about the success of recruitment for the Army. He is happier than anyone else in the community about the adequacy of the Army and its equipment.

What we want, and what the news media are demanding, will cost a substantial amount of money but what must we pay for security? I believe the people are more prepared than ever before to pay a substantial price for this kind of security. When the chips are down we see that we depend on the Army. This is the time when we should be courageous about expenditure.

I am prepared to admit that improving Army equipment will cost money. We are told that one armoured car costs in the region of £40,000. Recently there was a critical article on this matter in the Sunday Independent but I think it is worthy of consideration on this Estimate. While the Minister made a critical comment in his speech on commentators he did not deal with the subject matter raised by them. In the Sunday Independent dated 21st November, 1971, Joe McAnthony stated:

There is growing bewilderment in the Defence Forces about recent announcements, some official and others Government-inspired, which suggested, among other things, that a mid-October meeting of Ministers and high-ranking officers had decided as a matter of grave urgency that there would have to be increased spending on the Army.

That is fair enough. They are entitled to have this meeting and to make these decisions. Is this, in fact, the money mentioned by the Minister this afternoon in introducing his Estimate? Is this the £3 million approximately referred to by the Minister? It goes on to say:

The confusion on this matter must now be increased for, apart from 2,000 FN rifles, the Army has not ordered a single item of new equipment since the alleged meeting was supposed to have taken place and, despite statements by both An Taoiseach, Mr. Lynch, and the Minister for Defence, Mr. Cronin, which give the impression that the Army is to get a new look, we can now say that all of the money to be raised by Supplementary Estimate for the Defence Forces will go to pay for equipment already ordered earlier in the year as part of what might be termed normal military expenditure and which the Army has indicated to the Government would be inadequate for its needs in view of the Northern crisis.

I suppose these statements could create a wrong impression if the Minister can tell us today that in addition to this Estimate a further Supplementary Estimate will be put before us for £3 million. It goes on:

The story of just what the Army has ordered and the wide discrepancy between it and what seems to be Department of Defence inspired stories makes interesting reading. For instance, on 2nd September, when feeling over the Hackball's Cross incident and internment ran high, the Irish Press ran a highly publicised story which said that the Government had decided to buy more than 50 armoured vehicles for £1 million in France and that these would form the Army's first armoured regiment. The details contained in the story suggest that it came from either a Department of Defence or Government source.

Fifty armoured vehicles for £1 million would seem to very good value if we remember that one costs £40,000. It would appear to me that the expenditure would be more likely to be £2 million for 50 armoured vehicles.

In various papers every day publicity is given to the Army. This should be welcomed because for far too long the Army was ignored by far too many people, and the Press are included in that comment. Attention is now being focused on the Army and this is good. I have said here by way of criticism, speaking on the Estimate for the Department of Defence, that there was no channel through which Members of the House could communicate freely with serving personnel. When one gets a letter it is not signed. It has to be anonymous. The regulations in that regard have not been changed. Apparently there is now some new regulation under which the gentlemen of the Press are free to discuss facts about the Army, as they are described, with Army officers, and are free to give their version of them and their own comments.

I have said publicly before that all of us should know more about what is happening in the Army. All of us should have greater access to what is happening in the Army. We would then be in a position to make reasonable comments here. Serving personnel should not have to meet Members of the Opposition in holes and corners. They should not be afraid to be seen talking to us. Unfortunately that is the situation at present. I should like to hear the Minister saying that this should not be he case and that people should not be labelled if they are seen talking to Opposition Members of this House.

The Minister seems to be satisfied with recruitment. He seems to think that the numbers in the Army are satisfactory enough. At the same time he tells us that he is starting off on a special recruitment campaign. Why has he left it until now to embark on this campaign? Has it not been obvious to everyone for the past two years that there was a great responsibility on the Government to increase the strength of the Army and that most of the problems that exist in the Army, and most of the complaints one hears from Army personnel, arise from the inadequate numbers to cover the enormous field that the Army is expected to cover at present. Of course it is not able to cover it. It is not able to undertake adequately the enormous number of tasks and responsibilities now placed on it.

What is being done to make the Army as a career more attractive? The Minister mentioned a number of things but I think these attractions are at the same level as they were for some years past. No additional effort is being made. This is not good enough in the times in which we are living. The education programme mentioned by the Minister —university education and vocational education — is the greatest attraction to bring young people into the Army for a short time. It should be expanded. It should be possible to make it attractive for young people to go into the Army for three or four years and get a qualification, or even to achieve a standard which will enable them to leave the Army and get a qualification while on the reserve for a further three or four years, perhaps.

An immense amount of work could be done to ensure that more people will come into the Army. The Minister complained about the number of recruits he was able to get through the competition for cadetships in the present year. This must suggest that something is wrong. It is not the standard of education. It is the career itself. This is what should be examined. Surely if the advantages were there they would be availed of. The number of young men in the country with a good leaving certificate who cannot get a job is quite staggering. Why cannot we get a greater percentage of those people into the Army? There must be obvious reasons and there must be obvious discomforts that are not being attended to. Therefore they are not joining the Army. No doubt they hear from people in the Army what conditions are like. The Minister did not refer to that at all in introducing his Estimate. He did not mention any improvement in living conditions for married or single personnel.

Nowadays more and more people are getting married at a young age. Married people can re-enter the Army but married men are not taken in as recruits. People marry now at 18 years of age and many are married before they are 22. Surely these should be acceptable people in the Army.

I have been examining the performance of the Department of Defence during the past 15 years in respect of accommodation and I have found that they have been providing houses at the rate of ten per year. There is no figure given for obsolescence or loss of accommodation during that period. There is a serious problem in this respect in the Army and it is a problem that is not being dealt with by local government. The living conditions for both married and single men at the various barracks are not good enough. They have not been upgraded in the same way as has outside accommodation and people nowadays are accustomed to comforts that were not available 20 or 30 years ago but in the various Army establishments there has been very little improvement during the past 100 years. This is a shocking criticism to have to make, but it is an obvious reason why men are not joining the Army.

Rates of pay and other conditions have improved. Rates of pay in particular have been improved. While I do not know how they compare with rates elsewhere, I do not think it is on that score that people are reluctant to join. One aspect in which I am very interested is the educational programme that appears to be only beginning now in the Army. This programme is not developing as it should. As there is more mechanisation and as equipment generally becomes more sophisticated, a much greater percentage of people serving in the Army would have to be qualified technically if they are to play a useful part in the future of the Army. In regard to the one-year day course, so far as I can see this is only for the purpose of raising the educational standards of personnel so that resettlement at a later date will be easier. What is needed is a course comparable to the three-year vocational group certificate course even if this means that some fellows, if they have the basic education required, would have to start studying for this course at 17 or 18 years of age. They could then go into the various industries where they would be enabled to complete their particular qualifications even if they were to be kept on reserve if necessary.

The average age of Army personnel is increasing. This is a serious matter because if there is very important work to be done at any time it is not likely to be done by an army whose men are elderly. The conditions that have to be endured on Border duty and the various other tasks call for the services of young men although we all know that it is necessary to have the benefit of experienced men. Such experience is indispensable but, nevertheless, there must be a constant flow of young people.

It should not be beyond the power and the imagination of those really interested in the Army to devise ways and means of inducing people, profitably, into the Army. The tie-up in the Army should be as short as possible. I think that a three year stay would induce more people have to join because young people have no wish to commit themselves for a longer period than that. In fact, sometimes a period of three years might seem very long to them. However, after they join they usually become interested in their work and there is always the possibility that they will remain.

The work being done in the Army Apprentice Schools at Naas and Baldonnel is excellent and these produce first-class personnel but we should have an expansion of the activities of these schools. The Minister referred to the fact that two additional teachers have been appointed to Baldonnel for the purpose of upgrading standards there. I interviewed the applicants for these positions and I was impressed very much by the quality of the candidates who came forward. Two excellent people have been appointed.

I see no reason why we should not have a more rapid expansion of this type of activity in the Army. If we improved living conditions in the Army and if there was a proper promotion structure and also a reduction of the work load, I have no doubt that recruitment would be much easier and that there would be sufficient personnel in the Army. However, what are we to regard as being sufficient personnel? The Minister has not told us. Neither has he told us what are the tasks and responsibilities of the Army or what is expected of them. He has not told us either what would be regarded as a reasonable number of people, equipped properly, who would be capable of undertaking these tasks and discharging them in a reasonable way. These questions must be answered.

There are several other matters which must be mentioned in the course of this debate. One of these has been mentioned by the Minister but not referred to by him at any length, that is, fishery protection. The Minister said in passing that three minesweepers had been purchased but he did not tell us whether these were yet at sea, whether they are fully manned and equipped and what they are capable of in relation to fishery protection. Earlier in the year we were told that there was one all-weather vessel being built by Verholme of Cork and that this was due for delivery in March. I wonder whether this will be delivered on schedule.

Mr. Cronin

I believe it will.

Mr. Clinton

Will we then have four vessels at sea engaged in fishery protection? Some of us had the opportunity of going for a trip on the minesweepers. One thing that occurred to me was that they were very exposed. I am not very good at describing the various parts of a vessel of this kind but on the upper deck, from which there is a certain amount of navigation to be done, they were completely open to the elements. I asked, by way of Parliamentary Question, what were the prospects of having these three vessels enclosed and made more comfortable for the crew members. I am referring now to the Gráinne, Banba, and Fodhla. Are these three vessels, plus the all-weather vessel that is being produced in Verholme, properly manned and equipped, capable of giving adequate fishery protection? Some people have considerable doubt about this. I should like to hear the Minister telling the House what he thinks. Not so long ago we had no vessel at sea. This must be regarded as an improvement but I understand that these vessels are quite slow and that many trawlers can outpace them. I suppose this is a serious defect. I do not think they are anything like as well able to go to sea in bad weather as the old vessels we had, when they were seaworthy. They are a compromise because of a shortage of money and because the three we had suddenly collapsed and we could not, perhaps, wait until proper vessels were provided.

A new complication has been introduced by the settlement arrived at in relation to EEC fisheries where we have a 12 mile limit for a certain area of the coast and only a six-mile limit for another area of the coast for certain fish. To ensure that when boats come inside the 12 mile limit they are not fishing for shell fish is an additional complication. Many people believe that three vessels are quite inadquate and that something like twice that number would be required. It is surprising that the Minister for Defence should come into the House and not give us any rundown on the present situation because it is a matter of concern to many people in the House.

I was not in the House when there was a question answered on the recent incident in Drogheda. It is a matter of regret, because it concerns so many people in the country, that the Minister was not apparently in a position to inform the House adequately what exactly happened there or how it was possible to disarm the FCA unit in Drogheda on the occasion in question. This probably arises from the inadequacy of numbers in the Army to give the cover and protection that is required and carry out their normal duties at the same time.

The Minister said:

Morale is good, recruitment is satisfactory and the strength of the permanent Defence Force is higher now than at any time in the past decade.

Higher by how much? How satisfactory is morale? I do not think it is satisfactory. I think there is a great deal of dissatisfaction in the Army because of the lack of definition of responsibility and the lack of appreciation of the load that is being placed on far too few people in the Army.

The Minister told us that he is going to embark on an intensive recruiting campaign through the Press and television beginning about February next. Why has this campaign been postponed until February? Is it just a question of advertising in the newspapers and trying to glamourise the situation? Is it not far more important to look at the defects inside the Army, look at the reasons why they are not coming in, tell them what will be done about them in the future and try to induce them to come in by whatever means we think would be attractive.

The Minister mentioned the Naval Service. I do not know whether he mentioned An Slua Muirí but there is a great deal of dissatisfaction here. I do not know what they are expected to do or how capable they are of doing what they are expected to do. My own feeling is that they have not got the equipment and there is nobody taking any particular interest in them. They will inevitably fall to pieces unless some interest is taken in them and unless they are given a job to do and the equipment to do it. Again we should know what is the cost of doing that. I believe it would cost at least £1 million, if not more, to enable An Slua Muirí to become a force of significance and to continue in existence.

The Minister said:

A special recruiting campaign for the service resulted in the enlistment of 84 recruits.

This is for the Naval Service. How many are required in a Naval Service? How many are in it at the moment? How likely are we to get the number of people we need? He said:

Two competitions for Naval cadets have already been held in 1971, but the results were disappointing.

Why were they disappointing? Has there been an examination of the reasons and what are we going to do about them? There must be answers. There are more unemployed people in the country than there have been for a very long time and leaving certificates are ten a penny. A substantial number of people come to every public representative saying that they have leaving certificates and can get nothing.

We talk about the fact that we have an insufficiency of young officers and that we are anxious to do something about this. Then we have a newspaper coming out and saying that we are top heavy with those type of people. It is headed: "Too many chiefs and too few Indians." This may appear to be the case but I think it is a good thing to have too many chiefs in the present situation where the Army is so very much under strength. Unless there are sufficient officers and sufficient NCOs to train any influx of new recruits that you get you certainly cannot expand an army. If we had to suddenly call up the FCA in substantial numbers we could not possible train them unless we had enough officers and enough NCOs. Incidentally, is there any reason why more NCOs could not be brought into officer rank? Last year I think there were 35 commissioned. Is it not possible to increase the number? One admirable way of remedying the shortage of officers in the Army would be if there were more opportunities for people to be promoted from the ranks. If that were the case recruitment would be improved.

The Minister gave a list of persons who were enrolled in the various courses in Naas and Baldonnel. The only disappointing feature is that the numbers are remaining static or are not increasing to the desired extent. Of course there has been no expansion of accommodation or improvement of equipment. These are the reasons why we are not doing a better job. The limited number provided for are excellent people and will be of enormous benefit to the economy in civilian employment after their service in the Army.

The Minister referred to the Army Equitation School and said that this year full Army equitation teams competed at Wiesbaden and at Fontainbleau and that, in addition, Army horses and riders competed as part of mixed military/civilian teams at six English and Continental shows. What is not mentioned is whether the situation is satisfactory or not. As far as anybody can see, it is not satisfactory and the results are most disappointing. We should hear some of the reasons why they were so disappointing.

In the past the Army Equitation School was something of which we could be extremely proud. That is not the position now. There is a good deal of money being spent on horses and I was glad to see that McKee Barracks has been opened up to civilians for participation and that fuller use is being made of the facilities there. This is something for which the Minister should be commended. I am glad that close liaison has been established between the Department and Bord na gCapall. Bord na gCapall have received considerable criticism. I hope that as a result of the combination of forces here a better job will be done in the equitation school.

