Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 27 Jan 1972

Vol. 258 No. 5

Committee on Finance. - Vote 43: Defence.

The Minister for Defence (Mr. Cronin)

I move:

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £10 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 purpose of this motion is to enable the debate on the Defence and Army Pensions Estimate which commenced on 15th December last to continue. For technical reasons the motion that day on the main Estimates was passed before some Deputies had an opportunity to speak on them. I do not propose at this stage to reply to the points raised by Deputies who have already spoken but I will do so at the conclusion of the debate on this motion and I will, of course, also reply to the points raised now.

Mr. Cooney

The question of the Defence Forces has, unfortunately, become a more prominent question in this country due to the growth of illegal activities over the past year and the country has become properly concerned with the state of the Army and the state of the auxiliary defence forces, principally the FCA.

The Minister, very rightly, praises the members of the Defence Forces for the service they have given to the country at home and in Cyprus and those members who are serving with the United Nations Truce Supervisory Organisation in the Middle East. They, indeed, deserve the praise given by the Minister and I should like to join with him in paying tribute to these men for their unselfish service.

It is, indeed, a matter for some wonderment that the Army has continued to give such a high standard of service when we consider that it has been the Cinderella in terms of Government attention and Government expenditure. There is, to my mind, a serious lack of research into and detailed consideration of the structure of our Army and the objects our Army should serve. I suppose basically one can say it is there for internal and external security but having regard to the size of our nation, I think that the question of internal security should be the priority considering the objectives our Army should have. One must wonder then whether our Army is structured and trained to deal with serious problems of internal security. Like most armies throughout the world, its command structure and its organisation are based, I suppose, on what could be termed the British hierarchical military structure and that, of course, is geared to an army fighting a war rather than an army primarily charged with internal security. I concede that the external aspect of the matter must have attention, too, but I think it has been the predominant feature in considering the structure of our Army. This is something that has never got attention so far as we know. We do not even know if the matter has been given any thought by the Minister or by his lay or professional advisers. Certainly no reference was made to it by the Minister in his speech when this Estimate first came before this House.

The Defence Act, 1954 provides for a Council of Defence to aid and counsel the Minister in matters pertaining to the operation of his Department. The Minister told me in reply to a Parliamentary question some time ago that that council had not met for a very long time indeed. I cannot find the exact date but I do not think the council has met since the Minister took office. The council consists of the Chief of Staff, the Adjutant General, the Quartermaster General and two laymen, one, I think, being the Secretary of the Department. I would suggest to the Minister that this is a grouping which should certainly meet formally and often particularly at the present time. The group should be charged or it, in turn, should charge some sub-committee of itself with the task of taking an overall view of the structure of our Defence Forces and how that structure can be related to the objectives of our Defence Forces which, as I say, would appear to be primarily concerned with matters of internal security.

I indicated here in the last debate on Defence that there were certain matters causing serious concern in the Army, matters fundamental to the morale of the Army. The Minister praised Army morale; he said it was good. Having regard to the burdens and the disinterestedness with which the Army is regarded by the central Government, morale is surprisingly good. But, considered objectively and on a normal standard, I would suggest to the Minister that morale is not as good as it should be. While, however, morale could be higher, the loyalty of the Army is beyond question. Loyalty to the State is extremely and consistently strong throughout all ranks, commissioned, non-commissioned and private. We can be very grateful, indeed, to these men for this loyalty. They deserve from the State conditions of service which ensure that their morale is kept at a high level. Morale is essentially being proud of the organisation one serves in and having determination to serve that organisation at a consistently high standard. In order to be proud of the organisation members of the Army should be made aware at all times by the central Government that they are regarded as an important part of the State apparatus. That they are so regarded should be made abundantly clear to them by their problems being examined and solved. There are a number of problems in relation to careers in the Army, problems which no apparent attempt has been made to solve.

I mentioned last year a problem in relation to the officer corps. Morale among officers could be higher. This could be brought about if some opportunities were provided for them to implement their professionalism. As I pointed out last year, there is no reward for an officer who makes himself professionally more efficient. An officer's career in the Army is conditioned by his place in his cadet class and his advancement depends on fortuitous circumstances; if some members of the classes ahead of him die or retire early he will get advancement. If these things happen he may be lucky and he may reach a very high rank, but he reaches that rank, by and large, irrespective of his professional capacity. This is stultifying to a man who is serious about a military career. It is a disincentive to an officer to study and expand his professional knowledge. So long as this system of promotion obtains the incentive will not be there.

How to provide the incentive raises difficulties because it carries within it a threat to those officers who do not make the grade professionally since they will not be promoted; they will have to retire at a comparatively early age. As things stand at the moment, they receive no training to enable them to adjust to job opportunities in civilian life. This goes right to the kernel of the military career and it needs to be examined as a matter of urgency. There was nothing in the Minister's statement to indicate that bowler-hatted officers, so to speak, have been the subject of any study in relation to promotion on a professional rather than a seniority basis. It would be a tremendous boost to morale in the Army if serving officers were aware that their careers after army life were getting serious attention. It would be a boost to morale if they were aware that the public were conscious of the problem and sympathetic towards it, sympathetic to the extent of industry and other civilian employment being prepared to take on these bowler-hatted army officers. This is the main grievance within the commissioned ranks at the moment.

Another frustration from which commissioned officers suffer is that the structure of the Army is geared for a much larger force. It is geared for a force that will allow of brigades, battalions, companies and platoons but, in effect, there are not enough men in the Army to form these units. These units may exist on paper and officers may have ranks commanding units on paper but, in actual fact, the units do not exist. It is frustrating for an officer who is a platoon commander to know that he has no men under him, that they are engaged on fatigues to keep the barracks going or that, because of extra guard duties at the moment, they are constantly out guarding various installations. It would be much better to scrap the present structure and take a completely new look at how our Army should be organised.

One avenue to be explored in this particular respect is that of local loyalties when it comes to recruitment. As a result of the trouble in the North, troops are at present stationed in areas in which there has been no garrison since the end of the war. This has led to a rush of applications from serving army personnel in other parts of the country to be posted to areas of which they are natives. I understand there is also an impetus in recruitment in these areas. If similar units—call them companies, active service units, or columns, to go back to the War of Independence —of a consistent strength could be located at other than traditional military centres these units would attract to themselves a growing number of recruits. They would provide a permanent nucleus without the high turnover rate at present experienced in the Army. In addition, they would provide a vehicle for the better integration of the FCA into the permanent Army.

I throw out this thought to the Minister, his Department and his advisers as one way of overcoming the difficulties of having an orthodox command structure without the men to man it. As I said, this would help in recruiting. It would certainly help to raise morale still higher and to improve contentment. A man who joins the Army expects to do military duties. He does not want to spend the bulk of his career on barrack fatigues interspersed with a minimum of military training. Unfortunately, that is what a lot of private soldiers have to endure at the moment. That is not conducive to morale and not conducive to retaining the soldier in the Army for a long number of years. It is one of the causes of the high turnover. Men just get fed up with carrying turf from the turfyard, sweeping floors, mess fatigues.

That brings me to another point that I would like to suggest to the Minister and that might help in overcoming some of these difficulties. The duties that have to be performed are military and fatigue duties. The fatigue duties, while irksome, are, nevertheless, essential. The ordinary life of the barracks must be maintained. The barracks must be kept clean and heated. Meals have to be provided. These operations involve duties of a non-military type, duties which, I would suggest to the Minister, are not physically arduous and which are essentially civilian in their nature. I would suggest to the Minister that he should consider the recruitment of civilian orderlies to carry out these duties. While not physically onerous, they would be ideal duties to be performed by persons with slight physical handicap who might not be suitable for employment in industry or the normal commercial sectors. The duties would be well within the compass of persons with slight physical handicap. They would be worthwhile work for these people. These persons could be remunerated at standard Army rates of pay because this is what is being paid for these duties at the moment. If these persons were recruited on a wide scale—there is quite a large number of persons who would be available for this type of employment —it would relieve a considerable number of soldiers to attend to more professional matters. It would ensure that their training as recruits would not cease, that there would be continued training in more advanced matters. It would mean there would be men available for field exercises. At the moment I understand that field exercises are nearly a rarity, whereas they should be commonplace. The reason is the men are not available. They are, by and large, on fatigue duties or, in present circumstances, on guard duties. This amount of excessive fatigue duty is detrimental to the morale of men and of officers because all they can do is mark time; they have not the men to do military duties with.

In addition to this inherent fault which arises from the structure of the Army, there are other matters which tend to militate against good morale and which can be cured without any radical restructuring. The first point under this heading would be the question of equipment. I am aware that the Government have announced the provision of a large sum for the purchase of extra equipment and it is a good thing that this is being done but it is a pity that it takes an emergency to do it. Instead of there being a regular supply of new equipment, even on a limited basis, over the years, we now have to have an emergency and large-scale purchasing. It is some months since this extra allocation was announced but I am not aware—certainly there has been no propaganda on the part of the Department — that much, if any, of this new equipment has arrived. I do see on the streets some landrovers with up-to-date vehicle registrations and I suppose one can deduce that these are part of the new equipment but the type of equipment the Army wanted was what I may call purely military equipment, armoured cars and armoured personnel carriers. The latter are particularly urgent in view of the activities of the British Army along the Border. Thank God, there have been no confrontations between our troops and the British Army but we do read of an amount of indiscriminate firing in that area and we do read that patrols of the Defence Forces have been summoned to attend at the scene. These men have to drive to the scene in thin-skinned vehicles, into a position where there is often indiscriminate firing and, for that reason, a position of danger. It behoves this House, the Minister and his Department to ensure that these men who go into this situation are as well protected as we can make them. One basic protection is that they would travel in armoured protected vehicles. At the moment they travel in landrovers with canvas sides which afford absolutely no protection. The purchase of suitable vehicles should have been a priority and they should be in service already. It is a pity that this has not happened.

During the year when I had occasion to ask the Minister by way of Parliamentary question when was the last time our anti-aircraft guns had practised, I found that they had practised last year but that they had practised on what the Minister described as selected natural targets, in other words, they had been firing at fixed targets on the ground. The whole point of anti-aircraft defence is that they have to train to fire at moving and swift moving targets in the air. I understand that we have no target plane, no plane which can draw a target and consequently those members of our artillery corps who serve in the anti-aircraft section are unable to practise their particular skill. This is something which is very detrimental to morale. It is no answer to say that anti-aircraft guns are being outmoded. One has only to read of the startling success achieved by North Vietnamese anti-aircraft guns are outmoded can aeroplanes, the swiftest and most modern of jet aircraft, to see that anti-aircraft defences are still viable, to use the modern word.

It may be suggested that we could not afford the sophisticated equipment but it is an essential feature of training to fire at moving targets. There must be great similarities in the type of weapon we have and the more modern weapon. The basic principles must be the same. It is a pity that our gunners are so little thought of and see themselves to be so little thought of that the obvious target, a moving target through the air, is not available for them. I gather the reason for that is that there is no plane to tow the target. This seems an extraordinary thing because all that is wanted is a single-ended old fashioned piston plane.

Mr. Tully

It is not even true.

Mr. Cooney

If what I am saying is not true, I cannot see why anti-aircraft gunners have to practise by firing at selected natural targets.

Mr. Tully

They fire at an old "Droge" pulled behind an old piston-driven plane. That is what they do in Gormanston.