During the year I addressed a question to the Minister to ask him if he would consider opening the equitation school to all ranks and the Minister said that he would not. That the Minister could arrive at the conclusion that the leaving certificate is a necessary qualification for an Army rider is something I could not understand. One of our most famous teams included a man from the ranks. It is a great pity that is not permitted. The quality of the team could be improved by opening it up to the various ranks and not confining it to commissioned officers.

The Minister referred to the helicopter service and to the fact that it is doing an excellent job. With this we all agree. With the limited number of helicopters that we have, a very good job is being done. The Minister mentioned that the periods during which the helicopters are out of service for maintenance purposes have been increasing with their age. He said that there is provision for the purchase of a fourth helicopter.

The Minister made no reference whatever to the Air Corps in general or the policy in relation to the Air Corps. What is the intention in regard to the Air Corps? Reports appearing in the newspapers would indicate that the situation is becoming more hopeless every day and that most of the planes are no longer airworthy and that the corps is almost at disappearing level. Does the Minister consider that the Air Corps is unnecessary? If not, what is being done to bring it up to recognised strength? Is there any policy in regard to the strength of the Air Corps? Is the corps to remain in existence? No money has been spent on it and there is no indication in the Minister's speech that it is the Minister's policy to spend any money on it. I do not know how necessary the Air Corps is — I am not an expert in these matters — but I would imagine that it would be extremely desirable to have a small, well-equipped air corps at all times and that such a corps would be a very necessary part of the Army. I am not talking about an enormous force because that is something that we cannot afford. If for nothing more than to train pilots in Baldonnel, a task which our Air Corps has always done excellently, it is well worth while to maintain an air corps. I realise of course that it has other very important functions to fulfil.

We should be told something more about the various units of the Army and the intentions of the Minister and the Government in relation to them. Are they to be completely run down or are they to be maintained at adequate strength? What is the present position? There is no clear indication in the Minister's speech or from reports that we are able to get as to what exactly is the position in regard to various units of the Army.

A newspaper suggested that Members of the House get up and talk about what will happen to Private So-and-So whose pension was cut because his service was a number of days short of the requisite qualifying period. I do not think these matters are unimportant. They are extremely important. Grievances beget discontent and this discontent affects recruitment. Every public representative has a right to be concerned about small irritants that beget dissatisfaction.

I spoke at Question Time the other day about the methods of taxing Army personnel and of a situation in which a man with three children who had £19 a week was paying £5 a week for a house and who was called on suddenly to pay £6 a week tax. The Minister has promised that this will be changed. I hope we never have a recurrence of this situation.

There is the same sort of confusion about Army widows' pensions. Most Deputies continually find there is confusion in regard to widows of persons who had military service pension or special allowance. At the time when the pension was being made available some of us on this side of the House foresaw that this confusion would develop. In some cases persons did not apply for special allowance, because they were too proud, until they became too poor and then they applied but were deprived. The Minister should reconsider this matter. The only reason why persons got a special allowance was that they made an important contribution at the relevant time. There are not many of them left. All of these people should be included in the pension scheme.

I also dealt with the free travel allowance. I had a case where an extremely active old man, a veteran of the struggle for independence, got some little employment which necessitated his travelling earlier in the morning and later in the evening than the hours laid down in the Act. For this reason it was decided that he could not be included in free travel scheme. Surely there should be some provision for dealing with a special case of this kind. Surely it was the intention when we passed this legislation that that type of person would not be eliminated simply because of some little regulation or condition.

I am just dealing at random with things that occur to me. Going back for a moment to the FCA, the records indicate there is quite a number of people in the force, something like 20,000. I wonder what is the effective number or if there has been a recent check on it. What are the attendances and how available are those members and how adequately trained? Is there any programme to change and to improve the amount of training they get? It is the opinion of all that the amount of continuous training is insufficient to equip the FCA for any serious task. We have had ample evidence in recent times that soldiering is a serious business, something that people cannot play at, and something will have to be done if the FCA are to get sufficient basic training to do the job as it should be done. The Minister should comment on this when he is replying. He should tell us if he envisages any improvements in the periods of training and whether he considers the present situation satisfactory.

We had in existence and we used to be told something about an early warning system. Is this system still in existence? If so what is it doing? It is extremely important that we should know. The Minister spoke at some length about Civil Defence, but it is hampered without an early warning system. I am afraid this has been neglected.

I spoke earlier about the lack of information generally and about the fact that the defence of the country and the security of the State are the responsibility and the equal concern of all and that therefore it should not be a plaything of party politics. There must accordingly be something to be said for the setting up of some sort of defence committee that could visit freely Army establishments and consider the whole situation, not only visiting establishments but discussing problems and talking about future planning and a future programme for the Army. Very little thought is being give from month to month and year to year to the Army. It is time that some group sat down and seriously considered what are the tasks to be undertaken, what are the responsibilities, what are the normal methods for doing the work, how will the Army in the future be equipped if they are to undertake these responsibilities.

Concerning the making of a career in the Army, it is important that people joining should have some idea that an interest would be taken in them when they are leaving the Army —that adequate settlement or resettlement arrangements would be made for them. I realise that a start has been made on this but I do not think it is adequate. It is more a voluntary arrangement than anything else, where it exists. A group are set up in a particular camp, they take an interest, make contact with local industries and with people generally who are in a position to give employment and let them know they have people suitable to fill certain posts as they arise in the near future. People joining the Army must be given an idea that when they leave they will not be redundant, that they will have a place to go into.

Take the position of a commandant who has to retire at the age of 55 years. Surely there should be some arrangement whereby that man, who most likely has a family at the most expensive stage of rearing, could be brought into the Civil Service side of Army administration. Surely there is such a job for such a man. He has been doing that work during his career and he could be given such a position, at a much reduced rate, of course. In addition to his pension it would give him an income similar to what he had before retirement.

Are the Army up to adequate strength? Judging by the responsibilities we expect them to undertake and the enormous duties they are now carrying out, I think the strength of the Army would need to be doubled. If they are doubled and if things improve, as we all hope and pray they will, there must be then a peacetime role for the Army. Far too little consideration has been given to this. I can think of many ways in which the Army could be used in peacetime to the benefit of the nation as a whole and I am sure the Minister is aware of similar opportunities when the Army are not required as they are at the present time.

I have spoken here before about the utilisation of Baldonnel Airport. Here we have a first class airport and I suggest it should be used partly for ordinary commercial purposes and partly as an Army airport. On numerous occasions we have had Dublin Airport fogbound and no fog whatever at Baldonnel. Planes have had to return to England or to go to some other airport. There have been occasions when both Shannon and Dublin Airports have been fogbound, with no fog at Baldonnel.

There has been a very important trend towards the use of Army facilities for the benefit of people outside. There is evidence of this in the Equitation School and at the Curragh where swimming pool facilities and recreational facilities generally have been used both by the community outside and by Army personnel. A working party were in existence for some time and I wonder if they are still there. If so, what are they doing? The Minister did not mention this but I have never heard they were disbanded. The Minister should tell us if they are in existence and if so what they are considering at the moment — are they planning for the future or are they attempting to define the role of the Army of the future?

I was disappointed that the Minister, in the course of dealing with the whole question of the Army, did not tell us whether any additional houses had been provided and what had been done to upgrade accommodation generally. This is something which is extremely important and it is something which all of us would like to know was progressing and progressing at a much faster pace than we have had for a long time.

I believe the Minister is not taking his responsibilities seriously enough in the circumstances of the present time, circumstances in which we can be confronted any day with an overspill of violence from the North of Ireland and with the problems with which we would all wish to be confronted, if and when reunification is about to take place. I think it is something which is going to come quite suddenly in the end and much faster than many people believe is possible at present.

Mr. Tully

For many years in this House, the Defence Estimate was treated as something which was not terribly important and, usually, on looking around the benches, one found nobody except the Minister and the group of ex-Army Deputies who wanted to make their points, many of them remembering what happened when they were members of the Army. Looking around here today, I see that even they have disappeared and we now have only three or four people interested enough to come in to listen to the debate.

I compliment Deputy Clinton, who made an excellent speech, and I am rather surprised and disappointed, as he is, that a lot more information is not contained in the Minister's brief. Can I assume from the type of information which is given in the brief that the Minister considers that the best idea is to have a low-key speech which will play down the Estimate and give the impression that everything is going along grand, that there is no reason at all why anybody should get excited about what is happening in the Army or outside the Army? This does appear, as I see it, to be the general idea and if it is, it is a pity. I am not just repeating a cliché when I say that at present one of the big problems in this country, and will be in 1972, is defence. I think that anybody who underestimates the position, who thinks that if we have not got much of an Army it does not matter a whole lot and we are saving money, should have his head examined. For that reason I feel that if the Estimate were for a very much larger sum, there would be no complaint from the Members of the House if the facts were explained to them, as I think they should be explained to them.

With regard to the £3 million extra referred to here as being brought in for increased equipment, I think the Minister has fiddled around a bit with the figures, if he will forgive my saying so, because the figure of £3 million was released, was then substituted by £2 million by somebody else claiming to speak for the Government and was subsequently increased again to £3 million. It was supposed to be for a tremendous amount of new equipment to be ordered now and it was then disclosed by the Minister, in reply to questions as to details of how it was being spent, that it is being spent on necessary items ordered earlier this year. Maybe I am being unfair to the Minister and to those in charge of the Army, and I must apologise if I am, but if I do not make a very big mistake, equipment is not alone very short but some of the equipment in use is positively dangerous.

I was a member of the Defence Forces during the war, and at that time we were making do with old material, old equipment and old armaments, most of which had been handed down from the Defence Forces in the State for many years, with some little bought abroad. Then we had the windfall of Dunkirk and the British had a lot of old stuff which they were not prepared to use in war conditions, and we got it. This was new to us, being more advanced than anything we had got. Some of the ammunition was not exactly safe, and in fact it was nearly as dangerous to us as it was to a possible enemy, but there was nothing else we could do — at least we had the stuff and we practised with it and it could be used if necessary. Recently I saw that an explosion occurred with some of the same equipment we had in the early and mid-40s and if that is true, it is a little bit of a scandal. It may not be true, but this is the story I have got. I feel that we should have upgraded the equipment and ammunition the Army is using because an Army without ammunition, without modern equipment, is only playing with defence.

The suggestion which some people are making is that the Defence Forces are strong enough — we have an Army and the FCA, and therefore we should not worry very much about defence. These people should rethink the position. On a number of occasions I attempted to find out what the actual strength of the Army was. I do not know whether the Minister played football before he came into the House or not, but he certainly defended very well. Every time an effort was made to pin him down, he was a most elusive sort of individual, and it was impossible to find out if the position was as one suspected it was. He gave the figures very freely, but it was almost impossible to find out whether or not the figures we got were figures which had been compiled in such a way that it was almost impossible to see what strength the Army had.

Maybe that is all right; maybe that is the object of the exercise. If it was, it succeeded very well because I still do not know what the actual strength of the Army is, in spite of questions which I put down — Regular Army, Reserve and FCA, formerly the Second Line Reserve. I am under the impression, and I would like the Minister to correct me when he is replying, that the regular Army, counting all, both chiefs and Indians, the whole lot — officers, NCOs and men — cannot be very much more than about 3,000. The Reserve consists, in the main, of people who have been in a long time ago. The number of people who went out of the Army over the last ten or 15 years and on to the Reserve is, I understand, relatively small.

Then, we have the FCA, and one thing which rather annoyed me recently —maybe I looked at it from a wrong angle — was the celebration of the 25th anniversary of the forming of the FCA. I think the Minister will agree with me when I point out that the FCA as such were not formed 25 years ago. You simply changed the name from Local Defence Force to FCA, and in doing that, I think you were casting a slur on the people who had served right through the war years, or towards the end particularly when the LDF was formed and they resented the fact that you were writing them off and saying that as from today, the FCA have been formed and 25 years afterwards those who were in the FCA were referred to as having been in it within that period and everybody else was written off. I have met a number of older folk who pointed out to me that they had had service and they considered that they were now being cut off completely. They wanted nothing from the State but recognition, and I personally think it was a mistake to give the impression to those who did not know that the force started 25 years ago this year.

I believe an effort should be made to build up the Army. I am all for the suggestion that the regular soldier who has been promoted to NCO rank and who has the necessary qualifications should be promoted to officer rank. I believe that no matter what cracks are made about the chiefs and the Indians it is necessary to have a cadre of experienced officers around which a Defence Force can be built if and when the time comes. Unless the Minister is prepared to face up to this he is not doing his job as Minister for Defence. It is important to get people who know a little more about soldiers than many of the young people who pass through our hands and who will never be more than sergeants. I have seen instructors of various grades who were excellent men but for one reason or another never went higher than that. These men should be promoted. This was done in a fairly general way from among the volunteers in the mid-1930s. These men became officers of the emergency Army. There were thousands of young men like myself who hated Fianna Fáil but who still became members of the Army under a Fianna Fáil Minister because we believed in the necessity of defending the country. Politics did not enter into it.

At present there is a feeling that there is no point in joining the Army when one would be left to sweep out the billets or only be a room orderly unless one belongs to a local cumann and gets a good recommendation on entering the Army. This is the general feeling among young men. Every effort should be made to point out that that is not so. The Army can promote young men and an Army career is a reasonably good job. Army pay must keep pace with civilian pay. The Army is a good career for young people who should be interested in the defence of their country.

Nowadays you do not hear of district justices letting off young blackguards when they appear before them, on condition that they go to England or join the Army. Such people are not wanted in any army. Soldiers have a standing. Whether we are for or against violence there is a standing which the men who wear the uniform for the purpose of defending their country should have. There is an army spirit in other countries and our soldiers have it when the necessity exists for it. They do not seem to get much respect in peace time. That may be the fault of our society. We do not understand the situation. The more publicity which can be given to this the better it will be for the people in the Army in the future and for the people who are trying to recruit men now.

We have complained before about Army uniforms. Uniforms have been improved. The Minister told me that he cannot do much about the boots because they serve a useful purpose. I suppose they served the same purpose 50 years ago and nothing much can be done about them. Anything done to improve conditions helps those who wish to join the Army. An effort should be made to improve the billets, living accommodation generally and food. There have been improvements but they have not been as great as one would expect. A start was made but it was not sustained. There are many places where they have not got what one would expect in a modern home. A member of the Defence Forces should expect in the barracks in peace time almost the same conditions as he would expect in his own modern home. The situation at Gormanstown where the men have to go to an outdoor toilet during the night is undesirable. Proper facilities should be provided. Deputies will have no objection to supplying the money.

The Minister said:

The duties of the permanent Defence Force have been exceptionally heavy for some time past. Duties in aid of the civil power arising from the situation in the Six Counties have become more onerous. Special security duties, including Border patrols, are making increasing demands on manpower and equipment.

The FCA have been doing a good job. With very little experience they have stepped in and with out-of-date equipment have made it possible to continue the defence of the country. Without them this work could not have been done. We cannot thank sufficiently the men who spend portion of their time off from work on the defence of their country. We do not pay them much cash. These facts cannot be repeated too often.

It is about time that somebody told the gentlemen in Stormont when they complain about what is happening along the Border that there are thousands of British troops around Belfast and Derry terrorising the inhabitants and that these soldiers could be very well employed patrolling the Border. If the British are not satisfied with the position they should be told that it is their job to patrol the Border. It is no good trying to give the impression that we are doing the best we can on this side of the Border. This is not our job. They are the people who are complaining and if they are not satisfied thousands of their troops who are blackguarding the civilian population in the North should patrol the Border. It is about time they realised that if they want the job done they should do it themselves. The time is coming when the Taoiseach may request the United Nations to patrol our side of the Border.

Deputy Clinton commented that the end of Partition may be nearer than any of us think. An end could come to Partition quickly enough because the ordinary man in the street in Britain must be tired of the antics of the Britishers in the North. It is possible that a decision could be taken that they can no longer afford the luxury of subsidising armed thugs in trying to pander to a certain group in the North. Some people are complaining about not being able to get television programmes from UTV or BBC 2. The other night there were a number of these gentlemen talking about the situation — and these men are considered senior politicians — and it became quite clear after a while that they feared very much that they were coming close to a situation where it would not be a question of their withdrawing from the Commonwealth but, as one gentleman could see it, of being kicked out of it. Then one of them suggested that rather than come into the Republic they would opt for UDI. I wish them luck, but if they did opt for UDI, it is quite possible we might need a United Nations force on the Border. In any case in regard to putting our own people in jeopardy by posting them along the Border in an effort to protect the activities of these people on the far side of the Border, it is about time those concerned were told that it is not our job. If this was brought home to them they might adopt a different attitude. If they were up all day patrolling the Border they might find it less easy to stay up all night raiding Nationalist homes in Derry, Belfast, Newry and places like that.

I was appalled at the apparent lack of action by the Minister for Defence when a member of the Irish Defence Forces, on a casual visit to Belfast, was locked up for a considerable period. As soon as the Department of Defence discovered that he was locked up, the highest diplomatic representations should have been made to ensure that he was released and returned across the Border. In my opinion, a member of the Irish Army is a very important person, whether he is a private or a colonel, and this should be brought home to the people in the North.

I think the Minister had his tongue in his cheek when he said that recruitment was satisfactory. He is an honest man and he must know as well as any of us here who take an interest in Army affairs that it could not be much more unsatisfactory. Is it not true that as fast as people are being recruited others are leaving; that the strength of the Army has not been growing because (1) soldiers are leaving the Army after long service; and (2) young people cannot be persuaded to join?

I know a number of married men who left the Army and who having left the shelter of that life — it might be surprising that somebody who has been in the Army for a long number of years should give it that description — found after a short time that the civilian world was not all milk and honey. They attempted to re-enlist but some stupid regulation which was put in for the purpose of saving money, prevented trained soldiers, relatively young men, from re-enlisting. It is cheaper to enlist young recruits than to re-engage married men who are entitled to a married allowance and perhaps children's allowances in respect of six, seven or eight children, but there is an enormous difference in the calibre of the two categories. It is wrong that efforts should be made to prevent these people from re-enlisting when they discover they have made a mistake and want to serve for another three, four or maybe ten years.

In regard to the United Nations peace-keeping force in Cyprus, on a number of occasions I have made the comment, which I now repeat, that I do not think in present circumstances they should be there. We have done our share and nobody could blame the Irish nation if it is decided that this is the last group that will be sent there until things become normal in the thirty-two counties. It is taking a tremendous risk sending out soldiers who must be the best, or almost the best, we have when they are more needed at home. It is difficult to persuade the man who is doing 24-hour on and off guard duty that the strength of the Army is adequate and that there is no reason for bringing home the personnel who are serving in Cyprus. Each group that went out there did a great job, as in the Congo, but I would say we have been over-generous in this. The fact that the United Nations do not appear to be anxious to pay for their services, since more than £500,000 is due to this country, is another strong reason for recalling our troops, but it would not be the main reason. The main reason, I would claim, is that they are needed much more here.

While our troops are there, however, might I make this suggestion to the Minister? I understand that originally Irish planes flew our troops abroad. Then there was a row over the cost and subsequently the contract was given to a foreign airline who flew them out at a cheaper cost. If this is true, I think it is wrong. Irish planes should fly our troops abroad; even if it costs a little more, the money is coming back into the economy. It is a question of spoiling the ship for a hap'worth of tar, saving a few thousand dollars by hiring foreign aircraft and allowing all the money to go out of the country.

It would be no harm if more frequent visits were paid by members of the Government or their representatives to those troops. I understand that the other nations—maybe they are richer than we are — do this. If troops are stationed away from home it must be heartening for them to see that somebody is interested in their welfare. I do not know what conditions are like there for our troops, but I presume they are as good as those for other troops. Somebody said an all-party committee should pay a visit there, but if that cannot be done, then why not have the Minister or somebody representing him go out there occasionally to show that these people are still remembered here during their few months out of the country?

While other nations have been sending out the wives and families of troops on visits to Cyprus, not alone do we not do that but if people want to go out they are charged the full fare from Dublin to London. From London out to Cyprus they pay a reduced fare because they are the wives and families of serving soldiers. Would it not be possible to give some reduction to some token group who might like to go out there and see their men-folk. It is a very nice place even at Christmastime. I heard Deputy Tunney talking about free telephone calls. A free visit from some of their friends might be more acceptable to the troops, but at the very least the reduced fare which operates from London to Nicosia should operate from Dublin to London as well. This would be appreciated and I am throwing out the suggestion to the Minister for what it is worth.

He says 8,800 all ranks have done duty there. I have not counted them, but that is not quite correct. A number of them have travelled more than once. I am quite sure the Minister is aware that there is a certain amount of jealousy among the ranks over who went and who did not go. The fellow who had not gone at all felt he was being done down when somebody who had been there once or twice before was being sent again. They are keeping up a very good tradition and along with the men who are on the United Nations Truce Supervision Organisation in the Middle East they are doing a great job. I again ask if they are required more here than they are there. The Minister should decide before the end of 1971 that he will build up an Army which requires all the serving people he can get here in order to start it.

Some years ago it was quite common to see groups of soldiers in this city or in the various towns they were stationed in, but it is not possible now. The Army have got so small that they are either, as some of them said recently, coming off duty or going on duty and they find very little free time to engage in anything else. I suggested before that during the war great efforts were made on the sporting field by Army teams. This was encouraged by the Army and a fellow who could play some game if he did not get promotion he got some kind of a cushy job. He did not have to do as much duty as anybody else, but it had the effect of building up a team spirit. I suggested a greater effort should be made to try to look after sport in the Army. There were some wonderful teams in the city and I believe an effort should be made to try this again. This might possibly encourage young men to join the Army.

In addition to that there was the question of the Army band. We still have an Army band. It has not been scrapped like the Garda band. There should be more Army bands of various types. During the war and before it almost every battalion had its own band. We had pipe bands and brass and reed bands. There is no reason why the Army should not go into this in a big way in an effort to revive those bands.

I made a plea on a previous occasion that an effort should be made to teach men in the Army some type of trade. One of the boring things about Army life is that unless there is something going on to which the men can give their attention there is nothing to do except play cards. Playing cards can become a rather expensive way of passing the time and there is also the position if somebody gets into the habit of just doing that he is not very well suited for civilian life afterwards. It is either that or fatigues. You do not get any choice in regard to fatigues, but they are almost as bad for morale as card playing.

As Deputy Clinton said earlier an effort should be made to draw up a programme which could be followed. It should not be the case of going on parade in an Army camp at 9 o'clock, keeping out of the way of whoever is in charge, not appearing again until after lunch, going on parade again and wondering how soon 4.30 would come until you got out of the place. This is the routine which has to be followed by so many people because there is not anything else to do. There are many interesting things to be done if there was some planning put into it. The Minister could use the time at his disposal, or get some of his excellent staff, to prepare something like this.

I was rather amused by the reference in the Minister's brief to the helicopters. When the Army first bought them a Minister for Defence solemnly announced they could not be spread around the country as it was necessary to have what he called a nest of helicopters, consisting of three and to have one operative you must have three. Like the late Thady Lynch and the fishery protection vessels I fear before very long they will start cannibalising them and we will finish up with one because that is what happened the fishery protection vessels. However, the helicopters seem to have survived.

Reference was made to the Army planes. I wonder if a limited number of planes and far more helicopters might not, in fact, be better than the type of planes that we have. I accused the Taoiseach last week of laughing at the Army planes in Gormanston Camp. Maybe I was unfair to him but I felt the phrase he used suggested he did not think much of them and he did not expect anybody else would either. Deputy Byrne referred to the British planes which had flown over the area to take aerial photographs and I suggested since Gormanston military camp was there with a number of first-class planes possibly that might be the reason. The Taoiseach wanted to know if I was suggesting they were trying to find out what kind of planes we had, and did they not know the old type of planes we had there. I suppose they did, but that is not the fault of the people who fly them. It is the fault of the Government. If we are supposed to have an air force then we should have one.

I know aeroplanes cost a lot of money, but I suggest that we should have a small number of effective, modern planes and in addition have helicopters which can be used for so many things and which would in my opinion be very useful if we needed them in defence here. We do not have long distances to fly to bomb enemy cities or anything like that so bomber planes would be out of it. Gormanston Camp, during the war, had an extraordinary selection of planes landing there. Some of them flew down, landed and flew off again when they were permitted. Deputy Clinton spoke about Baldonnel being the ideal place to use if Dublin Airport was closed by fog but it might not be a bad idea if a little money was spent on the airport at Gormanston. It is very often open, because of its peculiar situation near the sea, when other airports are closed down by fog. It could be used on such occasions. I am glad to see that the Minister is buying a fourth helicopter and I suggest he might try to scrape up the money to buy more than one.

I do not want to comment too much on the Naval Service because I do not know much about it. However, I understand that the new vessels which we have got are not suitable for going out in rough weather and they are so slow that the poacher who is poaching within the extended limit can easily get away, that in fact the poacher who allows himself to be caught by one of our new fishery protection vessels deserves to be caught. This is the description which has been given of them and I am afraid it is not very complimentary. Possibly when the new vessel which is being built is put into service the situation might change.

The Minister referred to university training of Army cadets and young officers and he said that this training continues in a satisfactory manner. I am interested in the figures given by the Minister: Faculty of Arts, seven; Faculty of Science, four; Faculty of Commerce, two and Faculty of Engineering, one. Those were the figures in 1969. In 1970 the figures are: Faculty of Arts, four; Faculty of Commerce, four; Faculty of Science, seven. The Minister also tells us that a further 28 cadets of the 1970 class commenced their university studies in October this year; 12 are pursuing courses in Arts, 12 in Commerce, one in Science and three in Engineering. Do the cadets make a choice as to the Faculty they will pursue? The Arts Faculty is somewhat overcrowded — that is possibly the understatement of the year—and the Commerce Faculty is pretty close behind it. If these young people intend to stay in the Army there is not much use in training them in something they will not need. Training should be for the purpose of equipping them for something which will be useful if they stay in the Army. The same is true if they do not intend to make the Army their career. The Faculties they are pursuing are not ones which are very saleable in this country at the moment.

With regard to the training of NCOs and privates in vocational schools, again this is a good idea. I would, however, prefer that they should be trained in something which will be useful to them as part of their Army career. Some years ago I was in Teheran. The Shah had the reputation of doing things with which some people disagreed. He introduced a system with regard to army officers. Most of the people were illiterate and he arranged for army officers to teach in schools as part of their initial training. He had the right idea. During the day the children were taught and the parents came along at night. Within two or three years an almost illiterate nation had been turned into a semi-literate nation or something even better. I do not suggest the same necessity arises here, but the Shah certainly had the right way of thinking. The Minister might usefully study this whole question of education in the Army and find out whether or not the idea of allowing a limited number to take outside education courses is the right way of doing things. Would it not be better if they were taught within the Army? Side by side with teaching them the arts of war they could be taught the arts of peace. That would pay a rich dividend. I give the idea to the Minister for nothing.

In the apprentice school the standards are very strict. I know a very keen young man who was rejected because, it was alleged, he had a cast in one eye. Afterwards the doctor explained to me that he had what was, in his opinion, a lazy eye. This young man went out into civilian life and did extremely well. I always regretted that he was not allowed to do well in the Army. There was really nothing wrong with his sight. He wanted to train as a fitter. I think he could have done the job just as well in the Army as he eventually did it outside.

I am sorry the sleeping accommodation is not satisfactory. A sum of £42,500 has been provided but so far, the Minister says, nothing has been done but a start will soon be made on new billets. Why was a start not made before this? This is something which should have got priority.

We saw the cadets from Zambia marching down O'Connell Street. They have to be trained and, provided the training does not cost us anything, there is no objection to it.

For the first time we have an overall figure of 5,409 refugees. I am sorry there are still 200 refugees in Kilworth in Cork. We must not allow people to become permanent refugees. If they do not intend to go back, then an effort should be made to take them out of the camp and place them in houses. It is mainly women and young children who are living in these unnatural conditions and it is not a comfortable living no matter what people may do for them. An Army camp is not suitable for families. Every effort should be made to get as many as possible housed in towns throughout the country.

I am glad Gormanston was used as a transit camp only. It is one of the most uncomfortable camps in the country. During my time in it in the early forties it was a very uncomfortable place. It has not improved with age. Because it was so close to the Border it did attract a number of people, some from this city, indeed, who developed northern accents in order to get in there for a short period. It is not an ideal place for refugees and I am glad it was used as a transit camp only.