Mr. Cooney

That is no longer done. That is the point I am making. Even that is not available. The lack of even that type of target is detrimental to the men in the artillery corps. Likewise, we have Comet tanks. The Minister told me in November of last year that their last shoot was in October, 1970. Morale, I suppose, in the cavalry corps is kept up by the arrival of the new Panard but it is only part of their equipment. The other part is tanks. There is not much point in having tanks if the troops cannot practise shooting in the tanks. The last shoot was in October, 1970.

During the last few months new combat uniforms were issued. I am sure they have been purchased without difficulty. Yet that is something that was being asked for literally for years. It is one of the mysteries of Government in this country how long it takes the Minister's Department to accept, to process and to deal with a comparatively simple and obvious problem. There is nothing expensive about combat uniforms, nothing intricate about their design, nothing unique about the material and no difficulty about how or when they should be worn and yet it has taken literally years for this uniform to issue. I am glad it has at last arrived. On the other hand, what may be called the ordinary service uniform is something that needs attention. In reply to a Parliamentary question the Minister told me that the question of design, standard and type of cloth was being examined. I am glad to hear this but I suggest that it would be of considerable value to the soldiers' morale if they were let in on this military secret and were given an indication of the type of uniform in mind or who would design it. Indeed, if they were asked about it or involved in it, it would be so much better. Will this uniform be presented some day as a fait accompli? I suspect it will because I put down a question to the Minister concerning the design for the new shoulder insignia worn by officers asking who designed it. I got the extraordinary reply that it was not attributable to any one individual, that it evolved in the Minister's Department.

Mr. Tully

Nobody would take responsibility for it.

Mr. Cooney

This reply opened a fascinating field for speculation. Was the Minister doodling on his blotter some day before lunch and came up with the crossed-swords, say, for a commandant? Or did somebody else dream a design which he produced on paper the next day and gradually, through some extraordinary process, new insignia for shoulder epaulettes emerged? Things like this should not evolve. Will the new uniforms evolve in the same way? The epaulette insignia should have been designed professionally. Are they a rehash of what is worn by British or continental officers? I do not know. We have a design workshop in Kilkenny where it is hoped designing is turned into an art and this problem should have been taken there.

I do not know how the uniforms will be designed but I hope the persons who perpetrated—I use the word deliberately—the uniforms being worn now by the Army band will not be responsible for designing the new service uniforms for the Army. The Army band uniforms are not of a type a military band should have; they are more suitable for the cinema foyer.

We must have in the country persons of imagination and technical ability who could design a uniform our soldiers would be proud to wear. At this stage the Minister should consider the designing and provision of a dress uniform for the ranks. This would be an indication that the State is proud of its soldiers and wants them smartly and elegantly turned out. If a recruiting campaign is about to start one would think that one thing which would attract a young man into the Army is the glamour of military life and one of the things that make for glamour is an elegant and attractive uniform. The Minister should seriously consider this as a morale booster for the Army.

Last year I criticised An Forsa Cosanta Áitiúil and said there were many people in it whose dedication ended with qualifying for their gratuity. In turn I was criticised by the Irish paper Inniu but I have the privilege of claiming that I served for five years in that force and knew its character intimately. I do not think it has changed very much since those days. There is a nucleus of persons in the force who are dedicated, keen, part-time soldiers but there is no comparison between the number on paper and the number who can be depended on to turn up regularly for parades. I know that the dedicated men have given tremendous assistance to the regular Army in the difficult situation of the past year and without their assistance it would not have been possible in many cases to maintain security patrols in the areas and on the installations where they have been mounted. Tribute should be paid to those dedicated members of the FCA.

There is a most ridiculous rule prohibiting recruitment of married FCA men into the regular Army. I personally know a substantial number of married FCA members anxious to join the regular Army but because of their married status and because they were not previously in the regular Army they are not eligible to join. A campaign to recruit men is being mounted and yet we have these settled, trained men who, when they join, would make a permanent career of the Army and they have been refused merely because they are married. I cannot see the logical or technical justification for this but, like so many things in the Department of Defence, the rule is the rule and no matter how illogical is its application it is next to impossible to change it.

I appeal to the Minister not to reject these first-class men who want to enter the Army and make a permanent career of it. They are already trained soldiers giving invaluable assistance on a permanent, full-time basis and, in effect, are soldiers and they have given invaluable assistance to the regular Army in carrying out security duties, in driving, signalling and in the engineering corps. They are in all corps of the Army. Yet, these men cannot be transferred from the FCA into the regular Army merely because of the rule that married men are not acceptable. Exceptions should be made in the case of serving members of the FCA. If the Minister does not want to accept married recruits ab initio there is still a clear case for making an exception in the case of married FCA men. It defies understanding how this rule can be so rigidly applied and cannot be changed. Military personnel, as far as I can ascertain, are keen to see these FCA men in the regular Army. I ask the Minister to deal with this point when replying. If he can give a satisfactory explanation to these men, that will be something. If there is no explanation other than that it is a Civil Service decision, I would ask him to look at it and have it changed.

This is typical of the attitude of the Civil Service towards the military wing of the Army. The military wing believe they are completely dominated by the lay people in the Department of Defence whose criterion is never military but entirely administrative. If the Minister wants to have an Army of high morale and efficiency he will have to adjust that balance of domination and ensure that our Defence Force will be military-dominated rather than laydominated, that our professional soldiers will have an active say in the organisation, structure and the running of the Army. Crazy Civil Service regulations, such as the one I have mentioned, should not be allowed to assume the status of divine commands.

These matters will have to be looked at to ensure that we have an Army of continued loyalty and of increased morale. We can be extremely thankful to the members of our Defence Forces for their loyalty to the State, particularly in those difficult times. It is a great consolation to ordinary people to realise that this bulwark is there between them and the subversives who want, and who have publicised their desire, to destroy the institutions of State. That loyalty should be rewarded by ensuring that they are provided with all the facilities and attention that are necessary so that morale will be of the highest and, consequently, efficiency will be of the highest.

Mr. Tully

I am aware that this Supplementary Estimate was introduced in order to allow those who did not take part in the main debate before Christmas to make their contributions. I spoke at length in the debate before Christmas and I do not propose to detain the House now except to wish the Minister well with his recruiting campaign. I suggest that before the campaign starts he should take some measures to ensure that the maximum number of recruits can be obtained, particularly with regard to married men who should be recruited. We have a reserve but this should be used only for an emergency. It should not be a stop-gap when we run short of troops in normal times. Many people who are in the reserves are resentful that they were taken from their normal duties during the slight scare some time ago. If some of them had known this was likely to happen they would not have been so anxious to remain in the reserves. I appeal to the Minister to ensure that he has enough regular troops. The way to do that is to recruit a sufficient number, married and single men.

It is the Minister's job to ensure that when people join the Army they are not forced to do fatigues every day. At the moment they do fatigues, take part in parades and play cards. Somebody described them to me as soul-destroying exercises and I believe this to be true. An effort should be made to improve matters for the recruits and for those already in the Army. My experience is that the only time you can get young men interested in Army life is when there is some excitement about and there is certainly enough excitement at the present time. An effort should be made to train the men in handling up-to-date equipment. As far as I am aware in Gormanston they still fire at a droge from the ground. I do not know how it would be possible to attack a ground target with an anti-aircraft gun although I suppose it could be done. However, the important point is that they should be taught how to handle weapons which might be used in guerrilla exercises.

Having got a cadre of officers and NCOs, it should be possible to build up a good Army. I would ask the Minister not to hesitate to promote the good type NCO and officer who is available now. Some people talk about having all chiefs and no Indians but there is no point in getting more Indians if you have not the chiefs. During the Emergency we built up an excellent Army because there were available NCOs and officers who had experience. Perhaps they do not have the polish of Sandhurst but at least they know their job and the Minister should not hesitate to promote those people.

With regard to spare time activities, I regret that the Army seem to have forgotten that in past years they were excellent in many branches of sport. There is no reason why an interest should not be taken now in these activities. May be the numbers are small but an effort should be made to build up a unit which would take part in local championships in any sport. This would provide an interest for the men and give them an opportunity to play outdoor games.

It is essential that the position near the Border should be kept under constant watch. I live near enough to the Border to know what is going on and, although some people may not agree, there is a grave danger of an international incident occurring. Very little will create a situation where there will be a clash, no matter how minor, between the British Army and our troops. If this happens it will be a tragedy because we are not in a position to follow it up. However, certain people would like to see this happening, and if one has followed the trends of the last few days one can see how close we are coming to that situation. Very definite orders must be given to all commanders as to what they should do in certain circumstances. There appears to be still some doubt as to what the reaction should be. The officers should know exactly how to meet any situation so that nobody can say afterwards: "We did not know, we were taken by surprise." An army should not be taken by surprise but there is no point in blaming the man on the spot if instructions have not been handed down from the top.

With regard to pay and conditions, these must be improved considerably. We should not mind those who say that the Army costs too much. If you want to keep people in the Army you must pay them; if you want the best you must pay for it. One matter which I think has a bearing on Army service is that there is a reluctance on the part of the State, local authorities and some employers to give any credit for service when people apply for a job. Occasionally when people apply for a job where the age limit is, say, 45 years, they have perhaps five or ten years Army service. It was the practice that they got a certain amount of credit for this service because while people were taking up jobs in business they were serving their country. Instructions should be issued to Government Departments and local authorities to give even a few years credit for service to people who have served honourably in the Defence Forces. For instance, they should not be disqualified because they were 45 years on 30th June when the age limit states 45 years after 1st July. This discourages people and they say: "We get no consideration at all."

I wish the Minister well in his efforts to build up the Army. I congratulate him on his good sense in bringing back our troops because we need them here. We have done our share in peace-keeping abroad. Let us do what we can now to keep the peace at home.

Mr. Davern

I wish to associate myself with what Deputy Tully said about the Minister's efforts to build up the Army. I want to deal with the Old IRA pensions and to congratulate the Minister on the effort he made last year in recognising the widows of those pensioners. That was a tremendous step forward and it was greatly appreciated by those who were granted pensions, particularly as no means test is involved. There are still one or two little snags. In the case of a man who was granted a pension but who refused it, his widow should be entitled to a pension. He may have refused it because of pride, or perhaps he had a difference with the existing Government at the time, or he may have refused it because of an ideological difference. The widow of such a person should be granted a pension. The question is whether she can be granted a pension under the existing law. If the man was passed by the board she should receive a pension now, even if he did not accept it.

The wife of an Old IRA man can travel free only if she is travelling with her husband. I can understand the reason for this but there are difficulties involved in the case of an Old IRA man who cannot travel. If he is in hospital his wife cannot avail of free transport to visit him. It would happen very rarely at that age that the wife would be travelling without the husband and therefore I believe she should be granted free transport. I can see that there is a difficulty. If an old man is married to a young woman she could be on the train morning, noon and night.

I have a case with the Minister at the moment about the widows of service pensioners being granted the allowance. I would be grateful if he would give it deep consideration because there are so few of these cases. Every year we all say that there are very few Old IRA men left but from the list of medals issued recently it seems that for every one who dies another ten appear.

I want to deal now with what I consider to be the lack of training in the FCA, the lack of training in weaponary, the lack of facilities for the FCA, and other aspects. The most important matter is the lack of job security if they take on weekend duties. I spoke to a number of these men over the weekend and I was told about a man who works in the Forestry Division and who volunteered to do duty every fortnight in the battalion headquarters in Fermoy, and who was told that if he was not back on the dot of eight o'clock on Monday morning his job would not be available to him. He is working in a State job and he was doing another State job. He had volunteered his own leisure time to do weekend duty.