The Minister is quite right in thanking the various organisations which helped. I am sure should a similar situation arise in the future — I hope it will not — these organisations will be just as willing to help.

The Civil Defence officers are local authority officers as well and that tended to create a situation in which the organisations fitted very well into each other. That might not have been possible had there been no liaison between them. The man in charge of Civil Defence in my area, Jerry Dwyer, did a fantastic job. He was up night and day and the harder the work the more he seemed to enjoy it. I believe his colleagues were the same. The Red Cross, the Order of Malta and the St. John Ambulance Brigade all did trojan work. The local residents were very generous when called on.

The Civil Defence, like the FCA, is a peculiar organisation in that on paper it looks as though it has a tremendous strength but in actual fact its strength is not so great. On a number of occasions I have preached the gospel that nothing is too good for those who are seriously helping to keep either of those organisations in existence but it is a pity there are so many hangers-on. Somebody who has been trained in Civil Defence can be brought back should the occasion arise, provided he retains his training, and be of use. In relation to the FCA I am not so happy about training people in the use of Army equipment, whether it is old or new, and then allowing them to leave the force still carrving that expertise in their minds. This is a danger to the country and something which should be guarded against if at all possible.

I should like to refer briefly to the Drogheda incident. There is an inquiry going on and I know therefore that the Minister cannot be expected to comment on it. When FCA men are training inside a building it is no way to guard the building by putting somebody on guard either inside or outside the building with instructions to halt people but no instructions about what to do if the people do not halt. I am quite sure there is not an FCA man in the country who would know what to do if in fact two or three men rushed the post he was defending. He would be very slow to fire a weapon at these men. I am not blaming FCA men for that but definite orders must be given as to how sentries are to react. Definite orders will also have to be given to all those who carry arms under any circumstances. It is entirely wrong to blame them or regular Army sentries who are on duty for something they were not prepared for or could not be prepared for. If they had shot two or three people, or all of them, as they very well could have, there would have been an outcry and they would have been the first to be blamed. The Minister has got to think very deeply about this. He must ensure that all Army personnel, whether they be regular Army or FCA, have strict instructions on when to carry arms and how to carry arms. If official drilling is going on sentries should be placed in a position where they will be useful and not placed in a position where they are the first target with not a hope if something should start.

Reference has been made to the officer. I do not know who the officer was but I wonder what any of us would have done if we were in his position when a photographer set off a flashbulb in his face while taking a picture after the incident had occurred. The officer concerned probably reacted in the same way as any of us would have done. I know the pressmen concerned are decent reasonable people and I am sure they would be the first to agree now that the officer's reaction was not an attack on them; nobody was going to shoot them or anything like that, it was simply a natural reaction in a tense situation. It is a pity so many people are inclined to treat the incident in Drogheda as a bit of a joke and think the people concerned in it were not very efficient or effective. I should love to know what any of these experts would have done if they were in the position in which those men found themselves. Would they have fired a shot in a crowded hut with the risk of killing more than one person or would they have done what these men did, decided that the position was hopeless and therefore allowed the guns to be taken from them? It is a matter about which the Army Council and the Minister for Defence will have to make up their minds and very definite orders will have to be given because that sort of thing injures the morale of the Army more so than anything else.

The Minister has referred to the death of the late Chief of Staff, Major-General Patrick Delaney. His loss is felt in the Army. It is a pity he should have had such an untimely end.

Deputy Clinton referred to Army pensions in detail and the Minister also referred to them in certain detail. There are two things wrong with them: one is that the pensions in general are too small and the other is that the tests applied before an Army pension or a widow's pension is given are too stringent. It is a shocking thing that people who have given long service to the State should have to produce evidence that they could not be reasonably expected to have in their possession in order to qualify for a very small amount of money. This is causing a great deal of annoyance and it should not be allowed to continue.

In the course of his speech the Minister said, in relation to free travel:

Because of the popularity of the scheme, and because of increases in the charges by CIE, the cost of free travel this year will require a Supplementary Estimate of some £260,000. This brings the cost of free travel this year to £320,000.

Does the Minister mean that the original cost was only £60,000 because that, in fact, is what he is saying? I believe a mistake must have been made. It is not very important, it is a relatively small amount of money, but if it is wrong the Minister might like to correct it when he is replying.

With regard to free travel I understand the pensioner can travel with his wife on his ticket but if the pensioner is sick or unable to travel the wife cannot get free travel without him. I said on another Estimate that wives have to do what happens here occasionally when there is a very tight vote taking place — bring their husbands along on stretchers if they want to avail of free travel. This is ridiculous. Free travel should be made available for the pensioner and his wife. The Department fear that he may die and she may use the travel voucher but surely as the widow of a pensioner she should be entitled to use it for a period? I suggest the Minister should try to find some way around this. A number of people have complained to me that they wanted to go here or there to do business for their husbands who were ill but as their husbands were unable to travel with them they could not travel alone because they could not afford the fare. Who can afford CIE fares at the present time?

Everyone has been complaining about the cratering of Border roads by British troops. One of the main reasons for complaint is that by cratering Border roads farmers who live on one side of the Border and have land on the other side of the Border find they may have to go five or six miles to a place which was originally 100 yards from their homes. I live very close to Gormanston Camp. There are two gates to it, a front gate and a back gate. For as long as I can remember the front gate was open all night, there were military police on it, and the back gate was open until 12 o'clock and either a military policeman or a barrack policeman went on that gate. There are civilians who have lived all their lives in the camp and naturally some of them have land, friends and business outside the camp. Six weeks ago somebody decided the back gate should be closed at 4.30 p.m. and as a special concession it was decided to close it at 5 o'clock. This means that people who want to get to their land or to do business outside or visit one of the houses situated near the back gate have to go half a mile down to the front gate and three miles around to the back gate and when they are finished return the same distance. If it is a question of a shortage of personnel I am sure someone could be found to do the 5 o'clock to 12 o'clock stint each week on the back gate. I suggest to the Minister that this is something that leaves a bad taste. There is no reason why it should happen. The Minister should, without waiting for anybody else, say that if during the emergency it was safe to leave that gate open until 12 o'clock it should still be safe to do so. I do not want to go any further with it. I am sorry I had to raise it here: I had hoped to have a reply about this matter before the Estimate came up.

Deputy Clinton commented on the role of the Army in EEC conditions. As the Minister is aware, we are opposing EEC entry. Despite that we hear again and again from the Taoiseach, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and others that there are no defence commitments in joining EEC. The Taoiseach in Paris on one occasion and the Minister for Foreign Affairs and other Ministers in this House and outside on numerous occasions made the comment and repeated it parrot-like that a Europe worth joining was a Europe worth defending. If that does not mean that if we enter Europe we are prepared to enter into defence commitments, would the Minister please explain what exactly it means? I believe the Government firmly intend, if asked to enter into defence commitments, despite the fact that we have been traditionally neutral, to enter into such commitments and guarantee to take part in the defence of Europe. If we do so we will become embroiled in any future war. Not only that, but since it is impossible at present to get an army to defend this country, the only method by which troops could be supplied in a big way for the defence of Europe would be by conscription. I should like the Minister to think over that because it appears to have been glossed over by many people except that when it suits, the saying "a Europe worth joining is worth defending" is trotted out.

Deputy Clinton referred to something else about which I feel very strongly. I do not believe members of the Defence Forces should be allowed to take an active part in politics if the Government feel they should not do so but it is ridiculous that a member of the Defence Forces is not allowed to make a complaint or an inquiry to a politician. We all have to conform to the stupid assumption that the complaint has been made otherwise than by the soldier while nobody knows exactly what happened except the soldier himself. A certain amount of political freedom might be granted. I joined the Army during the last war despite the fact that I bitterly opposed Fianna Fáil as a Labour supporter but it did not stop me or thousands of others from being loyal members of the Defence Forces. The Minister should think over this because I understand quite a number of soldiers do take part in political activities and might as well do so legally. Trying to cover things up is a mistake.

There should be much greater liaison between the Army and the Organisation of National Ex-Servicemen. While ONE have been given a certain amount of recognition, successive Ministers for Defence have shied away from going close to ONE. They are an organisation of national ex-servicemen and within their ranks are members of every political party. Deputy Dowling and I were vice-presidents of ONE at one time until we became too busy and had to drop out. In the organisation are people of all shades of political opinion and of all creeds and classes. I believe they are doing a good job in looking after, as best they can, those who leave the Army, particularly those who are not doing well. It would be a good thing if they could get more recognition. The Minister may not be aware that a number of ONE branches exist in Northern Ireland and the people who come from the North have proved themselves, if anybody doubts it, just as Irish as we are. They also proved this during the war by joining the Irish Army.

Reference was made to tax deductions. I suggest to Deputy Clinton that the man he spoke about who had £6 per week deducted from his income was one of those who decided last April that he did not want any tax deductions made. If his tax deductions in April were £3 a week and no tax was deducted for six months, at the end of that period until the end of the tax year deductions naturally would be £6 a week. Some people have asked to have the Army and other State employees put on PAYE. I will repeat what I said here before and which was misreported by somebody who did not get the drift of it in the Press Gallery —they are usually very accurate. The State employees who are paying tax are paying on last year's income; if they go on PAYE they will pay on this year's income. I did not say civil servants were getting away without paying tax, as was reported in some papers. If they were paying tax on this year's income their last increase in 1970 would be taxable whereas it is not taxable because they are being taxed on the previous year's income. For that reason it should not be difficult for the Department of Defence or for any other State Department to make arrangements at the beginning of the tax year and to tell an employee: "You earned £X in the last 12 months and therefore your tax for the next 12 months will be so much." This can and should be done. It would save people from themselves. It would save the fellow who thinks he is getting away with it by not paying anything for six months and then cursing when he is caught in the last few months of the year for the whole amount. This happens many of them and then they come to Deputy Clinton and myself and, I am sure, to every other Deputy, complaining that the Department are terribly unfair in taking a lot of money off them. I have shown why it is being taken off and it could be very easily avoided if the Minister made the necessary arrangements, as I have suggested, making it compulsory that at least the same amount should be deducted this year from the very start as was deducted in the previous year.

I consider that the Army in this country, as in every other country, are doing an excellent job. In times of war or emergency everybody thinks the Army are great but in peacetime soldiers do not get the respect they deserve. The general public should have more respect for the Army. The system which operated before in this city and which has died out, whereby a uniformed soldier would not be turned away from the door as I understand has happened, but would be allowed in at a reduced rate or perhaps free to certain functions, should be restored. Soldiers should be treated as the special people they are, the people defending the State.

If our "friends" across the Border, or if Mr. Heath or Sir Alec Douglas Home are worried about people crossing the Border, let them take their thousands of troops out of Belfast and Derry and put them along the Border. They are the people who created the Border, we did not create it. If they are worried about it they should make their own arrangements to look after the Border. If they did that they would have less time to persecute and act in the manner in which they have been acting against the ordinary people of Northern Ireland.

Mr. Dowling

The Minister has been very helpful to other Deputies and myself who have brought problems to his notice. I know that the examination that he is carrying out will result in a much improved Force. It is the duty of Deputies to have a long hard look at our Defence Forces. The Estimate for this Department is important but frequently it is overlooked by many Deputies. However, many of us wish to do something to help those people who have given valuable service to our country. All of us are proud of the part played by Irish soldiers in the Congo, Cyprus and other areas. It is a proud boast of people who have served abroad that they did their duty in the interests of peace and justice.

There are many defects in the Defence Forces that need to be remedied. I understand there will be a recruiting campaign in the future but I hope it will not be a repetition of that conducted in the past. The last campaign was a disaster; it was badly-timed, coming up to the holiday period when people were not inclined to leave their homes. Use should be made of military bands and the equipment at the disposal of the Army should be displayed to the young people; the campaign should not be confined to an advertisement in the newspapers or a silly advertisement on television. During the Emergency there was considerable success with recruitment and at that time use was made of the military bands which paraded through towns. I hope the new campaign will be well thought out and will not repeat the mistakes of the past.

New recruits will expect to have reasonable conditions when they enter the services. In this city the accommodation available is not all that it should be and I hope this matter will be rectified at an early date. The matter of uniforms is important. If one walks down O'Connell Street nowadays, one seldom sees a soldier in uniform. Is it because he is ashamed of the shabby uniform? Attention should be given to this matter; the soldier should not be issued with the same type of uniform as in the past. People who come from good homes expect a reasonable degree of comfort in the Army. Some of the barracks have adequate accommodation; in the newer barracks cubicles have been erected— as has happened at Kickham Barracks in Clonmel and in other barracks.

The situation in relation to peacetime work is different to that obtaining in times of war. There tends to be a greater gap between the officers and the NCOs in peacetime than when soldiers are abroad on service. When they are abroad there is a greater sense of co-operation and comradeship and it is desirable that this should continue when members of the Force return to this country. However, this kind of understanding is not always evident in peacetime. The personnel who have served abrod are conscious of this and they hope if there is a return to peacetime soldiering with no overseas service the same type of co-operation will be maintained.

The problems of the soldiers are varied. I am mainly concerned about the NCOs because I think the officers are able to look after themselves, although I am conscious of some of their problems. Suggestions have been made from time to time for the betterment of the service but when they are made by the NCOs they are seldom heeded; unless the suggestion comes from someone at the top it is disregarded. We should bring about a situation whereby suggestions and complaints made by NCOs will receive attention. Many of the NCOs have had long service; they have been through the Emergency period and have continued in the Army since that time. Many of the improvements suggested would not have cost anything but the suggestions were disregarded. Some kind of committee should be set up in which the NCOs could participate. We speak about involvement in industry and management but there is pressing need for such involvement in the Army. NCOs and officers serve on sports committees but not on any committee that might affect the lives of the soldiers. There are many intelligent men in the Army, men who have given long service, and their suggestions and advice should be heeded. This might result in improving the lot of the ordinary soldier.

We know that the personnel who served in Cyprus and in the Congo have done a wonderful job. Their standard of morale and conduct is very high. When we see other forces such as the British forces carrying out the type of atrocities that we have seen on our fellow countrymen in the North we can make comparisons and see how civilised our people are in comparison with the occupation forces that occupy some portions of the country in the guise of security forces. We hope we know that our people will never try to ape the type of campaign that we have seen waged so close to us by foreign soldiers.

We have learned many vital lessons from overseas service. There are still investigations to be made in relation to the adjustments that have to be made. Overseas service has provided a very large fund of knowledge on many matters that were overlooked here in the past and has given us a greater insight into many problems of peacetime and wartime service. I hope the lessons will not be lost. I hope that before the personnel who have been overseas are released from service they will have an opportunity to properly document their experiences and ensure that the Army will benefit from the views and suggestions not only of the officers but also of the NCOs and men who have served so wisely and so well.

Fatigue duties have been mentioned. A soldier is a soldier and that is his job just as a tradesman in an industry does a particular job. Making dish cloths out of soldiers by having them on permanent fatigue duties is something that must be terminated. People have been on permanent fatigue duties from the time they entered the service just because somebody disliked them or wanted to divert individuals away from a particular line. It is deplorable that at this stage we should be concerned about fatigue duties for soldiers. They have a very real job to do. With the development of different types of equipment they should be fully occupied in learning and in being instructed in these developments. Fatigue duty must be cut out. If there are menial jobs in the barracks there are many civilians, many ex-servicemen, on the labour exchange who could be called in. There are too many people leaving the armed services and ending up occupying menial jobs such as petrol pump attendants. In the barracks, in this House, as Deputy Tully said, and in all the Government services there are many jobs which should be and must be retained for people who have given the best years of their lives to the armed services, the Garda Síochána or other services. There must be a special place for them. All over the world there is specially reserved employment for ex-servicemen. As Deputy Tully said what better place to start than Leinster House. If the Government will not give a lead in reserving employment in military posts, in the Houses of the Oireachtas and elsewhere for ex-servicemen we cannot expect outside employers to do it. I consider it proper that some jobs should be reserved. In Britain and elsewhere there are many jobs reserved for ex-servicemen. They have quite a number of disabled ex-servicemen. We are fortunate that we have not. Some of the jobs are menial with small pay but the pay plus their disability benefit brings them up to the normal income level. We should have a pool of employment available to ex-servicemen. It is regrettable that so many men leave the service and end up as petrol pump attendants and even worse.

The day of the officer's orderly in the Army has gone, the day when soldiers had to scrub the officers' floors and in some cases wash the napkins for the colonel's wife. A soldier is a soldier. All this nonsense about officers' orderlies polishing floors and washing napkins is disgusting. We should get rid of this type of duty. Fatigue duty is a tag attached to a variety of duties which includes washing cars which belong to other people. A soldier should be respected and he should be relieved of the disgusting type of carry-on that is a throwback to other armies.

The Minister and the Government must make up their minds in relation to new barracks. It is ridiculous that in the centre of this city we have possibly half a dozen barracks. We are not keeping up with the modern development. One bomb or one raid could throw our entire service out of gear. We need barracks removed from the city with bomb proof services. One on the north and one on the south side would be desirable. I slept in Collins Barracks. It is a barracks similar to many others I have slept in with cold rooms and very bad accommodation. Our soldiers deserve better than this. The Minister and the Government must decide to build something new that will provide a degree of comfort, something that will enable the military commanders to exercise a greater measure of confidence in relation to the movement of personnel. This is a factor at present. The blocking off of two roads can dislocate the entire armed services. This is a ridiculous situation. The time is past for using the crutches we have in this city.

The vast portion of land that is occupied by Cathal Brugha Barracks could be made available for housing. it would be an ideal housing site and one that any local authority or any developer would be glad to acquire. The price that it would fetch on the market would probably be sufficient for the development of a modern military barracks. There is not much point in spending vast amounts of money on a system of piecemeal repairs. Anyone visiting the Curragh can see there the dilapidated condition in which much of the accommodation is, but nobody appears to be concerned to any great extent with the problem.

In so far as the present location of barracks are concerned, the hazards are high and the Government must put off no longer the development of military barracks on both the north and south sides of the city. They must give consideration also to the Curragh Camp. I do not think that the Curragh, as a military post, is as important, at this stage, as some people seem to think. I would not be against the reconstruction of some barracks. Kickham Barracks in Clonmel, which were burned down during the Civil War period, were rebuilt by the Army Corps of Engineers. I spent a couple of years in those barracks during the war and when I visited the barracks recently I saw evidence of the great improvements that have been carried out there. There is a corps of men in the Army who are capable of carrying out major developments such as those carried out at Kickham Barracks. I hope that priority will be given to accommodation, to the disposal of military barracks and to the erection of new barracks.

I shall deal now with the question of married quarters. Some of these are a disgrace, particularly those at McKee Barracks. If we are to have married quarters at all, the accommodation offered must be decent. I have the greatest sympathy for the unfortunate people who have to live in the outmoded accommodation that is available. Another feature of this accommodation that is undesirable is that it is behind the barrack walls. The provision of married quarters should be a matter to be provided for in the capital budget. It should be divorced from this particular Estimate. Also, the Department of Local Government, who are concerned with housing people generally, should consider the question of married quarters because it is not fair that by virtue of being a soldier a man is denied the right to a proper home. I would suggest, therefore, that married quarters be built outside the barrack precincts and that they be the responsibility of some body other than the Army.

We are aware of the difficulty experienced by the Army in relation to overholders. These people have served the country well and they cannot be left on the side of the road with no hope of accommodation. Many of these people have been moved during the years from military post to military post and they now find that there is no hope of them being rehoused. Usually their families are grown up and have gone away and, so, they are not given priority on a waiting list. In some cases they are rehoused on compassionate grounds by local authorities, but that is a matter that is left to the discretion of the local authorities. It would be much better to abolish married quarters altogether rather than to continue offering the type of accommodation that is available. This accommodation is not suitable in any way for family life. An effort has been made at the Curragh to recondition many of the old married quarters but, perhaps, the situation there is different to that in the city. While there have been some improvements at Connolly Barracks, there are married quarters at McDonagh Barracks that are appalling. Many farmers have sheds for their dogs that are bigger than the dwellings in which some people at McDonagh Barracks are being accommodated. People who have served the nation well must not be expected to live in second-rate accommodation.

In some of the barracks there is a real problem involved, for instance, in keeping paper on the walls. The devices I have seen used by some soldiers for this purpose were ingenious but in spite of their efforts the paper would not stay on the particular type of walls in their quarters. There are stone floors in the dwellings but surely we have gone past that stage. Much discontent is bred by bad married quarters and not in the barracks. A soldier will tolerate a lot, but his wife and family, particularly if they are moving from large good accommodation to small cramped accommodation, will soon see the defects.

The re-housing of personnel is very important. When a soldier has about ten or 11 years to serve there should be personnel in the service to brief him properly. He should realise at that stage that, when he has finished his Army service of 21 or possibly 30 years, he will have to face the conditions at the end of the line. He should ask himself does he want to end up in married quarters as an over-holder? If he does not, he should know that there are certain grants available from local authorities to help him to purchase his own house. In fact, the Army should assist him to purchase his own house. He should be made fully aware of all the advantages that are available to personnel at a stage when he is in a better position to decide on purchasing his own home. This type of advisory service is necessary and desirable.

I understand that certain officers have been assigned to this type of work in recent times and to this type of social planning. There should be some type of educational service to make the private soldier or the NCO fully aware of the situation while he still has about ten years to think ahead and to assess his future properly. I was speaking in this House last night to an over-holder, a person who has served for 31 years, and who has been thrown overboard by the local authority. He was feeling very resentful. The corporation told him they would do nothing for him because his family is too small. If this person had been confronted with this problem ten or 15 years ago when he had his family to assist him, and if he had been properly advised, he would now be in his own home and would be independent of the local authorities and the Army. By virtue of the fact that he is an over-holder he is occupying a unit of accommodation that somebody wants, bad as it is. I would not suggest for a moment that these people should be fired out, but people who have given long service should get some consideration.

I hope the Minister will consult with the Minister for Local Government and work out some system in the various centres; in Clonmel, Mullingar, Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Galway. There are not so many local authorities involved. Land is available. I do not see why this matter cannot be solved in a very short time. We have had the development in Ballymun and St. Michael's estate and we know how speedily a development like the one in St. Michael's estate or in Sarah Place can be carried out to provide good homes for people. The nation should make available land and money to ensure that this problem is solved. These are slums just as Keogh Square was a slum, and the other areas which were demolished. These are substandard buildings and some of them are worse than the buildings were in the areas that have been abolished. I hope the Minister will give me an assurance that something positive will be done.

I would also suggest that if land is available adjacent to a barracks there is no reason why the Army Corps of Engineers could not build houses on it for Army personnel. There are skilled technicians, carpenters, plasterers and bricklayers in the Army Corps of Engineers. They have rebuilt barracks. They worked on St. Bricin's Hospital and they did other jobs. There is no reason why they could not build houses. This would give them an opportunity to develop their talents further. Bricklaying, plastering and plumbing are limited in the everyday life of a soldier. There are many men in the various sections of the Army Corps of Engineers who would be glad of the opportunity to devote some weeks or months to perfecting their knowledge and to acquiring further knowledge of house-building and up-to-date development. Some of these tradesmen feel that they have not got the opportunity to keep abreast of developments in the house-building industry. When they reach the end of the line they feel that their effectiveness is limited. For that reason their skills and their crafts should be utilised. This would fulfil the twofold purpose of getting houses built at no very great cost to the Army and of housing the personnel.

The question of the re-settlement of ex-servicemen is very important. While serving, the NCO or the man is said to be the backbone of the Army but when he puts on his "Martin Henry" and is pushed outside the gate, he is completely forgotten as an individual. We must follow the man into civilian life. We should have a director of technology or somebody like that to advise the soldier about his retirement at least ten years before he retires. We talk about the re-training of personnel for industry, but what about the soldier who has spent so many years serving the nation and serving the cause of peace and justice in the Congo and Cyprus and elsewhere? What happens to him when he reaches the labour market? Some of these people are completely unskilled and, therefore, the labour market is very limited. If a man has no skill and is entering the labour market today, he must find himself at the bottom of the queue, and many soldiers find themselves at the bottom of the queue after long years of service.

There should be somebody to say: "We will give you a skill. We will give you something in addition that you will have when you leave the service. There is a variety of jobs which we can train you for. Which do you want?" It could even be driving. If the opportunity were there many of them would avail of it. We have a responsibility to these people, a very major responsibility. If a situation developed here in which the armed forces were called into action we would have a great understanding of and a great sympathy for these men while the fight was on, as Deputy Tully said. It is the same in every country, but when the war is over the position is different. This applies everywhere although some countries have given greater thought to the re-settlement of Army personnel than others.

We have AnCO and we have the apprenticeship training school in Naas. That training school should be further developed so that it could take in personnel who have obtained a limited amount of knowledge from courses in vocational schools or elsewhere. It could be expanded to provide a "brushing up" service for people with some knowledge of engineering or woodwork who want to develop their knowledge before going on to the labour market.

I am glad to know that contacts have been made with AnCO to ensure that re-settlement is possible. There is a large number of people serving in the forces and the opportunities to attend courses are limited and generally go to very selected personnel. An advice and guidance service should be instituted which would help in the preparation of men for civilian life. Many of the men that I served with have made the grade, others did not and I have seen them coming out in recent times and being told that they are too old for employment. It is pitiful that these men should have to search for employment. We find the local authority saying to such men that they are too old at 40. In regard to one skilled man the Dublin Corporation say they will not employ him because he is over 40. It is not right that ex-servicemen who have served the nation for 30 years should be deprived of employment with a local authority. It is a shame that any local authority or any State or semi-State organisation should indicate that a man who has served the nation so well for so many years is too old at 40 for employment in their organisations. That matter must be corrected. Men who have served the nation have been victimised and that situation should not be allowed to continue. When one makes representations to a local authority on behalf of an ex-serviceman one is asked how old he is and then one is told he is not wanted at that age.

The question of reserving a number of jobs within military barracks or in State and semi-State organisations for ex-servicemen should be considered. That is done in other countries and it should be done here.

A man may die immediately prior to retirement leaving his widow with a large family of young children. She finds herself in dire difficulty and the pension she gets is of little use. In other countries the widow, in such circumstances, receives free instruction to enable her to take up employment and the children are given educational training. It should not be beyond the powers of the State here to provide such instruction for the widows of deceased servicemen so that she may be able to take up employment and rear her family in some sort of comfort. Many widows of ex-servicemen would be glad of the opportunity to take up employment following suitable training. Positions could be found for them in military barracks, in State and semi-State concerns. They should not be directed merely to jobs as cleaners. It is always the most menial jobs that are offered to widows of ex-servicemen. The widows of men who have served the nation are entitled to more than they are getting. The children and widows of ex-servicemen should be protected. The Minister should consider this matter.

I had an opportunity, with members of a committee of the House, to visit the apprenticeship school at Naas and to examine the position there. We were all impressed. One of the problems that we brought to the Minister's attention was referred to in his speech, that is, the lack of suitable accommodation for the young boys serving in the apprenticeship school. I am glad to note that a substantial amount of money is being made available and that young boys who have left good homes will be able to have reasonable comfort during their period of training. It is all-important that there should be decent accommodation and it should be possible to have proper recreational facilities. The existing accommodation is not adequate and great credit is due to those who have achieved success in the apprenticeship school, having regard to the difficult conditions under which they worked. The school has developed in a very practical way and has produced excellent young men trained in electrical, technical, carpentry and other skills. Greater attention should be paid to this school. There should be replacement of some of the machinery and all the tools necessary for the proper training of apprentices should be provided.

That brings me to the very important matter of the financing of the technical school service at Naas and at Baldonnel, which I also had an opportunity to visit. A demand may be made for a certain type of equipment by the technical personnel in charge of the school, who are the best people to assess the needs. There is no point in having inferior equipment simply because somebody in the Department of Finance says that what is required cannot be supplied for five years. The person in charge of the training knows what is required and when it is required and when that person requisitions equipment it should be supplied. The apprenticeship schools in Naas and Baldonnel must be fully serviced and if more money is required it must be provided. The best possible type of training and equipment must be provided. It would be an injustice to the apprentices not to replace existing inferior equipment.

The time has come when there must be an allocation of money to the apprenticeship schools at Naas and Baldonnel. Let somebody in the schools be allowed to decide which equipment to buy and when to buy it instead of waiting for the issue date. I think the officer in command should be given an allocation of money instead of having to make demands on people who have never been near Baldonnel.