When this arose in 1969 the previous Minister guaranteed that anyone who was called up would not lose his job. That applied to the regular Army. I know the Minister is very sympathetic towards this point. I am sure he has many examples in his own area. There should be no question of their civil jobs impinging on their national security jobs. National security is the priority. These men are good enough to take on an underpaid job as part-time soldiers. They receive the generous gratuity of £6 a year. They should get only the best treatment. If they carry out weekend security duties they should at least be allowed to be a little late for their ordinary job if that is necessary. Any employer who seeks to dismiss a man or to make his job harder because of his patriotism should be punished. I cannot understand this when the State is the employer. The Land Commission have not been helpful or co-operative in this regard. I have a question down for next week and I will leave it at that until I hear what the Minister has to say.

FCA men are issued with uniforms, boots, and so on. They are expected to keep the uniform for two to three years. They are supposed to do their training and to do parades in the same uniform, and do guard duty and manoeuvres in the same uniform. One shoulder of my uniform was completely worn from carrying a gun and it was covered with oil smears and marks and that was the uniform I had to wear while attending a passing-out parade. Members of the FCA should be given a combat uniform for camp duties and manoeuvres. This is essential. For their weekly parades they should have a uniform which they could be proud of and look smart in instead of the awful-looking things they have at present. The old tunics are coarse. Many FCA men are now remodelling their tunics privately without the approval of the Army or the Department. At a recent anniversary celebration you could see a man in a tunic with his lapels back, a nice khaki shirt and a green tie, and the man beside him up to his collar in horse hair in the old tunic. This does not help to present a good image of the FCA.

As Deputy Cooney said, there is a wide discrepancy between the number on paper and the factual numbers in the FCA. Many of them drop out after a couple of years or are being dropped from the list for non-attendance. The really dedicated members, the men who have been in it for 15 or 20 years and the boys now coming in at 17 or 18 years of age, are the people we shall keep. We would have the cheapest Army in the world even if we doubled their pay. These are people who are willing to give their free time to the national cause. I would be grateful if the Minister would consider providing a high standard of uniform for these men. They deserve the best in both a dress and a service uniform. I do not mean a dress uniform in the sense of ballroom dress but I mean something they could walk out in, look smart in and be proud of.

There are FCA men in various parts of the country who have never fired an FN rifle. They are still firing 303s, which I understand are going out of date. I know many FCA men, including officers, who have never fired an FN rifle, which has been in use in our Army since 1962 or 1963. Many of them have not fired a sten gun, a Gustaf or a sub-machine gun of any kind but that may not be their sphere. Every man in the Army should have fired the current rifle on issue but this is not the case with the FCA. If they are not given responsibility, how can they react responsibly and become an efficient force?

There is a lot of sneering by some members of the regular Army at the part-time soldiers in one or two camps. I know the Minister would not allow this if he were aware of it. I know the Army officers and particularly the present Chief of Staff would not allow it. This sort of thing should be checked on regularly and stopped before it reaches larger proportions.

I agree with what Deputy Tully said about the regular Army. A man should be credited with the years he has served in the Army. The Department of Defence should be doing this and encouraging other Departments to do it. If a man has 15 or 20 years service at the age of 40 and applies for a job he should be given at least five years service which is only one year for five years spent in the Army. The old system under which a man leaving the Army got priority for a job, if he was suitable, was a great system. It was an incentive to people to join the Army to know that they would be looked after and that there would be no feeling of insecurity.

The housing situation in the Army leaves much to be desired. I know it is a matter of finance but I should be grateful if the Minister would look into the matter.

There are some men in the Army who have held the rank of corporal for 15 or 20 years not because of lack of initiative or ability but because there are no vacancies at higher ranks. People must die or retire before they are promoted.

When an NCO retires after 20 years service with the rank of quartermaster or company sergeant he has gone as high as he can go in the Army. I think he should be given a retirement rank such as the top brass are given when they are going out.

With regard to recruiting, I do not know whether the bounty money is still given but it was a very good system. Any officer or man who brought in a recruit got £5. There were no questions asked about how he got him inside the door so long as he signed the papers. I do not think the press-gang system operates anywhere in the world today but if some initiative were given to the men themselves to bring in recruits and if the bounty money was issued, it might have better results than some of the advertising.

I should like to compliment the Minister on the interest he has shown in his Department and on the fact that he has gone out to Cyprus to see the men there and to show that they were being thought of at home. He has gone around the Border routes. I know he has visited more camps than any of his predecessors. In the past year and a half he has gone round to every camp and met the men at all levels. He has spoken to them and listened to their points of view which has meant a lot and has had results at later stages.

I should like the Minister to look into the question of job security for members of the FCA who do weekend duty to see that these men are granted any leave of absence from State or semi-State Departments that is necessary to fulfil their security duties at weekends.

Mr. O'Sullivan

As one who had the honour to wear the uniform of the national Army, it is only right that I should contribute to this debate. My view is that our Army is only a second-or third-class Army. It has never been given, by successive Ministers for Defence, the position it should hold as our premier force. An army is something a country must be proud of. When I look back to when our Army was founded and think of the men who served in it, I am proud to say that down through the years it has upheld its dignity and served the country well when it was needed. It may be forgotten that when we had the first change of government our national Army was handed over intact, ready to serve whatever government took over. It is a great tribute not only to the Army but to the Government that handed it over that it was ready to serve whatever government came into power. When we look back on the history of the Army we find that the Army served not only the Government which brought it into existence but also the Government which succeeded it. That Army was trusted by that succeeding Government and it was worthy of that trust. Under various Ministers for Defence since the Army has been literally starved of finance. It is not properly equipped. We all know we cannot afford a big Army but we could at least afford an Army equipped and trained to the highest level. Can those in charge of the Army say that this is the case? I say it is not. The Army we have at the moment is loosely organised, badly equipped and quite unable to do the job for which it is designed. It is about time the Army was reorganised and properly equipped. Our Army should have the latest equipment. It should be properly trained. It should appear on every occasion of consequence and ceremonial.

I believe the people would support the Army. We know how the people supported the Army during the Emergency. Great numbers volunteered for the second line of defence, the LDF. Irrespective of political feelings or outlook the people were behind the Army then. This should not be forgotten, but I am afraid it has been forgotten. Men who left the Army and returned to civilian life were not treated as they should have been treated. They did not get the preference to which they were entitled. That problem still exists. When Army personnel return to civilian life they are given a miserable pension; it would hardly keep them in cigarettes. That is the way we treat our Army. The result is the Army is not the best army we could have.

I appeal to the Minister to start, even at this late hour, to reorganise and equip the Army as it should be equipped. Something has been done about our Naval Service. We did not even have vessels to protect our fishery interests until quite recently. There were a few old vessels tied up at the pier at Cobh. I do not believe they were seaworthy. I do not believe that the present vessels are suitable for protecting our fishery interests. We cannot afford a big navy but it is a disgrace that an island like ours should be unable to protect its fisheries. A properly equipped navy could be a tremendous asset. The men trained in it would be available for our growing mercantile marine. I trust that both the Army and the Naval Service will be properly equipped and trained and something of which everybody can be proud.

Mr. Coughlan

We have got to be very tactful when we discuss our Defence Forces in public because we cannot disclose the true position. There are matters, however, which are public knowledge. I appeal to the Minister to relax the regulations which do not permit Army personnel to air their grievances. These people are immured in their barracks and they have no means of redress other than a complaint to the OC and, possibly, a courtmartial. I know we must have discipline. I am myself a rigid disciplinarian. I believe in discipline. However, the human aspect must always enter into relations and Army personnel, like others, should be at liberty to complain to public representatives. This is denied them at the moment. There are many grievances but, even when one is approached in one's capacity as a public representative, one has to proceed very cautiously because there could be repercussions.

We should introduce compulsory military training as part of our ordinary educational facilities. The physical training of young men would pay a tremendous dividend. The discipline would give them responsibility as citizens. It would do no young man of 18, 19 or 20 any harm at all to be on the barrack square at six or seven o'clock in the morning. Such young men would turn out better citizens than will those who do no military training at all. I would impress on the Minister that he should give this matter full and careful consideration. It has been a success in other countries. We have adopted schemes that have proved to be a failure in other countries. That has proved to be the case in the education and health fields. Compulsory army training has been a success in other countries and should be adopted here.

In order to encourage recruitment, army life must be made attractive. At the moment the Army seems to be a dead end. It involves routine work. Army life has not been made as attractive as it should be so as to encourage young people to join the Army.

I would suggest that there should be Army parades on the streets at regular intervals throughout the Republic. I have not seen an Army parade in Limerick for four years or more. One may see the Army at military funerals. The Army carry out their routine duties on the range. They carry out their exercises within barrack walls. In order to encourage recruitment there should be Army parades such as we had during the emergency.

In five years the Army Band made one visit to Limerick city and gave an open air recital. The place was packed. People could not get in. A request was made for another visit but that did not come about. I do not know why. It would be a simple matter to bring the Army Band around the country to give musical recitals for the people. I do not know why that is not done. Some years ago I brought the Army Band to Limerick. As Mayor of Limerick at the time, I held a dance in aid of handicapped children. We made over £1,000 profit. The Army Band played at the dance. I saw nothing wrong in that because a commercial band was also employed for the occasion. The Army Band attended in all its regalia. There was a public performance in Limerick last summer. There was a demand for a repeat performance but we did not get it.

How can a boy who is musically inclined be induced to offer his services for training for the Army Band if he sees no future in it? Two buses could bring the Army Band to any part of Ireland. The men could be quartered in the nearest barracks. They could give public recitals and in this way young boys could be encouraged to join the Army with a view to training for the Army Band.

Another matter which concerns the Army is the question of housing and married quarters. Some time ago I visited most Army stations in the country. I found that conditions were deplorable in most of the barracks I visited. We did build six or seven houses in Limerick in Sarsfield Barracks but we could go further than that in order to encourage recruitment. Decent housing accommodation should be provided. This could be done directly by the Department or through local authorities. Other countries have done this successfully. We should adopt schemes that have proved to be successful in other countries and not those that have proved to be failures, as has happened under the Government.

In view of the soaring cost of living imposed by Fianna Fáil the Army must be made attractive and the only way to do that is to improve the conditions and to increase the pay. The pay is not bad but it could be better. Unfortunately, some of the men have to take up a "Tom" job here and there in order to maintain a standard of living.

Army service should be recognised in filling vacancies and in regard to which there is an age limit. In order that the person employed can qualify for full pension at 65 years of age it is usual to have a starting age limit so that it is possible that the person will have the necessary contributions for pension purposes. I am glad that those Deputies that I have heard speaking on the matter agreed with me that there should be exemption for men who have volunteered to defend the country.

With regard to promotion in the Army, I realise that cadetships are hard to get. For instance, there is a very strict medical qualification. There should be more promotional outlets for men from the ranks. I regret very much the untimely death of our last Chief of Staff who was a personal friend of mine. I am glad to be able to say that he did rise from the ranks. All Ireland was pleased that that should happen. This is such a rare occurrence as to make front page news. The late Chief of Staff was an efficient and great man. There should be more promotion from the ranks. A young recruit should not have promotion closed to him. He should not be restricted to promotion to quartermaster sergeant. A man's ability should be recognised. If that is not the case, let us forget about recruitment to the Army.

At one time we had an Army jumping team which brought honour and glory to this nation throughout the world. Members of that team who were and are personal friends of mine told me of the conditions under which they had to compete. There are receptions at these international events and a certain amount of money is provided for them by the different nations but the amount allowed to our Army jumping team would not buy fish and chips. It was a miserable sum and for that reason most of the men refused to have anything to do with the Army jumping team. Participation was beyond their means. I do not know why the team was allowed to collapse but I know that the cause was that the men were not given sufficient means to carry out their social commitments in the same way as their counterparts from other countries. That was the calamity of the Army jumping team.

At present our best horses are being bought by other Governments. Bord na gCapall are making some efforts to remedy the situation but our best horses are going abroad and winning honour and fame for other nations at every show and exhibition in Europe and beyond it. We should concentrate on this kind of effort and make it attractive for our Army personnel. We should develop these things if we are to restore the Army to what it was and have the kind of Army we all want to see.

While trades training has been introduced it is only being done in a very small way. Classes are being held and certainly vocational teachers are going into Clonmel barracks because I saw them there. There is not sufficient being done in this direction. There is more to the Army than handling guns; the training, mental development and education of the men are involved in addition to the parades on the barrack squares in the mornings and the ordinary chores that are being done at present. We must give the soldiers skills which will not only help to provide for them when they retire but will help them in their everyday life and give them an interest. That effort has been successful in Clonmel but not so successful in other areas. I do not know why. There is no use in talking about an Army unless we make provision to encourage young men to don uniform and defend the Republic.

During the Emergency, Army strength was much greater than it is now and we had soldiers competing at open sports events. We had Army hurling, soccer, rugby and tug-of-war teams entering open competitions. That was a great thing and I do not know why at present with all the PT instructors we have, a sports or games master has not been appointed. We have them in every school and in every organised community. The Army should come out in open competition in every field of activity. Whatever physical exercise a man is inclined to take he should be encouraged. That is not the position. The Department of Defence have been sitting on their backsides in Parkgate Street doing nothing about the unfortunate soldiers. Every morning they pass my door at 8 o'clock on bicycles going to the barracks. They go up and down and they spend the whole day in the barrack square. This is not Army life as I want it to be or as the Irish people want it to be. We want to see activity in the Army and this is not happening. Those in Parkgate Street should pull up their socks and change their attitude if they want to have a successful recruitment drive.

On my visit to Galway Barracks I inspected the Army vehicles in the square. The area served by Galway takes in Donegal. I was ashamed of the vehicles I saw.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social Welfare (Mr. Geoghegan)

Be careful.

Mr. Coughlan

I saw them. My only mistake was in not having a camera. Men were thrown into ramshackle, boneshaker vehicles which were falling to pieces, their hoods held on with shoelaces and string.

Mr. Nolan

I do not believe the Deputy.

Mr. Coughlan

Did the Deputy go and see?

Mr. Nolan

No.

Mr. Coughlan

I did, and I only talk of things I know something about. If the Deputy doubts me let him go to Galway and he will see what I saw. These men are doing duty here, there and every place along the Border at present. They are thrown in the back of these old lorries which are falling to pieces. If these vehicles were to be raffled nobody would buy a shilling ticket for one of them. I am not exaggerating the position. Horses, pigs and cattle are carted around in better conditions than members of the Defence Forces. This is a tragedy. Then you ask people to join the Army.

Why are young married men not accepted in the Army? I do not know how many times I have made representations on behalf of young married men up to 30 years of age. These men offer themselves but they cannot join the Army. Why?

Mr. Clinton

We are only joking about recruitment.

Mr. Coughlan

The Deputy means Fianna Fáil?

Mr. Clinton

Yes.

Mr. Coughlan

We are agreed on one thing, anyway. That is the position. The Government do not want these men in the Army. If they were honest and sincere about recruitment it would be handled in a different way. As Deputy Clinton rightly said, the Government are only joking about it; it is a farce. Parkgate Street will have to take another look at the matter if they want the recruitment drive to be successful. If they think they will get the co-operation of people like myself, they are making a very bad mistake unless they change their attitude.

I want to mention income tax deductions from soldiers. In the month of November income tax demands were sent out. Some of them had to pay £20 per week or more until the full amount was paid. These deductions were made in the months of October and November in respect of a 12-month period. If they were liable for income tax the amount should have been deducted from their regular Army cheques. However, because of the indolence of someone in Parkgate Street this was not done. The people concerned were ordered to pay these enormous sums before Christmas. Certainly this is no encouragement for anyone to join the Army.

The people in Parkgate Street have shown great presumption in their dealings with Slua Mhuirí. In my city there was a group of young men who were involved in Slua Mhuirí. During the summer they were sent for a fortnight to places like Cobh, Haulbowline or Foynes. They were provided with an ordinary fishing boat and that was all they learned about Slua Mhuirí. I have tried repeatedly to arrange for some naval practice for the members of Slua Mhuirí but I have failed. The result is that in my area Slua Mhuirí is no longer in existence because of the lack——

Mr. Geoghegan

They should have gone to the Minister for Justice.

Mr. Coughlan

I will leave the Minister for Justice alone for the moment because he has his own problems. There has been no encouragement given to recruit members into Slua Mhuirí. Young men who live in towns along the coast are inclined to think of naval careers but they have not been given any encouragement. The Minister should carry out a serious investigation into this matter.

I do not wish to be hard on the Minister. He has not been long in office and he is trying to make a good job out of a tragic situation. However, I would remind him that he will never make a success of the recruiting campaign unless he takes steps to ensure that it is effective. I have given him my views about what he should do. I come from an area that was known as a garrison town. In our city we have a substantial Army barracks with good men in it. I meet the Army men and I know about conditions. I will be completely behind the Minister in his recruitment drive if he carries out the suggestions I have made.

Mr. Nolan

When the Minister presented his main Estimate to the House some weeks ago he mentioned that due to the disturbances in the North the Army had been called out to aid the civil powers and that as a result the Army had been discussed quite considerably in public. When there is public discussion about the Army politicians are inclined to take it up from there.

I agree with some of the things Deputy Coughlan has said; needless to remark, I disagree with others. He referred to Army training as a type of education and I agree with him. He suggested we should have compulsory Army training for boys at the leaving certificate stage, and that we should have some kind of Army training in our schools. Some time ago I suggested that we could extend regulations governing recruitment to the FCA, whereby we could have a three-months training course. Now that we have free education, in June of each year thousands of young people are free. Some of them may take temporary jobs during the summer months but others just roam the streets.

I should not like to see compulsory military service but I should like the FCA regulations changed in some way which would enable us to take these young people into the Defence Forces. They could have a three-months training period, similar to the old volunteer force. This training would be a tremendous asset to them. I am an ex-Army man and I know that when one meets people who have spent some time in the Army it is immediately apparent. It is obvious in their manner and approach that they have a certain amount of discipline and there is no need for me to stress how necessary this is in any country.

Many of the young people could undertake this three-months training course in their fifth year in secondary school and have a further three-months course the next year when, if suitable, they could be trained as NCOs and potential officers. I would ask the Minister to consider this suggestion. It might fit in in some way with Deputy Coughlan's suggestion of compulsory training or some kind of military training in schools.

We have three main branches in our Defence Forces—the Naval Service, the Air Corps and the Army. Some months ago at the invitation of the Minister I went out to Dún Laoghaire to see part of the Naval Service; Deputy Cosgrave and other Deputies were also in the party. The few hours that I spent there were informative and useful. I was pleased to discover that all the public criticism, and the criticism that has been voiced at times in the Dáil, regarding the minesweepers that were purchased was ill-founded. When we spoke to the officers and the men who man these vessels we were glad to discover that the boats could do the job for which they were purchased. The naval officers we spoke to smiled at some of the criticism that had been made about the vessels. It had been said that they were too slow to catch foreign trawlers fishing in our waters. One of the officers explained that when a foreign vessel is sighted often it is about eight miles away and one would need a very fast boat to catch it before it gets outside the 12-mile limit. It is not only speed that counts. The officer explained that, generally speaking, the captains and officers of the fishing trawlers are honourable men who, when called upon to halt when they are inside our territorial waters, cooperate fully with the Naval Service. They always get full co-operation from them.

One point which arose from that visit was that the officers and men of our Naval Service would be very pleased if from time to time during training cruises they could visit some foreign ports. Naval vessels come here from Germany, Holland and other countries. I can see nothing wrong with one of our minesweepers on training in the summertime going to Cyprus or some other foreign port. While we were on a short trip on the Gráinne this was mentioned. Our merchant ships go all over the world and our sailors meet some of the merchant seamen from other countries. Our minesweepers just go from Cork to Galway or somewhere like that. I would ask the Minister to consider this. I know that the training programmes for our Naval Service are arranged by the training officers, but I hope this will be taken into consideration in further training programmes.

It is a great tribute to the technicians and those who maintain our aircraft in our Air Corps that they have kept our aircraft flying for so long. Indeed, the young pilots who are training in the Air Corps are flying aircraft older than themselves. Last year the Committee of Public Accounts were informed by the accounting officer for the Department of Defence that most of the aircraft are over 18 or 19 years old. The Minister said we are purchasing another helicopter. We can be proud of this service which is provided by the Air Corps. Helicopters have done excellent work in bringing people who were seriously injured to hospital and in transferring people from hospitals down the country to hospitals in Dublin. They have also been on many rescue missions.

One of the problems the Minister may have to deal with in this sphere is capital investment. I presume that the purchase of aircraft would be considered capital investment. Many Deputies have said that in Dublin city we have quite a number of barracks half of which could be sold. They are valuable properties. If there is any capital problem I can see nothing wrong with selling half of them or, indeed, the lot of them and building another barracks outside the city. These old barracks were built on the perimeter of the city in years gone by by an occupying power, and they were built for defensive purposes. The time has come when we should get rid of them, build a new barracks, and inject capital into the Air Corps and other spheres in which it is necessary.

Last year we visited the apprentice school at Naas and the apprentice school at Baldonnel. The standard of training in these schools is equal to that in the technical schools but when one compares the standard of the building and equipment it makes one shudder. The Department of Education in most of our towns have provided beautiful colleges and technical schools and we also have our colleges of technology. If we are so interested in education, and in view of the fact that the apprentice schools in Baldonnel and Naas are playing a major role in the training of technicians, I cannot understand why more money was not made available to build proper classrooms and proper recreation rooms for the young men who are being trained in those schools from year to year.

Deputy Coughlan referred to Army service in general and to the fact that a man who joins the Army must retire at an early age. There is no point in having a soldier of 65 or 70 years of age in the Army. We need to have a look at this aspect of our Army training. Without any question jobs should be reserved for ex-servicemen in our semi-State bodies and our State bodies. If a man joins the Army at 17 years of age and serves for 21 years he comes out of the Army at 38 years of age as a disciplined and fully trained man. More semi-State and State jobs should be reserved for people like that.

We have had discussions about our officer corps. Most of the young officers in the Army now have the opportunity of attending the university. Their predecessors did not have that opportunity. When an officer reaches the age of 28 or 30, by automatic promotion he has obtained the rank of captain. His ability should be assessed and he should be advised whether he should remain in the Army or whether he should gear himself for civilian life. If he is retiring from the Army he should retire earlier instead of waiting until he is 54 or 55 years of age when he will be too old to get a job.

I want to deal now with credit for Army service. After the Emergency people who took up posts with the ESB or with the Department of Posts and Telegraphs got incremental pay for their service in the Army. Today a number of those men are reaching retiring age. I am sure the Minister is aware that they are asking that their four or five years service, or portion of it, be taken into consideration for pension purposes. A typical example would be the case of a man who started to work for the post office at 18 years of age in 1939. A colleague joined the Army and served for six years. He came out after six years in the Army and went to work in the post office. He now discovers that because he served his country—and he was still in State employment while he was in the Army—his colleague is getting a far higher pension.