I am glad to say that nowadays officers have a certain amount of latitude in regard to the exchange of food with suppliers. They can exchange, for instance, beef for mutton and it is no longer necessary for personnel to eat sausages and peas when they do not want sausages and peas. Because of this arrangement soldiers are getting a better deal in the matter of catering. As I have said, people on the spot should be given more discretion in the matter of purchase because heretofore they had to go to the man in the Department of Finance and he became the nigger in the woodpile because when it came to the question of needed supplies an officer said: "What will the man in Finance say?" We should cut out a lot of the nonsense and red tape, the shuttling backwards and forwards from one Department to another. When I was in the Army I got one pair of boots every two years whether they were worn out or not.

Reverting to the question of apprentices, we should ensure that the very best possible equipment is available for them. These schools are very important and the people in them are doing an excellent job. After they have served their term, the apprentices fit in very well to civilian employment and their employers have nothing but good to say of them. However, a practice has risen up which must be stamped out. There have been cases where young men, when trained, have been pirated by certain employers. The employers have given these young men the money to buy themselves out of the Army and then have made them repay that money over a period of years. In these circumstances these young men are nothing more than bondsmen. This must be stamped out even to the extent of increasing the amounts for which apprentices can buy themselves out. Personnel should be released only on genuine grounds and, perhaps, if this were done the financial consideration need not enter it to such an extent. An officer can easily judge whether the reasons for releasing a soldier are special and pressing. I should like to say that in relation to the practice of pirating employers to which I have referred, apprentices have found after leaving that the promises made to them have not been lived up to.

Still in reference to the apprentice schools at Naas and the Air Corps at Baldonnel, I ask the Minister to consider allocating money to the personnel at both places and at engineering depots where equipment is in demand and where there are changes in the type of equipment required. Officers in these places should be enabled to purchase required equipment within a period and not have to wait until the end of an issue period.

In relation to the educational schemes for personnel, I am glad arrangements have been made with the universities. I also welcome the interest taken by officers in relation to these courses, which have been a success. There are, of course, certain limitations in regard to personnel attending these courses as there are in relation to those receiving training in vocational schools. The Minister has stated that the university training of Army cadets and young officers continues in a satisfactory manner and that the 14 cadets appointed in 1969 who commenced their university degree course in October, 1969, have all passed their first and second year university examinations. This is very creditable and it shows the value of this particular service and I hope there will be a further extension of it for the equipping of personnel for civilian life and the betterment of the Army. In relation to training of one type and another the private soldier is on no account to be overlooked. It is well that cadets and young officers should get this opportunity but I think the question of the NCOs and the men should be further examined. The Minister states that 15 cadets of the 1969 class commenced their first year at university in October, 1970, pursuing courses in arts, commerce and science and that 12 of these are continuing at university. He says that a further 28 cadets commenced their university studies in October of this year and are pursuing courses in arts, commerce, science and engineering.

When we come to the personnel who have been trained in the vocational schools, we find that 85 men commenced courses at five different centres. That figure of 85 out of all the privates and NCOs in the Army is very small and there is some breakdown in the system here, or the matter is not getting sufficient attention, because on the basis of the ratio between officers, NCOs and men, there should be quite a lot more than 85 men who would be suitable for training. This scheme must be examined to ensure that every NCO and man can avail of this scheme and that no exception is made. Far too often in the Army we find that exceptions are made and this has been so right through the Army in relation to promotion and courses. I remember when I was in the Army some fellows claimed they did more courses than Mick the Miller. They got all the courses while other men got nothing. I hope it is not a question of some soldiers getting all the attention while others are disregarded. The weaker section is the section that requires attention, assistance and guidance. The person anxious to go ahead should be given the opportunity, but we should have a look at the person who does not appear to be anxious and find out the reason and see can we assist him. These will be the real problems in society when their Army period expires.

The Minister says that the special arrangements initiated in 1970 whereby men may undertake a two-year course leading to the Leaving Certificate continue in operation and that a total of 43 men enrolled for the course at six centres. Again, this is a very creditable effort, but I think the ratio between NCOs, men and officers again requires attention. Very often a man who does not appear to be interested may have genuine reasons for this. He merely says that he is not interested and no further action is taken, and this is a problem which should be examined to find out the reasons for his saying so.

The Naval Service has been mentioned, and I want to thank the Minister for having given us the opportunity recently of visiting the minesweepers, of examining the equipment and of having a trip abroad. One could not but be greatly impressed by the personnel and the service being provided. Some people have stated that these vessels are not fast enough, and that may well be, but with the development of craft, and particularly fishing craft, at the moment, if one is six miles away from you, if one comes into view at six miles, it takes a considerable time, several hours, to overhaul such a craft. However fast the vessels may be, they still could not make up the distance mentioned, unless we have some type of craft other than the conventional type in use at present. Even with the speed of the new ship being constructed at the Verolme Dockyard, a ship a couple of miles away would probably make the open sea before any impression would be made in breaking down the mileage. I want to thank the Minister for extending the invitation to Members of the Oireachtas and it is regrettable that so few Members accepted. Similarly with this debate— so few people appear to have an interest in it. It is, however, very important, affecting as it does the lives of 8,000 or 9,000 people for all time.

The security of the nation, our contribution to international security, our commitments in Cyprus and other countries—these are all very real problems. The contributions which we have made and which these men have made are very great and no words of mine could in any way do justice to their wonderful contribution. It was a pleasure to serve with many of these people. I served as a private soldier and as an NCO and I understand the problems of these men. These are very real problems to the people concerned. The officers can, in large degree, take care of themselves, and while I do not want to see their problems overlooked, there are people here who can put forward their points of view and who will do so with their knowledge as officers of these particular problems.

There is one point, however, that I would make in relation to officers and I ask the Minister to take particular note of it. It is that where a single officer is leaving the Army, he gets no gratuity. This seems to be a ridiculous situation, which I think applies to certain NCOs. The purpose of the gratuity was resettlement, so that the man concerned would be able to buy a home and settle down but in present circumstances if a single officer —and there are only three or four in the Army—retires from the Army, is he not supposed to have a home? Where is he supposed to end up after 20 or 30 years service? Does he not want to buy a home, to settle down or is he to end up in the Iveagh lodging house or some such place? This question and the question of single NCOs must be examined to ensure that justice is done. The day of the outmoded ideas about resettlement of Army officers has gone and in relation to NCOs the system should be completely overhauled to ensure that persons retiring from the service will get a fair and square deal.

I thank the Minister for the courteous way in which he has dealt with the problems presented to him by me and my colleagues, and in saying that, I think I speak for the members of all parties. He has been realistic in his approach and has tried to remedy many of the older problems which have existed. With his understanding of these problems and of human problems generally and his interest in the Deputies who bring the problems to him, in the future, I am quite certain that we will have much progress made and that the problems of the personnel I have mentioned—those living in married quarters, the fatigue men, the officers' orderlies and other people doing duties which are unbecoming—will all be rectified and remedied, so that we will have a more contented force and can look forward to new recruits coming in, in the full knowledge that they will have something at the end of the line. They should join the Army to give themselves a career knowing that they will have something in the future and that they will not be at the end of the line in the labour exchange.

Dr. Byrne

This Estimate has been awaited for a long time by many Members of this House. For some time past the armed forces of this country have come under unfavourable criticism from many quarters. The most notable section of the Minister's speech is the third last paragraph from which I will quote:

Defence is one of many State services that have to be maintained from the limited and hard-won revenue. What is allocated to each service is determined by a difficult, even painful, balancing process, in the knowledge that if more is given to one, the others must do with less —unless, of course, extra revenue can be procured. Money is really the nub of the matter, and these critical decisions are taken by Ministers and, in the final analysis, by the Government.

I would submit that from that paragraph the Government stand indicted by the Minister for Defence with regard to the armed forces—and rightly so. The Minister for Defence is an honourable man who is interested in his Department and in getting proper equipment and facilities. The Minister has said that money is really the nub of the matter. Why cannot money be voted for the Defence Forces? A figure of £18,788,010 is quoted for the financial year 1970-71. This year that sum will be £19,165,000. Why are we voting a small amount of extra money for the Defence Forces? What do we expect to do with this small amount extra by today's standards? The extra money voted for the Defence Forces will not offset the extra costs of inflation over the past 12 months. We have a figure of £3 million. The Minister said:

Final figures and costings are not yet available, but I can say at this stage that it will be of the order of £3,000,000. It will include substantial provision for new and increased equipment and for an increase in the strength of the permanent Defence Force. Satisfactory progress is being made in the implementation of these programmes.

To me these programmes would seem to be the purchasing of new equipment and the increasing of the strength of the personnel in the permanent Defence Forces. It is no boast for any Minister for Defence to come into this House and say that the strength of the permanent Defence Forces is higher now than it has been in the past decade. It is only marginally higher. It is only greater by 180. That figure includes cadets, Air Corps personnel and the Naval service. It is 25 less than the previous month's figure in that most important section of our armed forces, the non-commissioned officers. Never over the past 24 months has the figure for NCOs in the permanent Defence Forces been as low as at present. Only on six occasions in the past 24 months has the figure for NCOs been less than 3,000. In August 1970 we had 2,994; in September 1970, October 1970, January 1971, May 1971, September 1971 and October 1971 the figures were at their lowest and the last figure for NCOs is the lowest in this country over the past 24 months. It is idle to boast that our permanent Defence Forces are stronger now without asking how efficient are they?

How long does it take to train an NCO as compared with a private? How long does it take to train an officer? We know that the money spent on training an officer or an NCO is greater than that spent on training a private. I would question, therefore, the validity of the Minister's statement while accepting that the statistics are true. The numerical strength of the permanent Defence Forces is at the figure the Minister mentioned and is the highest in the past decade but the efficiency and the power of these forces are not necessarily at their greatest.

About six weeks ago the Taoiseach made a speech in Cork in which he said that the strength of the Defence Forces had never been higher. I have a tabulated statement of the strength of the Defence Forces for each month over the past 24 months. On at least three different occasions over that period the figure for the Defence Forces was higher than at the time the Taoiseach was speaking in Cork.

An Ceann Comhairle

What is the Deputy quoting from?

Dr. Byrne

From a reply to Parliamentary Question No. 100 of 30th November, 1971, and the figures I quote relate to the permanent Defence forces, the reserve Defence Forces, including the first line reserve, the FCA and Slua Mhuirí.

In the third last paragraph of his speech the Minister referred to the shortage of money. I respect the Minister's integrity in what he has stated and I am not putting a twisted interpretation on what he has said. The simple facts are that the Government will not give the Minister sufficient money to provide the country with an effective Defence Force. I have sympathy with the Minister and with his predecessors. The Defence. Forces are in their present situation not because of the actions of the present Minister for Defence. Over the past 15 years the Defence Forces have been allowed to run down continuously. Only recently have we seen new equipment purchased. The Naval Service had deteriorated to such an extent that we were forced to make a hasty and panic purchase of three minesweepers from the British navy.

The Minister in his brief said:

The improvements resulted in more men taking their discharge than would otherwise be the case.

In reply to a Parliamentary Question here last month the Minister told us that over 500 NCOs had taken their discharge from the Army. If the amount of discharge pay given to soldiers were increased more of them would leave the Army. The armed forces are the cream of this country, intellectually and physically. To join the armed forces one must be 100 per cent physically fit and one must have reached the same educational standards as are needed to enter a university. Therefore it comes hard for me to say that successive Governments have ignored the armed forces, and have neglected to provide them with proper living conditions, proper equipment and proper facilities for their families, because they know that by virtue of the contract which these personnel have signed, they are completely forbidden to resign or go AWOL as they could do in any other job.

The member of the Defence Forces who becomes disillusioned or discontented, who does not find sufficient outlet for either his intelligence or his ambition, is bound by the oath he has taken to stay on regardless of the conditions. This is a factor on which successive Governments have capitalised over the years. Recently other people with a high degree of responsibility have taken to the streets or gone on strike, to have their injustices rectified. We have seen nurses—it was never known before in this country—outside the gates of Leinster House carrying banners because the conditions of their employment were so bad that they could no longer tolerate them. Apart from Italy this is the only country in the world where junior hospital doctors went on strike.

Members of the Defence Forces cannot do this. The only course of action open to them is to work to rule. Volunteers in our Army have continued to serve regardless of deteriorating conditions. They have done an excellent job with the tools made available to them. We should be more than grateful to them for the manner in which they have defended our installations against internal aggression, particularly over the past two years, and we should be particularly proud of their service with the United Nations peace-keeping forces for the past 12 years. They should be given the honour they deserve.

The first thing that struck me about the Minister's brief was the total omission of the Slua Mhuirí. The discontent of the Slua Mhuirí with their conditions and the fact that they can leave at any time has received great publicity in the newspapers over the past two weeks. It has been reported in some newspapers that the commanding officers of five different sections of the Slua Mhuirí, sections that were in charge of the reserve defence of Dublin, Waterford, Cork, Limerick and Galway, came in a deputation to the Minister stating that they were dissatisfied with the facilities available for training members of the Slua Mhuirí to become an efficient reserve force in backing up the permanent force.

Newspapers have put the strength of the Slua Mhuirí at around 500. Here again I must explode the myth that the strength of the Slua Mhuirí at 31st October, 1971, was 336, and that its strength at 28th February, 1971, was 274. The officer strength of the Slua Mhuirí has gradually deteriorated from an all-time high of 28 at 30th November, 1969, to the present level of 25. The number of privates has not appreciably increased; it has fluctuated in the same way as the number of privates in the FCA. The number of NCOs has increased. It would appear it has gradually increased to its highest ever figure. The present figures are: 25 officers, 87 NCOs and 224 privates at 31st October, 1971. Therefore, there are not 500 members in the Slua Mhuirí and there never were over the past 24 months.

It was also reported in the newspapers that the equipment available to the Slua Mhuirí for marine training consisted of five large rowing boats. A maritime country which requires the youth and men of this country to volunteer for the navy reserve, which is attempting to build a fishing fleet, which should have a good coastal defence service, should not find itself in the position in which, according to the newspapers, naval personnel say they will resign unless their conditions are improved.

I would not attempt to criticise the Minister unless I could suggest an improvement. There is nothing to stop the Department of Defence from purchasing high-powered trawlers which would, in fact, be faster than the minesweepers we have. An Slua Mhuirí could receive training on these boats as well as mingling with fishing fleets moving from port to port along the Irish coast. There is nothing to prevent the Department of Defence from overnight converting a civil fishing boat and designating it as a military vessel. It would certainly be an improvement on what we have. We have An Slua Mhuirí attempting to defend the major ports of this country but they should have some facilities whereby they can receive training for such work.