Representations both privately and by letter will be made to the Minister about this matter. He will be hearing quite a lot about it in the future. I am an ex-serviceman—I will not qualify for this because I am self-employed— and I would urge the Minister to ask the Minister for Finance to consider giving those men credit for the service they gave when they were in the Army during the Emergency. It is only fair that they should get pensions equal to the pensions of their colleagues who joined other services at that time.

Mr. Cosgrave

There is general agreement among those who have spoken that a number of changes are necessary not merely to make the Army more attractive but in order to treat Army personnel and their dependants as they are entitled to be treated and as the public, I believe, would like to see them treated. It is true that on a number of specific occasions the interest that is displayed in the Press and other media and the interest of the people generally emphasises the importance of the Army. An obvious case is the present situation in the North and the need for patrols on the Border as well as the general question of security. When Irish troops first went abroad it attracted a great deal of attention and there was a good deal of legitimate pride in the manner in which the troops carried out their duties. They are still, of course, on duty in Cyprus. Leaving aside the Emergency, there were one or two other occasions, like the serious flooding in the West when the Shannon overflowed 15 or 16 years ago and when the Army did a great job. These were special occasions when because of the impact made by the Army in dealing with a particular problem the Army was brought before our minds and perhaps some public representatives who normally would not take the same interest found that others were taking an interest in the Army.

Those of us who have been concerned for a long time with the Army situation, realise that a number of changes are necessary. There is the general question of recruitment, not merely the need to attract the right type of personnel into the different categories but also the question of the role of the FCA and how it can be utilised to the best advantage. I think if this is faced up to realistically we must ask what numbers are genuinely on the roll in the FCA. I think it will be found that the paper numbers bear no relation to the actual numbers available. That is bad. I know there are certain grants, et cetera, applicable if there is a certain paper strength. That should be dropped and we should make a realistic assessment of the actual numbers.

We should go further. Because of recent events and the present circumstances in the country we should consider, as has been suggested here by Deputies from different sides of the House, whether we ought not to have a period of obligatory military training for young people. This is done in other countries. I realise that there are many difficulties attached to that. Nobody wants to suggest that there should be conscription or anything of that sort but in some other countries they have military training for a limited period and then people are called up again at intervals over the years or, in some cases, on an annual basis. Some of these periods are probably too long. If for instance, young boys are studying or doing any sort of course that involves study a period of three months would involve problems. For that matter, if they are employed it might not be possible for them to retain their positions but I think employers will have to recognise that the security of the State is everybody's business. It does not matter whether one is employed in a particular capacity or remote from the military situation in the sense of having no contact with it, the security of the State is and must be a matter of concern to everybody.

Therefore, we ought consider whether it would be desirable to restructure the FCA and have a period of obligatory training for, say, three months two years running and afterwards for a shorter period. The most serious defect in the present arrangements in the FCA is that there is a good deal of money spent on it and there is no really valuable return for it because the type and length of training does not enable many people to get the benefits from it that they should get. This is a matter that might well be considered on a different basis for the future. The FCA has continued in its present set-up since shortly after the war. It is certainly over 20 years in its present form. There is a lot to be said for having a fresh look at it.

In so far as Army recruitment generally is concerned we should change the regulations and allow married men to be recruited for the first time. As regulations stand a married man cannot be recruited unless he has had previous Army service. This is completely out-of-date. With people marrying younger there is a lot to be said for allowing married people to join the Army. What I said about the FCA applies also to An Slua Mhuirí. I should like to join with other Deputies in expressing my appreciation of the manner in which the commanding officer and the other personnel of the Naval Service welcomed us and provided us with much factual information when we visited the ship at Dún Laoghaire some time ago. It was a most interesting experience and, from our point of view and also I think from the point of view of the personnel concerned, it was a useful experience.

Leaving aside altogether our possible entry to the EEC, fishery protection is very important. A certain role for An Slua Mhuirí has been laid down as well as for the Naval Service— the defence of harbours and ports, the staffing of the quarters, sending out signals, examination of vessels and the ordinary naval duties that have to be carried out. In order to do that it has been suggested to me that they need more sea-going power vessels, harbour patrol vessels or fishing vessels. In addition they would require to be equipped with ship to shore radio sets. I understand there are two at present on issue as well as 55 sets currently on issue to the Army, Naval Service and the FCA units, as well as Radar. There should be demonstrations of such equipment.

I understand that certain vessels may be on offer by other navies, possibly by the British Navy, the purchase of which would enable our Naval Service to be better equipped. I represent a coastal constituency and I know that fish landings in Dún Laoghaire have increased considerably. I think the landing of fish all around the coast has increased. The value of our fishing industry does not need to be emphasised and what I said about the FCA applies in another respect to An Slua Mhuirí. There is no point in spending money unless we get value for it and the way to get value is by providing the best possible equipment and giving the personnel the most intensive training possible. This is what we should aim at instead of the rather loose arrangement that applies in respect of both the FCA and An Slua Mhuirí.

With regard to the Air Corps, I understand that the number of airworthy planes is very limited. This is a very serious matter. We should provide a certain number of planes for the purpose of training the Air Corps properly.

There is a tremendous advantage— I have advocated this for many years —in equipping Army personnel for civilian life when they resign or retire from the Army. I acted as Minister for Defence for a short period and during that time we established the Army apprentice school at Naas. The Quartermaster-General discussed the matter with me, as did other Army personnel. He had been Director of the Supply and Transport Corps and one of the advantages in that corps was that the men were trained as fitters, mechanics, and so on. The result was that, when they left the Army, they found it relatively easy to get employment. They had a specialised skill and knowledge. This also applies in the case of the Signal Corps and the Ordnance Corps. The Quarter-master-General recognised the value of an apprentice school in which Army personnel could be trained not only for service in the Army but for subsequent absorption into civilian life. I mentioned the school in Naas. There is, of course, the apprentice school in Baldonnel. It is attached to the Air Corps. Remarkable success has attended the efforts of the school in Naas. I believe the apprentices there have won top awards in competition with other apprentices. They have, I believe shown the way to still further development of that approach.

Officers have recently been given the opportunity of attending university. That is a welcome development. Because of the discipline and the training these men get in the Army public and private companies and organisations are only too anxious to avail of their services. I suppose it cuts both ways; they are a welcome addition. It is a matter of concern that a great many young officers when they reach minimum pension entitlement leave the Army and go into civilian occupations. Of course, if they did not do that at a certain age their chances of employment when they were older would be pretty slim. This is an aspect that needs consideration and study. Some investigation should be made to find out what officers could be encouraged to remain in the Army with, of course, adequate prospects of promotion.

I am disappointed to see a reduction in the expenditure this year on the purchase of horses for the Army jumping team. There has been a great deal of misguided criticism about the team. The number of military teams now is very few. When our Army jumping team reached the pinnacle of its fame in the twenties and thirties the teams competing against them were military teams. We had at the time a group of skilled horsemen. It is doubtful if we will ever have their like again, but we have a number of very good Army riders, some of them in the top rank. These are competing with civilians in the main. Indeed, the whole business has become highly competitive. People with money, and even people without it, have become professionals. It is not quite as it was before. This should be said in fairness to our jumping team.

The Equitation School should have sufficient funds to purchase high-class horses. The demand is so keen that it is most essential to provide sufficient funds to have available a pool of young horses. Very few horses reach the top, but it is possible to have a pool of quite good material. The reduction in the sum it is proposed to spend is not in the interests of the teams. This could lead to unjustified criticism of the team and the Army generally.

With regard to pensions, I have at the moment a question on the Order Paper but, because of the number of questions in recent weeks, it has not been reached yet. In particular, I want to mention a limited number of widows of Army personnel who are affected by the present situation. When the scheme was introduced in 1937 it took account of certain benefits, such as free medical and dental treatment, and Army pay was adjusted vis-á-vis that of civil servants who did not have these perquisites and, because of this adjustment, the scheme might be regarded as a contributory scheme. At that time the rate of pension was very low. Since then retirement gratuities, promotion and advancement have changed. In 1969, the Civil Service contributory pensions scheme included all Civil Service widows and other public service widows who up to then had not been in receipt of a pension. In 1970 an ex gratia scheme was introduced which provided pensions on the basis of 50 per cent of the amounts payable under the 1969 scheme. In the same year a contributory Army pensions scheme was introduced under which a widow would be entitled to 50 per cent of her husband's pension. So far as the 1937 scheme is concerned—and there are still widows receiving pensions under that scheme—the initial amounts were very low and while percentage increases have been granted, because of the fact that the initial amounts were low, some of the pensions received are only nominally higher and in some cases no higher than the widows and orphans pensions.

I want to suggest to the Minister that the 1970 Army pensions scheme should be amended to include all widows under the 1937 scheme so that they will become eligible for the full amounts. These people have suffered very grievously because of the rise in the cost of living. The number of widows concerned is very small and the amount involved would be a small sum. These widows have been very unfairly treated, not deliberately, but because the scheme has not been changed and because it was in a very different era. It is only in very recent years that Civil Service pensions have been changed. While a scheme has been in operation for I suppose 15 or 16 years, it has been changed considerably in the past few years. I would urge that there should be a change in this scheme.

Widows and in particular the Army widows that I am talking about, are a small group who have no organisation to work for them, who are powerless in regard to bringing influence to bear, unless they approach a Deputy or public representative. While the recent changes in the Army pensions scheme will benefit widows of deceased officers in future or those who retire now, the serving officers and Army personnel have an obligation in regard to this matter and the Minister has an obligation to discuss with the Army and the Civil Service the question of changing the scheme in order to include these people. They are entitled to that and the matter deserves sympathetic consideration.

I have covered the main points that I wanted to deal with. I should like to emphasise what I said at the beginning, that recent events have forcibly brought before the House and the country the immediate need for a determined effort to step up recruitment, to make the Army more attractive, to recognise the vital role it plays in the security of the State, in conjunction with the Garda. There is an obligation on the House and the country to recognise that role. There is an obligation to appreciate the services by adequate conditions of service and rates of pay and to recognise that old time attitudes in respect of either Army or Garda personnel are not good enough at the present time. There is an obligation to show that the country recognises that they have served and are serving the country well and that the State is prepared to make the necessary financial and other sacrifices to ensure that the security and freedom of the State and in the last analysis, the freedom of the individual, is safeguarded. That can be done by recognising and rewarding adequately the Army and those who serve in her.

Mr. Kavanagh

Most of the speakers this morning dealt at length with the Army, the problems of the Army and related problems. Speakers from these benches have dealt almost exclusively with these problems. I should like to deal with the other arm of our service, An Slua Mhuirí. This is not surprising as I have been asked by the Leader of the Labour Party to look after fishery interests in the House. Last year, on the Estimate for Fisheries, we were prevented from making mention of fishery protection operations on the grounds that that came within the ambit of the Department of Defence. The debate this morning gives us an opportunity of dealing with that aspect of the fisheries problem which will also arise on the debate on fisheries which will follow this debate.

The Naval Service is the Cinderella service. Most people have not a very serious image of the Navy. That is unfortunate because the members of the Naval Service whom I have had an opportunity of meeting are very dedicated men who are interested in their work and who are professionals. Whether it is because of disinterest in this House and elsewhere, disinterest, perhaps, in the Department, the image that the people have is that the Naval Service exists only because of the fact that if we had not a Naval Service some other country could claim to be protecting our waters and in that way, perhaps, have some influence in the comings and goings to and from our ports.

The Naval Service has a dual role, the normal naval function and the role of fishery protection. It is of the utmost importance that these two services be divided and that we have a Naval Service and a fishery protection service. Most people regard the Navy as primarily a fishery protection service. Fishery protection is not the duty of a Naval Service. The function of a Naval Service is to protect our waters not only from those who might be interested in our fisheries but also from those who might have designs on our waters for any other purpose, say, in regard to minerals or in regard to our ports. The Naval Service has the duty of patrolling our waters for protection purposes.

The image which the service has got is largely due to the equipment with which officers and ratings have had to work down the years. There has been criticism by reason of the fact that in the event of an unfortunate disaster occuring or a problem arising in our waters rarely is there a boat at the particular place or even within a day's journey of the place. Some years ago when the Viscount crashed off Tuskar Rock the shortcomings of the Navy were highlighted when we had to bring in boats from Britain to attempt salvage operations. Our boats that acted as tenders to the salvage vessels left the rest of the coast unprotected while that operation was proceeding. This highlighted the weakness in this arm of our Defence Forces.

When we had a disaster over Wicklow Harbour involving a helicopter and a light plane resulting in the loss of four lives the only corvette then in service had to spend the best part of a week or a fortnight in Wicklow Bay trying to recover the wreckage and bodies from the sea. This meant that for the period while the one protection vessel was in Wicklow Harbour area the remainder of the coast was open to marauding fishing fleets from the Continent. The intelligence service of these fishing fleets is very good and they know at any time where our fishery protection boats are and they spread the news from one area to another with the result that, because of our lack of vessels, our fishery stocks cannot be adequately protected.

The duties of the Naval Service should be broken down into normal naval duties and fishery protection duties. To make an analogy it is like asking the Army to dig drains and do work it was never intended to do when we ask the Naval Service to engage in fishery protection. They are two distinct operations.

I am glad the Verolme dockyard is being used by the Department to build fishery protection vessels and the opportunity should now be taken to staff these vessels with officers and men whose duty it is to protect our fishery stocks and not have them undertaking normal naval exercise which must be undertaken by the present naval vessels.

The purchase of the three minesweepers made in the last year or 18 months has been criticised. In defence of the Department it can be said that at least they have gone about replacing the old corvettes and this was necessary because only one or two of them were available at any one time. Replacement by minesweepers was, however, ill-advised. For fishery protection work they are completely unsuitable to operate in the waters around our coast from Kerry to Donegal. They are not long service boats and cannot stay at sea for three or four weeks which is what any fishery protection boat operating on that side of the coast should do. The most appropriate boat for protection in these waters is a boat of the frigate class which is operational in the much heavier weather that boats are likely to encounter on the western seaboard.

Minesweepers are not suitable for operation off the Donegal or Kerry coast and for that reason the addition of a frigate to the naval fleet is necessary even if it means much heavier expense. I believe we could still buy these vessels relatively cheaply but they are much more expensive than the minesweepers we purchased recently. If the service can be broken down into fishery protection and naval service I think we can justify the claim that this is necessary. If we get the expected expansion in fishing that has been predicted some payment out of the resources going to fishing could be made available to provide fishery protection vessels.

The Chair will probably not allow a debate on the prospects of the fishing industry in the EEC but fishery protection is becoming more essential if we are to withstand the pirating that will take place by other Common Market countries if we enter the EEC. There will be great need to strengthen our protection service and now is the time to begin. Whether we go in or not fishery protection is very poor at present, as is known by everybody in the fishing business. They look to the Department of Defence and An Slua Mhuirí for protection which up to now they have not been getting. I think part of the problem is the difficulty of recruiting personnel for the navy which cannot compete in this respect with the Army and the Air Force. The job requires much more dedication than the Army and it is obvious that one has to be of sterner stuff to face the seas around Ireland as a way of life.

To go back to the minesweepers for a moment, when I visited one of these in Wicklow recently I noticed that it had an open bridge and in this day and age to expect officers to stand on an open bridge in prevailing weather conditions around the Irish coast is nothing short of criminal. It would take men of steel to withstand weather like this. There is no use in saying that this is what seamen put up with in the past and they should be able to do so now. In every service people are getting better equipment. Equipment which requires men to stand on an open bridge in the present weather conditions is not acceptable in the second part of the twentieth century. That is why people think there is no interest in the Navy.

Young people leaving school having done the leaving certificate examination, and who are looking around for a career are also deterred by the fact that further educational opportunities in the Navy are limited by the fact that they must be at sea for long periods. If one is in the Army, he is able to attend university or other courses to acquire skills in his spare time. This is not the case for young officers serving on boats. Therefore, I believe other inducements and incentives must be provided to get young men into the Naval Service. I know that recruitment is a problem but it must be looked into if the navy is to expand. One way in which the image of the navy might be improved is by arranging for boats to visit various ports. This would allow the people in those towns to go on board, ask questions and see how the navy carry out their work. If young people are to be encouraged to consider the navy as a career they should be allowed an opportunity of seeing the boats used.

Last year a minesweeper visited the port of Wicklow and there were long queues of interested parents and children who were delighted to go aboard and talk to the officers and men. In particular, the young people were interested in finding out about the various instrumentation on the boat. There is a great interest in the Naval Service and it should be cultivated. I am thankful to the Minister and the Department of Defence for allowing the boat to visit Wicklow. The visit was a success and I am sure the officer in charge has let the Department know about it.

Another area of the Department's operations in connection with the sea is the hydrographic service. This has been almost completely ignored by the Department. I attended a seminar on 22nd and 23rd June, 1971, concerning the development of marine resources. At that seminar Captain R. H. Connell of Sea Surveys Limited read a paper on the need for hydrography in Ireland. Captain Connell has carried out this kind of work for 30 years with the survey service of the British Navy and, as far as I know, he is the only man in this country who is qualified in this kind of work.

He pointed out that the sea bed changes with the action of the tides and that the need for charting of the sea coast around any country is necessary, and particularly so with the different type of vessels and the larger boats that are being used in the waters around this country. It came as a shock to most of us to know that some of the charts now in use for parts of our coasts were drawn up some 30 years after the Battle of Trafalgar. I do not want to alarm anyone by saying that they are in use for the main shipping lanes or the lanes into our main ports; these have been revised, but it is worth repeating what Captain Connell said. I shall quote some of his remarks at that seminar:

The majority of our charts are based on old lead and line surveys, mostly done in the middle of the last century. None are more recent than 1920 when the British ceased to survey here. Some charts, e.g. a chart of the lower Shannon, which my firm is currently re-surveying for the Limerick Harbour Commissioners, were surveyed only 35 years after Trafalgar! The work was wonderfully accurate considering the facilities available at the time, but it is simply not good enough for the requirements of modern shipping. The main deficiencies are in coastal waters, particularly over irregular bottoms, where the sailing ship could only sound at long intervals, since she had to be stopped to get a vertical sounding.

The echo sounder was the greatest single advance in hydrography. The continuous profile of the sea bed meant that innumerable hitherto uncharted features were revealed. Other new developments such as Transit Sonar—a development of the war-time Asdic, and electronic fixing aids and, of course, the ever increasing draught of ships, involved most maritime countries in a flurry of surveying activity designed to replace all the older charts.

But not so Ireland; with our 1700 miles of coastline, ships still navigate on charts virtually uncorrected for 100 years! The consequences of our omission may be serious indeed. Apart from the fact that deep draught vessels navigating in our coastal waters or approaching our harbours may be in danger, the possibility of a major oil spillage is far from remote. In the course of our own surveys we have often found hitherto uncharted dangers.

We must take the words of Captain Connell seriously and carry out up-to-date charting of our coastline. I do not think that the new ship launched in Verolme is equipped for this kind of work. There should be space available for the kind of equipment that is needed to carry out charting operations. We can recall the tragedy of the Torrey Canyon and similar occurences in the British Channel where there are many wrecks. Although we do not have that kind of shipping around our coastline, nevertheless, one could visualise a vessel carrying butane colliding with, for instance, the mailboat or a car ferry. The tragedy could be enormous, both in the number of lives lost and the material damage caused. If such an accident were caused because of the uncharted waters round our coast we would be guilty because of our neglect in this matter.

We have left lifesaving to the Royal National Lifeboat Institute, a British-based institution. This is a very worthy institution and we are glad of the service it gives. There are numerous lifeboats along the east coast but on the west coast from Kerry to North Donegal there are only three lifeboats. One is based in Kerry, one in Arranmore in Donegal and one in the Aran Islands. British shipping do not use those waters and, consequently, the Lifeboat Institute do not provide boats in this area. This deficiency should be made up by the Department of Defence and the navy. It is essential that there should be sufficient lifeboats on the west coast. In bad weather it would take a long time for a boat to travel from the Aran Islands to parts of Mayo. The Royal National Lifeboat Institute do a wonderful job and they do it with a grant from the Department I believe. I give every credit to the people who man the life stations and who staff the lifeboats. They are a credit to the Naval Service and they are a credit to their towns.

We must also be thankful to the many young and old people who go around with collection boxes to keep the service up-to-date around our coasts. I wonder is this the way it should be done in future? I hope the Department will take another look at the lifeboat service and plug the gaps which are so obvious along the west coast and any other gaps there are. It is not enough to hand out £50,000 and say: "We are looking after that end of it. Let the Royal National Lifeboat Institute get on with the job. Let them be subsidised from Great Britain." As a separate country, we have to look after these services ourselves. We should take a look particularly at the life saving service on the west coast.

I said I wanted to deal with that aspect of the Department's operation only. What I have said may jog us in this House into a realisation that our fisheries protection services and our naval operations are very weak. They need looking into and I hope that, in the years to come, an effort will be made to have a better recruiting drive and that there will be more opportunities and better conditions for officers and ratings and everybody working in the service. Charting is of the utmost importance. I hope the Department will take a very hard look at this problem which has been with us now for some time.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

I should like to support the concluding remarks of the last speaker in relation to the need for a hydrographic survey. Captain O'Connell was a distinguished member of the British Navy who carried out surveying work for many years in a highly efficient and skilful manner. It is a great advantage to this country to have him here ready to do survey work but for some reason or other the Department do not seem to be inclined to avail of his services.

An overall hydrographic survey is necessary because we are functioning on the old Admiralty charts, some of them, as Deputy Kavanagh said, over 100 years old and none of them less than 25 or 30 years old. An overall hydrographic survey would cost a lot of money. There is no reason why the Government should not undertake a minor hydrographic survey in the areas where it is particularly necessary. Around the east cost and the south coast there are innumerable sandbanks which are continually shifting and creating hazards for ships. This is evidenced by the fact that quite a few ships have piled up on sandbanks in the past few years. Some of them were absolutely irretrievable and had to be broken up and the machinery sold. It is high time that there was some rational thinking on those lines.

The difficulty is that these things are always looked at in this country as overall plans. We could not afford an overall survey of our coastlines but surely we could ask the British, and other countries who have an interest in seeing that we are properly charted, to assist us in the survey and, perhaps, carry some of the expense on our behalf because, after all, it is an international amenity just as much as it is a national one.

I am glad to see that at long last the Irish Naval Service is being given a chance of lifting its head out of the doldrums into which it was forced over the past 20 years. The three obsolete corvettes had no function. The only thing they were of any use for was slow convoy work up to about 15 or 20 years ago. The modern ships were too fast for them and they had no function. They were absolutely useless for fishery protection. The Minister is to be congratulated on his good fortune in being the Minister for Defence who has been able at last to scrap those corvettes. I do not think he even had to do that. I think they automatically fell to bits in the dockyard. However, he was able to introduce a new element into the Irish Navy.