An Slua Mhuirí should be worked into the coastal rescue service. The Department of Defence should consider the implementation of a coastguard service. We are attempting to enter Europe; we are an island but we are the only country in Europe without a coastguard service. We have been told that this is the responsibility of the Department of Defence, although I would have thought it was more the responsibility of the Department of Transport and Power because they are in charge of coastal rescue services and coastal marine operations. It should not be beyond the scope of the Department of Defence to set up a coastguard service in this country. Coastguard buildings were there when we took over from the British but those buildings are now in ruins. If this coastguard service were even put on weekend rescue on the east and south coasts of the country, where the majority of yachting accidents occur, it would be a great help.

There is no mention in the Minister's brief of the Department of Defence building new military barracks. I should like to see the Army valuing the properties which they have around the country, particularly Griffith Barracks. On the 24th June, 1971, in reply to a question in relation to Griffith Barracks, the portion made available to the Dublin Health Authority for the housing of displaced families, the Minister stated:

This accommodation continues to be used by and is administered by the Eastern Health Board and my Department have no function in relation to the persons accommodated there.

Army barracks should primarily be used for the Army. One of the best ways of disposing of an unsuitable barracks which is not in use is to rent it and build a new barracks. New barracks are very urgently needed. Some of them were built during Queen Victoria's reign and they are completely out-of-date; they are not habitable for our present Army. It is no secret that when a new recruit goes into the Curragh he has to hang his clothes on a nail if one can be found to hammer into the wall or he has to throw his clothes over a chair. There is no secret as regards the lack of furniture available to our Army personnel.

The Minister, in his opening statement, referred to the duties of the Defence Forces. He said that their duties were exceptionally heavy for some time. What duties are we speaking of when we speak of the Defence Forces of this country? What are the functions of the Defence Forces? Are there to be different functions for the Air Corps? The Minister stated that the Air Corps were engaged in semi-civilian operations this year. They participated in removing injured people to hospital presumably from traffic and other such accidents and they participated in sea rescue operations. While the Minister's brief was being prepared at least 19 incursions into our air space occurred. A British Air Force Canberra bomber came into the Twenty-six Counties within 20 miles of Dublin City and spent almost an hour inside our territorial air space in an international air traffic corridor without permission from the Irish authorities. I do not know at what height or speed it flew but it would not be hard to ascertain that. It constitutes the greatest act of violation of the Twenty-six Counties territory when a British Royal Air Force plane can come south of the Border and spend approximately one hour in an international air corridor, which takes commercial aircraft from Dublin to Belfast, Dublin to Glasgow, Dublin to Edinburgh. Despite what the Taoiseach said this act was in complete breach of International Air Traffic Association regulations.

It was in complete breach of all the recommendations made by Eurocontrol and it was in complete breach of the International Air Traffic Association which is the equivalent of a United Nations of airlines. This body is there for the purpose of effecting co-ordination. I am not satisfied that this Canberra plane did not interfere with civilian aircraft. The fact is that air traffic corridors had to be closed because of the incursion of that aircraft. That was a gross breach of international regulations, a breach which would have been sufficient to cause serious repercussions in other countries. But we have done nothing about this breach. It was suggested to the Taoiseach that this aircraft might have been taking photographs of the north-eastern part of the Twenty-six Counties in the area of Mount Oriel. Mount Oriel is the main communication line from Gormanston to the north-eastern board of command; it is also an important point in television communication. It is a main point for electrical communication with the North. It is a vital area. It must be defended. If anything were to happen Mount Oriel our Border patrols would be out of contact with their base. There is no secret about that. It does not take any military genius to appreciate that.

This aeroplane violates our territory and the Taoiseach makes a laugh out of the episode. Others attempted to ridicule those who raised it in this House. I innocently put down a question on 28th October and on the following day, the 29th, the incident occurred. There was little or no answer from the Taoiseach. I was refused permission to raise the matter by way of Private Notice Question. Eventually I got a question down and I got a hazy answer. There must be something the Taoiseach does not want us to know about. There is more in this than he has told us.

There are nominally 500 men in the Air Corps. That is roughly 1/16th of the total strength of our permanent Defence Forces. We have three helicopters. There is talk of buying a fourth. We have six Vampires. A question was asked recently as to the number of Vampires capable of taking off into the air on 29th October, the day the Canberra came in, and we were told in reply that not one was capable of taking off to obtain the markings of the intruding aircraft. Indeed, the Taoiseach had to ask the British Government what kind of aircraft it was. To rub salt into the wound, the very day the question was raised here two further incursions occurred, one by a British C130 and the other by a helicopter. The British have now decided to mount machine-guns on their helicopters used for Border patrol. This is a further manifestation of aggression towards the civilian population.

In 1969 the leader of this party said it was a retrograde step for the British Government to put the Army into the North and his assessment has proved to be true. The British Army has achieved a certain success blowing holes in roads along the Border, something bold children would do. We all know this is designed to placate hardline Unionists. Nothing concrete is really achieved by this futile exercise, but the day is coming when those engaged in this exercise will be accompanied by viciously armed helicopters which will spray bullets into the Twenty-six Counties, if necessary. Over 40 roads have been blown up inside the Twenty-six Counties. On 19 occasions helicopters have flown south of the Border. The Minister must take steps to defend our territory. We are left with little choice but to arm the three helicopters we have. A completely new situation has arisen. I am familiar in only the smallest degree with the stupidity of the administration of the British Army, but I assert it will not take long before these armed helicopters shoot into the Republic and injure innocent people in the Republic.

It was, indeed, a retrograde step ever to allow the British Army into the North. Aggression has increased. The poundage of explosives used has increased from 519 in June last to over 2,381 in October. The number of British soldiers injured increased from three in June to 34 in October. The number of British soldiers killed from June to October is 11. The number of civilians killed in the same period is 17.

How could anyone who believes in a life after death believe that internment could be a successful solution to the problems? Who can give any credence to the statements which are being spewed out by the Tory politicians in Westminster that the IRA are beaten? We must face the fact that there is an open war going on between the citizens of the Republic in the North of Ireland and the British Army. They should not be there, they have no right to be there and they should be removed as soon as possible.

How can the Government complain to the United Nations about the brutality of British troops, whether they be the Green Berets, the commandos or the SAS, when we have 390 men serving with the United Nations in Cyprus under a British chief executive officer? We have always supported and encouraged overseas service by our armed forces where such can be justified. It is not possible for us to attempt to convince a developing African nation that British troops are illtreating civilians in the North of Ireland when 390 of our men are serving under a British chief executive officer in Cyprus. We should make representations to the United Nations, who incidentally have not paid our troops the full amounts they are due, to have this chief executive officer replaced by a Swedish officer. The commanding officer may be Swedish but the man who is trying to sort out another mess made by the British in Cyprus is a British army officer. The British should either pull out of Cyprus or get this chief executive officer away from controlling our troops there.

Armoured cars have been brought back from Cyprus. If they are Panhard armoured cars they are useless because no Panhard armoured car is allowed to fire a mortar shell in this country until the mortar shells have been completely checked. On the 27th November, 1969, I asked the then Minister for Defence whether his Department had refused to purchase a special mortar shell necessary for the efficient functioning of certain armoured cars in the Army; and if it was a fact that the present mortar shells being used were ineffective or inefficient or misfired on many occasions. The Minister stated in his reply, and I quote:

My Department has not been requested to purchase a special mortar shell for armoured cars. The present mortar shells are not ineffective or inefficient nor do they misfire...

On the 2nd December, 1971, five Parliamentary Questions, including one by me, were asked about Army exercises. I asked the Minister for Defence if he was aware of the tragic accident which resulted in injuries to the commanding officer of the Second Motor Squadron in the Glen of Imaal and whether, in view of the fact that his attention was drawn to the inefficiency of firing particular shells from an armoured car, his Department purchased the necessary shells for efficient firing of the armoured car guns.

I know very little about munitions but I do know the difference between a barrel load mortar and a breach load mortar gun. A slight difference is necessary in the fuse of such a shell. The shells bought by the Department of Defence for the Army were of the barrel-loading type for ground mortars. The Department of Defence was told that when used in a breach-load weapon they misfired, were inefficient or less effective but it has taken two years and one badly wounded commanding officer to bring this home to the Department of Defence. If the Department refuses to purchase proper mortar shells necessary for efficient firing from armoured cars and brings back armoured cars from Cyprus which cannot fire shells because the shells are too dangerous they should be honest and tell the Army that they are not going to provide the necessary equipment.

Is the Minister aware that indirect taxation increased by £50 million last year and his Department got only £3 million of it? We have the cream of this country in the armed forces, and many of them live in my constituency. I have seen a private in the Army getting into arrears of rent with the local authority to the tune of £270.

The Army must have fully armoured personnel carriers instead of personnel carriers with armour put on or armour plating put on because there is no formula for armoured plating in this country. Once the troops are mobile the next essential is to be able to keep in touch with them. The most up-to-date radio equipment is needed so that the headquarters section can communicate with different sections of the Army in the field. I have outlined the dangers of Mount Oriel and the North Eastern Border Command being cut off from headquarters. Our Army should be able to stay in contact with headquarters and not be cut off because there is a 100 ft. or 200 ft. hill in front of them and they cannot get through with their old radio equipment. It may come ill from me as a person trained in healing to be promoting something that takes life but I am a great believer in prevention being better than cure and I think if we have a properly equipped Army it will act as a deterrent to any subversive elements in the Thirty-two Counties in any illegal activity in which they might wish to engage. Our Army badly needs a more up-to-date and efficient, high explosive, anti-personnel grenade, one that is lighter, smaller, easier to carry, package and transport. It needs more modern, light, multipurpose machine guns. Every member of the armed forces going on Border patrol should be issued with a flack-proof jacket. He should have a helmet instead of a beret on his head because things are happening in this country with the British Army that have made them perhaps worse than they ever were in the worst days of colonial Ireland.

Another urgent military need is the provision of facilities for night vision for troops on Border patrol or installations duty. There is no point in having four or five young student FCA members up in Kippure if they have not modern infra-red devices to see the terrain from which people may come. This is no longer mere theorising; it has already happened; they have been captured and their guns taken. The same thing happened in Drogheda. In 1939 the Germans invented night vision equipment. It is a long time since then and our troops need this type of auxiliary equipment to render them effective.

It is also necessary that each soldier in the Army should have a double combat uniform. By that I mean a double tunic and a double combat trousers. These articles must be cleaned. The soldier does not need the linings or double belts or double helmets and so on, but he must get his tunic cleaned and when he does so he has nothing else to wear because he has no other combat uniform. So, there is need for that. When we do try to meet the needs for Army equipment let us not do what we did in 1969 and buy 1,550 British Army combat uniforms for distribution to our troops. I do not care where we get them but let us not have our troops on Border patrol with ex-British Army combat uniforms even though they may only be tunics and trousers and even though 16 other parts of the combat uniform have to be provided from elsewhere. The main part of the uniform and the colour, the tunics and trousers of 1,550 of our troops, if they have all been distributed, have been purchased from Britain and they have been distributed, as the Minister said last week or the week before, as appropriate to Army needs. The reason they were purchased is because no Irish firm tendered in time.

The present needs must be met and also we must have some form of protection of an open space for our armed forces, protection of an installation. One of the simplest forms of this type of protection is smoke-making mechanism of which we need a more modern type. With the things I have suggested, plus modern armoured cars with efficient firing capacity, you would have a mobile force of a strength determined by the numbers available, a mobile highly-powered, quick-striking force with very good fire power, with good defence and attack ability and good deterrent value in contact with its headquarters because the modern radio equipment would have been purchased. That is very important; it is something we have not in the Army at present.

Out of the more than 8,000 troops we have, we are not far from the point where the majority of those men are involved in the day-to-day running of the barracks. If you take the number working in the cookhouse, guarding the gates, putting up the flags, doing servicing and cleaning and other routine jobs around the barracks, you find very few Army personnel are capable of being put into the field.

I mentioned this two years ago and said the number of troops our Army could put in the field was very small. Now I am saying the same thing. It was true then and it is true now. I have the full figures here, completely tabulated over the past 24 months for each month. There is no significant difference. There is a difference of 570 or so privates but on modern logistics where you need five, six or seven backup troops for every one in the field, and with 400 troops in Cyprus, we shall not be able to put many troops into the field if necessary.

This brings me to one of the most important points on this Estimate. It is that our Army, Air Corps and Naval Service have been so neglected by successive Governments over the years that it is hard to know where to begin. I want the Minister and his staff to listen carefully to this suggestion: that the Army value the property they have all over the country, that they dispose of assets they do not need at the moment because no modern army needs six or seven separate barracks in one city. Even though we have 100,000 people in the Greater Dublin area it is still smaller than many other European capitals.

The first thing that must be done is to give the Army a function and to define this function to the officers.

They should be told whether the prime function is to protect the State against external aggression, against internal aggression, or whether it is to be in support of the civil power in times of multiple accidents, strikes, nuclear fallout, air disasters or natural disasters. The definition of priority must be given to the officers and the troops, and this is the duty of the Government and the civil servants involved in this matter.

It appears to me that the functions would be with regard to, first, external aggression, secondly, internal aggression and, thirdly, aid to the civil power in times of natural disaster. We must consider the site of a new military barracks. This should be selected as soon as possible and it should be made apparent to the personnel of the armed forces that this country will move along modern lines with a modern, skilled and manoeuvrable Army. We must have an Army that will command the respect of the people. At the moment the officers, the NCOs and cadets are respected and admired by the people but the people do not consider that the Army is efficient or powerful. This is because successive Governments have denied the Army the necessary equipment to enable them to become an efficient functioning power. It is not until we gather 400 or 500 troops together, give them the best equipment and put them into Cyprus or some other area, that they become an efficient unit and show us how good our armed forces can be when they are well equipped.

The first thing to do is to have a new military complex, including the military headquarters. In this matter consideration must be given to selecting the best location for national defence, for internal defence, and we must also consider the question of support for a civil power. With regard to national defence, it is important that the site we select should have access to the main routes of this country. It would be important that the site would have complete radio communication with all parts of the country, that it be located near an airport and that it be reasonably easy to defend.