As I see it, the main difficulty the Minister faces at the moment is that recruitment has fallen to such a low level because of the ships that were available that there is a shortage of naval personnel. At the moment we have three ships. I gather that these three minesweepers are not in full commission. I have been afloat in them through the courtesy of the Minister and I think they are suitable. I must correct Deputy Kavanagh and say that they are seaworthy. They may be extremely uncomfortable at sea, but I had no hesitation in going out in them in very rough seas. I was conscious of the fact that I had every chance of getting back to the harbour safely.

Mr. Kavanagh

Off the west coast?

Sir Anthony Esmonde

They would live through any sea if properly handled. Because a ship is only 300 to 400 tons that does not mean it is not seaworthy. There might be occasions on which you might have to heave to but they would survive in any seas. The Deputy need have no anxiety on that point. They may not be very comfortable although I was impressed with their quarters and particularly those for the lower deck ratings. I thought they were extremly good.

Mr. Kavanagh

I agree.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

They are serviceable ships and they were a sensible buy. None of us was in a position to judge them until we were given the opportunity to go afloat in them. The Deputies and Senators from all parties who were out with me the day I was out agreed with my view that they were a good buy.

Let me get back to the personnel. Because of the disrepute into which the Navy had fallen owing to the ships we had until very recently, recruiting had stopped practically completely. The training of naval officers was at a total discount. We now have three moderately up-to-date and serviceable ships for fishery protection and other purposes. Another ship—I suppose it will be the flagship of our Navy—is to go into commission in March, a ship of about 1,000 tons, always provided that the naval personnel can be found to man it. I am extremely doubtful about that.

The Minister must make a full-blooded drive for recruitment to the Navy. He must offer some future to naval officers. It is very hard to see how four ships in our Navy can offer a future to senior naval officers with regard to promotion. It is quite obvious that we will have to have extra protection for our fisheries. We must be particularly concerned to see that our fisheries are not poached as much as they have been heretofore. If we are to become a member of the EEC we will have to abrogate some of our rights and permit people to fish within our territorial waters, according to the Treaty of Accession which was signed recently. The conditions are that the London agreement holds good and our territorial waters will ultimately be thrown open to other fleets.

We are not poached by EEC countries only. Anybody who goes to the east coast or the south coast when the herring are running will see practically the whole of Europe fishing there. We have the Soviet Union fishing there. We have Polish ships there and ships from all over the world pouring into those areas and enjoying the harvest of the sea. Therefore, the Navy having now been provided with ships that are at least fairly modern and not the laughing stock of the world as they were before, we shall eventually have to increase our Navy and be in a position to offer to Navy personnel better prospects than they have had heretofore. In the meantime, while we are recruiting personnel for these ships, there will be a hiatus in promotion for quite some time to come. I would suggest to the Minister that it would be well worth his while to make agreements with other navies for the purpose of training naval personnel so that we shall always have sufficient personnel to man the ships. Unless we increase our Navy we shall not be able to protect what we have, one of the richest fishing grounds, possibly in Europe today.

The ships we have could probably do a fairly serviceable job in that at least they can get on the spot without being seen miles away so that any marauding trawler can get out of territorial waters before it can be arrested and brought in. Insufficient use has been made of the limited Air Corps service for the purpose of acting as spotters to enable the Naval Service to get there as quickly as possible. We have approximately 2,000 miles of coastline to protect and even though we have three ships and even with the bigger training ship coming into commission, which can also be used for fishery protection work, the facilities for protecting our coastline are insufficient without the assistance of the Air Corps.

I hope the Minister will bear in mind that the immediate problem in regard to the Navy Service is recruitment. It must be made as attractive as possible, and it must be admitted that the Irish Naval Service has not got the same facilities as other naval services.

I would further suggest to the Minister for Defence—and it would not cost a great deal—that our naval ships should be allowed to pay visits to other ports and to associate with other navies. Foreign navies frequently come to Dublin, Cork and other ports around the coast, and there is no reason why our Navy should not be allowed to visit other countries in the same way. I gather from talking to Irish naval officers that everything that is ever suggested is always turned down or cut down because of expenses. As I have said, it is a must for the future, if we are to protect our fisheries, that we have an up-to-date, efficient and contented Navy Service.

Since I became a Deputy I have repeatedly asked questions about helicopters. It was one of the disgraces of our Defence Forces that if we wanted a helicopter we had to call in the British from the station in Northern Ireland. It would be singularly embarrassing for a Fianna Fáil Government if they still had to do that today. They have not. It has been found that a helicopter service is absolutely necessary for saving life, taking people to hospital and so forth. I am happy to note that a landing block is to be built at the Tuskar lightship to enable a helicopter to go there to take the personnel ashore. Very often they have to stay weeks and months beyond their time. I gather there is to be some extension of the helicopter service, but I am not very clear what this extension will be. We started off with three helicopters and now we have four. I speak subject to correction on that point, but whether we have four or not I feel we would require at least six helicopters. Again, that suggestion will be turned down on the grounds of expense. Everything that is of national benefit is always rejected on those grounds.

The Fianna Fáil Government have not hesitated to spend money on a great many things. They have never thought of economising in many directions in which they should have economised. The limitations of this debate do not permit me to extend the good advice to the Government as to where they should cut down their expenses, but I hope to do so at a later date on some other more open Estimate than this. In any case, I would ask the Minister for Defence to remember that one of his priorities is to acquire more helicopters.

The Government have also announced that they intend to recruit more personnel for the Army. It is regrettable that they had to be almost burried in redundancies before they decided to do that. One of their economies was to cut down on the Army. The Irish Army have played a great part in putting Ireland on the map. They have given magnificent service in Cyprus, the Congo and other parts of the world, and far from reducing the strength of the Army the Government should have had the intelligence to build up the Army. They have let it go down to dangerous proportions, but it is never too late to mend and one is glad to hear they are taking action in this direction.

I should like to join with other Deputies in pointing out to the Minister for Defence that there is no use in trying to get contented recruits for the Army unless two things are assured: first, that the equipment is absolutely modern—in this scientific age, with new inventions all the time, equipment is constantly changing; secondly, that the unfortunate personnel in the Army are dressed in some sort of decent clothes. I cannot understand why there has not been a revolution in the Army long ago because of the ghastly clothes they have to wear.

Mr. Malone

The Estimate has got a very good airing and I shall be very brief in the remarks I have to make on it. I have great sympathy for the Minister in so far as he is in charge of a Department which has been described already in this debate as the Cinderella of Government Departments. While the Minister requires a greater amount of money each year for his Department other commitments which the Government have to meet invariably take precedence over his Department. As we know only too well, if I may take two examples, the doctor and veterinary surgeon are never thought about when we do not need them, but when we need them we expect them to be at hand the moment we lift the phone or give their door bell a ring. Consequently, we find ourselves today with defence forces which are quite inadequate for modern needs should the occasion arise to call on them. The Minister now finds himself with completely inadequate forces, the Army lacking the modern equipment which is so necessary nowadays and almost immobile. I hope in the coming months he will be able to rectify this position but it needs to be done quickly. There is a view abroad that too many cooks spoil the broth and that there are too many civil servants looking after too few Army personnel.

We wish every success to the recruiting campaign which the Minister's Department will embark on shortly. The strength of the Army needs to be doubled. Unless it can be made attractive the Minister will find it hard to get the men he requires. Has the Minister ever stopped to think why the Army is not attractive? I have heard it said that when a recruiting campaign is on although the standard of education required is only 6th standard in the national school out of 100 who will apply as many as 20 are found to be illiterate and are rejected by the Army. We have educational facilities at the Curragh at the present time where men can continue their education after they join the Army and improve themselves. It is a pity that the young lads who are not up to the educational standard required cannot be retained because I am sure they would make good soldiers afterwards.

Lack of housing for Army personnel is a very great problem. In Kildare we have housed many soldiers but there is the great problem of overholders. Men who wish to get married find there is no housing available for them. The Minister should see that a very urgent crash programme to provide houses for Army personnel is embarked on.

There should only be one officer in charge of recruiting. It should be made very clear to men joining the Army that on completion of their training they can select the unit they wish to go to. The Minister will probably say that this is available at the moment. I am afraid it is not because a man can say when he joins the Army that he wishes to go to a particular unit but maybe when he is finished his training he might find that is not the one he is most suited to but he is stuck there. It would help in the recruiting campaign if it was made known to the applicants that on completion of their training they could decide at that stage what unit they wished to be put into.

The inadequacy of pensions will hinder recruiting. At the moment there are only very meagre pensions given. Many Army personnel even find themselves without any pension. I came across a man recently who gave the best years of his life to the Army but he was discharged for health reasons. He was told he would be hearing about his pension. His health improved and he went to England and obtained a job. He kept writing home to inquire if there was any word from the Army about his pension. He has never heard from the Army and after many representations having being made, the Department now claim that he is not entitled to a pension. That may be an isolated case but, nevertheless, there is a feeling that after men have given the best years of their lives to the State they are very badly treated when they leave.

The Minister and his Department have some say in the newly-formed Bord na gCapall. As far as I know it is under the aegis of the Department of Defence, the Department of Finance and the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries. It is a pity it is not assigned to one particular Department. We have the Army jumping team, which we hope will continue to bring new honours to Ireland in the future, based in the Curragh and I feel that the headquarters of Bord na gCapall should be set up there, where it would be convenient to the National Stud, which is a showpiece for our hunters and ponies. A great number of visitors come to the National Stud every year. The manager there told me that visitors very often ask where they can see Connemara ponies and Irish hunters. When visitors look at thoroughbreds they then want to see ponies which are suitable for children. Bord na gCapall and the National Stud should be able to work hand in hand and the Curragh is the place to set this organisation up. The Minister might have the idea of bringing it to Cork but while we might get very good horses there I do not think that is the place for the headquarters of this organisation.

When we discussed the Estimate last year I referred to the fact that there were two organisations on the Curragh dealing with the Curragh grasslands. I do not believe there has been anything done in the last 12 months to make any progress in that regard. We have thousands of acres there at the moment with very little grassland. The Minister is responsible for grazing there and there are organisations there willing to improve the grasslands but I do not see any sign of co-operation from the Minister's Department in this regard. The Minister should look into this matter immediately. The farmers will co-operate. Co-operation by the Minister would be of benefit to both farmers and the State.

Mr. Clinton

I have already spoken on the main Estimate but there are a few matters to which I would like to refer, having listened to the speeches made and having thought about them.

It has been said many times from these benches that defence and the security of the State should not be regarded as party political matters. They are the concern of everyone. We should examine the question of defence in that light. It is regrettable that it is not accepted in that way. This is emphasised in many ways to which one could draw attention. We have spoken strongly from these benches about weaknesses in relation to defence. This was not done just to criticise the Government in power for the time being. It was done because it was felt that it is essential that the people should know of the existing weaknesses in order to be prepared for the necessary taxation needed in order to equip the Army properly and to provide the numbers necessary for proper security.

The Leader of our party expressed the view this morning that serious consideration should be given to a short, compulsory period of training for all young men. Deputy Cosgrave suggested that the training should take place in two successive years for a period of three months each time so that the education of those intending to avail of higher education would not be upset. Every country in Europe has this compulsory training. It is reasonable and fair. Security is everybody's concern and responsibility. There are many young men who would benefit by such training and by a period of such discipline. I am speaking from my own short experience in the Army. The Minister should consider carefully the question of compulsory Army training.