When one considers internal aggression, the factors must be changed slightly. It is essential that access be had by road to all parts of the country, complete radio communication must be possible with all parts of the country, and it is essential to be able to protect vital non-military installations throughout the country.

With regard to the possibility of aid to a civil power, the first priority would be to locate the complex close to the largest centre of population. Secondly, it must be near the main road arteries of the country and, thirdly, it must be easy to defend. When considering this matter we must look at the camps throughout the country. Some time ago Deputy Clinton asked a question with regard to Army property. In examining the property, it appeared there were six camps that could possibly fulfil the function, but eventually there was only one that was considered suitable in all respects. I think it is only fair to mention the reasons some of the camps were not suitable.

The Curragh camp is one that should be mentioned first but Mullingar, Athlone, Limerick, Kilworth and Dublin city can also be mentioned. If we investigate the facilities available at these centres purely from a military point of view—not from a social point of view, because a social function has never been defined for the Army; not from the point of view of providing higher education for the children of the officers and the soldiers, or from any other point of view—we will find that in relation to external aggression Mullingar, Athlone, the Curragh, Kilworth or Dublin would suit. In regard to internal aggression one would have to look at Mullingar, Athlone, the Curragh or Dublin. In each case the two stations that come to mind are Mullingar and the Curragh. With regard to aid to a civil power, the only suitable sites are the Curragh or Dublin. However, Dublin cannot be considered safe because it would be a first target in modern warfare. Above all the others, the Curragh emerges as the most suitable site. However, there is one problem in that it is not close to an airport.

If one were to go further afield, it would be found that Baldonnel airport is perhaps the most suitable and the one military complex we have at the moment that would be suitable if it were expanded sufficiently. It would be the most suitable to attain the aim we all wish, namely, a modern, wellequipped, efficient and mobile Force.

The advantages the Curragh has are that it is an inland location near a main artery, and that it is a good area for radio communication and for natural defence. It is a fair area for internal security operations. It is fairly close to the capital city. Perhaps most important of all there is a good site available.

Baldonnel is a good military installation. It is near a main road. It is a good site for radio communications and for internal security. It is also a good site for the general amenities and it is close to the capital city. It is a reasonable site for national defence and it also has an airfield. This makes it the most suitable place for the new military complex which is necessary. It should be built there or on the Curragh. Having studied military history, since I have an interest in the subject, I would say that for the next 40 years Baldonnel would be the perfect site for a military complex for an Army whose function was to protect the State against external aggression, or internal aggression, and to support the civil power. For the next century then you would probably have to move on to a place like the Curragh. Our barracks were built in Victorian times and they are not suited to modern Army requirements.

On 11th December, 1969, the Minister for Defence told me that the strength of the Air Corps was 506 comprising 76 officers, 146 non-commissioned officers and 284 privates. He said:

There are 48 pilots in the Air Corps and there are nine trainee pilots at present in the Military College undergoing a course of general training prior to commencing a course of flying training with the corps.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Would the Deputy give the reference?

Dr. Byrne

Question No. 106 on 11th December, 1969. What sad reading that makes. The Minister said we have 29 aircraft in the Air Corps, 48 pilots and nine trainee pilots, and that we have 222 officers out of a total of 506 people in the Air Corps. Would not it sadden the heart of everyone who has any interest in our armed forces to compare that answer with the answer given by the Minister recently when he said that on 29th October, 1971, one of the six Vampire jet aircraft held by the Air Corps was undergoing a major overhaul and the other five were being checked and serviced? He said that one of those aircraft was at present operational and a further three were expected to become operational in the next few months and that the remaining two were unlikely to become serviceable again.

The writing was on the wall in December, 1969. Are we to be honest with the recruits we take into the Army and the Air Corps? Will we tell them that the last military aircraft we purchased in the fighter category was purchased in 1961 and that the last time we purchased ammunition for an Army aircraft was in 1961? The Minister suggested that we should do all we can to encourage people to join the Army. Are we being fair to the 48 pilots and the nine trainee pilots in the Air Corps if there is not one fighter aircraft that can take off or one Vampire jet that can take off and if the Army has only one plane which has to be tuned up for one hour to get it into working order?

Is it not true that the Air Corps has no striking power apart from its helicopter section? We have three helicopters. The Minister has said that he is buying a fourth. He said:

The three existing machines have proved very suitable and so far they have enabled the Air Corps to meet all emergency calls. However, the demands made on them have been increasing. The periods during which they are out of service for maintenance purposes have also been increasing with their age.

Instead of getting an extra helicopter into the air all we are doing is replacing a helicopter on the ground. On paper we will have 30 aircraft in the Air Corps. The Army officers should now be allowed to run their own business. There are 503 civil servants employed in the Department of Defence to run an air force that has 506 officers and men and no aircraft. There is something wrong somewhere. The Minister has said that the nub of the problem is money. That may be so, but the reason for that cannot be that people are not paying enough in taxes. One has only to look at the figures for last year to see the percentage increase that people are paying this year in income tax and, of course, there are all the other taxes. Out of all this extra taxation the Army get a mere £300,000 and there is a Supplementary Estimate for almost £3 million. Is this being honest in respect of an Army that we hope to expand? Is this being honest with members of that Army who have served this country so well abroad under the flag of the United Nations? The Minister has condemned his own Government in saying that the nub of the problem is money.

Mr. Power

The root of all evil.

Dr. Byrne

People on the Government Benches have expressed regret in regard to the facilities available in the Army but, yet, as they have been doing for the past 15 years, they will support the Estimate. On the 20th November, 1969 I asked the Minister for Defence what was the date of his last visit to the headquarters of the Irish Naval Services at Haulbowline, Cork. The Minister replied that since his appointment as Minister for Defence in the previous July, he had not visited the naval base at Haulbowline. Is not that typical of the attitude of successive Ministers of this country during the past 15 years? I exclude from that the present Minister, whom I believe to be an honourable man and who, in no small way, condemned the Government as being responsible in so far as they did not give him sufficient money for the Army.

Some of us have been aboard the minesweepers that have been purchased. These are very fine vessels but again we are faced here with a peculiar problem, a problem that is indicative of a complete lack of planning. On 4th November, 1971 I asked the Minister the total number of officers in the Naval Service on 1st October, 1969, 1st October, 1970, and 1st October, 1971 and the total number of officers available for sea command on the same dates. The Minister replied, as is reported at column 1311 of the Official Report for that day and I quote:

The total number of officers in the Naval Service on each of the dates mentioned by the Deputy was as follows: 1st October, 1969, 34; 1st October, 1970, 32; 1st October, 1971, 36.

The number of officers in the executive branch of the service who held certificates of competency or naval watchkeeping certificates on each of these dates was: 1st October, 1969, 18; 1st October, 1970, 17; 1st October, 1971, 16.

At that time Deputies on this side of the House were warning the Minister and his Department that when they purchased the minesweepers they would not have sufficient officers in the executive branch of the service who held certificates of competency or naval watchkeeping certificates.

The fears expressed by Deputy Clinton and myself and, indeed, by other Deputies, have been realised. In reply to a parliamentary question tabled by me the Minister told me on the 10th November, 1970 that the complement for a minesweeper is expected to be four officers and 27 ratings and that the complement of a corvette was five officers and 60 men. Here we are running into trouble with the Navy by ignoring the strength of the watchkeeping force of the Navy. We had 300 ratings in the naval service but only two minesweepers could be put to sea because there were only eight officers out of a total of 56 who were available to go to sea on these craft.

There is much unrest and dissatisfaction in the Naval Service and this is understandable because more ratings went to sea on a corvette than are going now on two minesweepers. I understand that when there were three corvettes at sea practically the total number of men available went to sea. When people join the Naval Service of this country they do so because they wish to go to sea. I shall say no more in regard to that matter except to tell the Parliamentary Secretary that he could do worse than go to Haulbowline as other Deputies of this House have done and see there the officers at work.

Mr. Andrews

Without taking a lead from the Deputy, I intend visiting Haulbowline in the New Year. The enemies of the State will love the anti-national muck that he has been pouring out.

Dr. Byrne

The watchkeeping officers at Haulbowline, because they are working an 80-hour week, will have an increased deduction from their pay of up to £15 in extra mess charges. Is it any wonder then, that between 1st October, 1969 and 1st October, 1971, we have lost two naval watchkeeping officers? Have the Department any plans for replacing these men or of enticing these two men to rejoin the force? Have they any plans for recruiting commissioned officers to the navy so that the three minesweepers might be put to sea at once? In my opinion the naval services have been hampered badly by successive Ministers. It is not a bad thing that we have bought these minesweepers. They will serve a useful function. However, their main purpose should be fishery protection. On 19th July, 1971, I asked the Minister for Defence:

If his attention has been drawn to a report indicating the probability of greater efforts being made by the Dutch fishing fleet to increase herring catches off Dunmore East; and what contingency plans his Department have prepared to deal with any encroachments of territorial waters?

The reply I received was a classic example of the replies we have been getting here for two and a half years. He replied:

I have seen the report referred to by the Deputy. While the report does indicate the probability that the Dutch fishing fleet may, in future, fish for herrings off the south coast of Ireland more extensively than was the case last season, it does not imply that such fishing will be carried on illegally within our fishery limits. Due cognisance will, however, be taken of the report by the Naval Service in arranging its programme of fishery patrol.

It is not so long ago since we read in the newspapers that the Polish fishing fleet had come inside the fishing limit at Dunmore East and since we read that the fishermen of Dunmore East had stated that unless minesweepers were sent to protect the fishing limit there, they would take the law into their own hands. After due warning being given on 19th July, 1971, that this would happen in October or November, there were tax-paying citizens, many of whom do not enjoy the easiest of lives — it is a hard life and a lonely life at times — threatening to take the law into their own hands because the minesweepers had not appeared on the scene when the Polish trawlers came into the Dunmore East fishing ground. Incidentally, I see that in the EEC negotiations this area has been left with a six-mile limit for continental trawlers which means that the protection capacity of these vessels should be increased.

We need more vessels and the place to look for proper vessels is the United States, and we should not be buying stuff that has come out of mothballs from the British Navy and which has been there since the second world war.

Mr. Andrews

The Deputy expressed satisfaction with the vessels when we visited them. He said they were tremendous boats. This is most unfair.

Dr. Byrne

We should go to the United States and see whether it is possible to obtain from them some of the all-weather motor torpedo boats which they designed in recent years for a war they were fighting in Asia; see whether it is possible to purchase these before they go into mothballs, while they are functional, while they are modern.

Mr. Andrews

It is a pity the Deputy would not go into mothballs.

Dr. Byrne

They can do a speed of up to 27 knots which is practically twice what the minesweepers can do. Deputy Dowling rightly said that the minesweepers have not got much chance of catching up with a ship when they see it on the horizon. This relates purely to the power of the vessel. It does not relate to the will of the men. On the 10th November, 1970, the Minister in reply to a question, said that he would not issue any details regarding these vessels. We on the Opposition benches have been doing great research and we have advised the Minister on many different aspects of these minesweepers, particularly on 19th July 1971, when I asked him whether a minesweeper could put to sea in a force 8 gale. The reply was that the coastal minesweeper could put to sea in force 8 gale weather conditions but that it would not normally do so. The prevailing conditions along the Dunmore East coast in the past two or three days have been south-westerly gales.

Mr. Andrews

What force?

Dr. Byrne

The Parliamentary Secretary must know that it is at least force 8. He is Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence. He should know that.

Mr. Andrews

The Deputy and I were on a minesweeper together and he expressed great satisfaction with the minesweeper.

Dr. Byrne

You cannot learn all about sailing by just going out in Dublin Bay. The Parliamentary Secretary was a fair weather sailor. He went across Dublin Bay as far as Howth. You will not learn anything about a minesweeper doing that. You will not learn anything about weather conditions doing that. I suggest that he should listen to the forecast and he might learn a little about the weather and what gales are.

Mr. Andrews

The Deputy said the vessels were satisfactory.

Dr. Byrne

I hope the Parliamentary Secretary knows where Dunmore East is because it is a very important fishing ground and a very important area for these vessels to patrol. You come out of Haulbowline and straight into a south-westerly gale. That is why there is no fishery patrol. The vessels, good and all as they are, were never designed to sweep mines, to operate in unfavourable weather conditions. One of them was damaged in transit from Gibraltar.

Criticism is not any use unless one has an alternative to offer; so, the Government should investigate immediately the possibility of purchasing from the US Navy some of their all-weather motor torpedo boats which have a speed of 27 knots, which can go out in any weather and which would provide this country, if sufficient were purchased, with a naval force capable of patroling the coast and giving protection to the fishermen.

I should like to move now to the question of purchasing armoured personnel carriers. Why should we tie our apron strings to the British Government continually? Why should we tie ourselves up militarily with them as regards the supply of equipment when we can negotiate with a Government that has had one of the largest armies ever in the field, over 500,000 troops in Vietnam, and is now withdrawing from that field of battle and will have a surplus of war material? That is where we should look in an attempt to find modern and efficient material for our armed forces.

An Ceann Comhairle

Under the Order made today I must now put the questions. Is the motion to refer back withdrawn? I am putting the question: That the Vote be referred back for reconsideration.

Mr. Clinton

On a point of order, will this Estimate not be taken up again when we resume?

An Ceann Comhairle

No, it is finalised on this discussion.

Mr. Clinton

Is it not taken up under a supplementary or a token Vote?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is long enough in this House to know the procedure. It should not be necessary for me to tell him that the House passed a motion this morning that at 10.30 p.m. the Chair would put the question and that would close the debate on the Estimates.

Mr. Tully

Maybe it is a little bit confusing.

An Ceann Comhairle

It is very simple. There is no confusion whatever.

Mr. Tully

Yes, but there is a token Vote which will come in afterwards and the Minister will be replying to the whole debate then.

Mr. Andrews

That is the position.

Mr. Clinton

This debate will be carried on again.

Dr. Byrne

Before I finish, may I say——

An Ceann Comhairle

Will the Deputy please sit down and allow me to put the question?

Dr. Byrne

May I say one thing?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy will please sit down.

Dr. Byrne

May I say——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy may not.

Dr. Byrne

May I put a question?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy should not be disorderly at this hour of the night. The Deputy will please sit down. An order has been made by the House. The Deputy is a Member of the House, which made the order.

Motion: "That the Vote be referred back for reconsideration", by leave, withdrawn.

Vote put and agreed to.