In the course of the debate on the economic situation and on unemployment the Taoiseach promised that there would be a recruiting campaign for the Army. Perhaps the Minister would tell the House how this campaign will be conducted and how he can make it more attractive for young people to join the Army so that people will not just join the Army because they are unemployed. People should be encouraged to join the Army because it will give them a good living.

One Deputy drew attention to the fact that we do not recruit married men. This places a serious restriction on the number of people we can get into the Army. A married man would cost the State more than a single man, but people are getting married at a younger age nowadays. A new field for recruitment would be opened up by accepting married men. Such a move would bring more people into the Army than we have been able to recruit in campaigns in the past. I would like to hear the Minister dealing with the steps he is taking to get the recruiting campaign under way. Over-duty is driving people out of the Army today. Too few people are being asked to do too much. There are tough and unpleasant duties in relation to the Border at the present time. Our responsibilities in this regard are bound to increase as steps are being taken for the reunification which must inevitably come. On this occasion there is no going back. The British Government already recognise this fact. A period is coming when we will need a strong Army. Otherwise, irresponsible groups will take over. If we have not succeeded in doing anything in our recent debates and discussions in this House other than arousing the interest of the people in regard to the importance of the Army when the chips are down and the importance of having at all times proper strength in the armed forces, we will have done some good.

I have noticed a new awareness about An Slua Mhuirí. This happened because people in that force had reached the point where the commanders were about to approach, or had approached, the Minister to say that the force should be stood down if nothing could be done to give them the necessary equipment. If properly equipped this force could provide a useful service. If my information is correct, it is possible to get the type of vessels they need at a low price through the British Navy at present. The British Navy have many of these vessels and are prepared to sell them at very low prices. This gives us an opportunity of buying them and giving An Slua Mhuirí the role which they deserve. We should not pretend that there is something in the Army which does not exist and which could not be relied on in times of emergency. Everybody would criticise and say that there was no real preparation for the day of crisis.

Harbour and port protection duties, as well as minesweeping, could be performed by An Slua Mhuirí. The minesweepers which we have purchased for fishery protection are more suitable for such work. It is better to have them than to have no vessels for fishery protection. Perhaps the Minister would tell the House whether he is satisfied that the four minesweepers and the vessel which has been built at Cork recently can be regarded as adequate fishery protection. Everyone feels that we will require more fishery protection now in view of the EEC fishery agreements. Will we be able to man these four vessels? Are there enough officers and, if not, what is the Minister going to do about that situation? What is the reason for the shortage of officers in the Naval Service? Is it because they are paid less than the officers in the Army? Does the Minister intend to rectify this position? Is there any quicker way of manning these vessels than taking in raw recruits and training them? Have we people who have had some experience in Slua Mhuirí who could be brought in for a period of intensive training and who could, with a few trained officers, man these vessels, or help to man them?

That is a channel that should be explored. It would incidentally be giving people in Slua Mhuirí experience they badly need. I imagine there are people there who would be prepared to take on this type of duty for short periods of from 12 months to two years. This suggestion should be considered seriously and not be turned down. If that sort of offer is made by people in Slua Mhuirí, it should be accepted. Apart from the service they could give, it would eliminate the reason for their becoming dissatisfied and disgruntled.

I hope to hear the Minister deal in detail with fishery protection. It is becoming a matter of great importance to the country. Our fisheries have expanded and are expanding and the income from them is of vital importance to us. A lot of people have been extremely courageous in the amount of money they have borrowed to buy boats. Coupled with it is the State's investment, which is quite substantial, in the form of grants to fishermen to buy boats and gear. We should ensure that everything possible is done to improve fishery protection. The Minister must get credit when it is due and I must say that he has taken steps in this direction. Whether they are adequate remains to be seen.

Many people say that our fishery protection service is still inadequate. They say that the three minesweepers are not all-weather vessels which can go out in bad weather. We now have a new boat and I hope that we will then have at least one vessel capable of moving out on rough seas in bad weather.

In reference to this, the Minister recently had a naming ceremony for the new vessel. Would it have been too much to expect him to invite the spokesmen in the Labour Party and in this party to join him on that occasion? That is the way we should be working. It is a way to show that all of us are interested and that all of us wish to be involved. It would not be expecting too much from the Minister that when an occasion of this kind arises he should let it be seen it is an occasion of importance and that it is so regarded by all parties in the House.

Last year we began to pay visits to Army establishments and recently I had a chance to visit Ballymoney in County Wicklow. There were refugees there. All of us could get a better idea of the conditions in which Army personnel are working and their deficiencies if these visits could be extended. We would then be able to speak more intelligently and understandingly on the subject. Things should not be made difficult for Deputies who wish to visit Army establishments. They should be able to ring up somebody in the Department and say: "I should like to go down tomorrow or the next day to visit an Army establishment or two." Like everybody else in public life, I cannot say I will do something three weeks or a month hence. In this matter long notice should not be necessary and I should like to hear the Minister say it can be arranged that Deputies can visit Army establishments at short notice. If I am to do it I should like to bring a Deputy from the constituency with me, at least one Deputy, because I think it is only common courtesy that that should be done.

I wish to refer briefly to the sale of Army property, Army barracks, in the country generally. I have only one reason for doing so. I refer particularly to Dublin where we have so many establishments which are all old —of course, this goes for the whole country. When we have an opportunity of getting big money for Army property that is obsolete in the extreme I suggest we should take advantage of the present high prices and get these properties valued with a view to selling them and then, immediately, building modern barrack accomodation. I suppose we have not built barracks for one hundred years. Those we have are so old and obsolete that it is difficult to get people to live in them. They certainly do not provide the ordinary comforts people enjoy in their homes today.

Along with that there should be some sort of campaign in regard to housing accommodation. Deputy Malone referred to the difficulties in Kildare. I assure him they are not confined to Kildare. They exist in Dublin. Every week I have letters from people who are over-staying their time in Army houses and cannot get out because nobody accepts responsibility for giving them alternative accommodation. I refer in particular to people who have served 40 years or so and whose families have left them. They are down to two or three people.

It is almost impossible to get this dealt with in Dublin. Regularly I get letters from Dublin Corporation stating that in cases where there are families with four children living in one room they will be considered for accommodation when it becomes available but warning me that they have many such cases under consideration. Where you have that backlog it is impossible to get local authorities to accommodate people who are overholding Army accommodation if they have smaller families. The Army will have to accept responsibility for people who have given the State service over a long period. We cannot just reject them and say: "You are no longer any good to us. It is time you got out and made your own way in the world outside."

I know the Minister wants to get in to reply and I think he should be allowed to do so at this stage.

Minister for Defence (Mr. Cronin)

I am obliged to Deputies for the interest they have shown and for their contributions. It is clearly evident from the quality and tone of the contributions that there is a correct and keen awareness in the House of the great importance of our providing the best possible security at this juncture. I want to say as well how appreciative I am of the compliments to the Defence Forces. They are well deserved tributes to men who are performing a task of extreme importance and responsibility in difficult circumstances.

Since the main debate began in December, the most significant development has been the withdrawal of some of our men from Cyprus. A Government decision was taken to withdraw 250 of that contingent, leaving a balance of 140 men to continue to participate in the peace-keeping mission there. Many considerations enter into the question of continued participation in the UN peace-keeping mission and this has been a matter of constant review, particularly in the light of circumstances here at the moment.

Some Deputies referred to the effectiveness of our Defence Forces. Deputies Clinton and Byrne referred to this in particular and I want to put on record the strength figures of the Defence Forces at the 31st of last month. The numbers amounted to 8,983, comprising 1.114 officers, 3,021 NCOs and 4,848 privates.

The question of recruitment was raised and I am again appreciative of the good wishes of the Fine Gael and Labour speakers for the success of the recruiting campaign. So far it has been progressing satisfactorily. The intake amounts to about 100 per month. This is a net figure having taken into account the usual military wastage. Of course, recruitment is a continuing process and with a view to improving the normal flow of recruits to the Army local measures were put in hands some time ago to stimulate the intake of personnel. Arrangements have now been made to broaden this limited recruiting to a full-scale national recruiting drive. Deputy Clinton said that the House should be informed as to what is being done to attract young people to the Army. I can say that the pay and conditions of military personnel have been considerably improved in recent times. They have been stepped up to match the improvements in the standards of other sectors of the community. To back up the recruitment programme which is already taking place an intensive campaign will be launched beginning on 1st February or, perhaps, before that date through the Press, radio and television. This campaign will be continued until March, 1972.

The equipment of the military forces was mentioned by a number of Deputies, particularly Deputy Clinton. As the House knows, in addition to the provisions of the Estimate of last year an additional £1.7 million was provided specifically for the purchase of additional equipment and transport for the Defence Forces. The continuing programme to modernise and build up a holding of equipment of all types, adequate to meet the Defence Forces requirements and mainly in the areas of weaponry, transport and radio, received an extra impetus this year. Additional equipment has been ordered mainly for delivery within this financial year, and a supplementary Estimate will be introduced which will include provision for these purchases. These are above and beyond the provisions of the Estimate of last year.

Another important matter raised by Deputy Cooney was the Council of Defence. Concern has been expressed in the House on previous occasions at the fact that there has not been any formal meeting of the Council of Defence for some time but as Deputies well know the personnel of this council are readily available to the Minister at all times and many meetings with the individuals and with two or more members of the council have taken place from time to time. This is normal practice. While a formal meeting, as such, has not been held the advice of the members of the Defence Council has been available and has been availed of at all times.

The present strength of the FCA was also referred to. The effective strength on 31st December was 19.430 comprising 678 officers, 3.508 NCOs and 15.694 privates. There is, of course, by the very nature of the FCA structure a continuous wastage and, correspondingly, additional numbers coming into the force.

The question of uniforms was raised by Deputy Cooney. This is another very important aspect. I want it to be known that a new cloth has been manufactured and it will be introduced when present stocks of the old type uniforms have been absorbed.

Mr. Tully

They would need to burn another couple of hundred.

Mr. Cronin

A very attractive uniform has been designed, acceptable and and attractive to the men. In the interests of economy it is only sensible and correct that existing stocks should be used up before there is a total introduction of the new type uniform. Some criticism was voiced of the uniform of the Army band. This, in my opinion, is completely unjustified because the uniform of the band has been the subject of very favourable comment from people from time to time. I think this is one matter of which we need not take too much notice.

Deputy Cooney expressed the wish that FCA married personnel should be admitted to the permanent Defence Forces. I am pleased to say that an arrangement is planned that subject to certain specific service and training requirements married FCA personnel, up to the age of 28 years, will be admitted to the permanent Defence Force. Deputy Clinton said that nowadays people are getting married younger so we should take in large numbers of the FCA who are suitably qualified in other respects.

Mr. Tully

Would the Minister consider the re-admission of people who have service in the Army, have gone out and are anxious to come back from the cold, cruel world outside?

Mr. Cronin

There is a provision for the re-admission of former serving personnel in the Army.

Mr. Tully

Provided they have not got a certain number of children.

Mr. Cronin

This is not a condition of their re-admission. Personnel who have had previous service are re-admitted.

Mr. Tully

All of them?

Mr. Cronin

There is an age condition.

Mr. Tully

Up to what age?

Mr. Cronin

Thirty-eight I think. I would not commit myself to a figure.

Mr. Tully

I heard of a fellow of 29 with six children, a sergeant, who would not be re-admitted.

Mr. Cronin

Deputy Cooney referred to the advancement of officers. He appeared to be concerned about promotion and seniority. Before a line officer is promoted to senior rank he must pass the Command and Staff course. Professional officers must be certified by the Chief of Staff as having a suitable standard of professional training and experience for promotion. There is a very strict basis for promotion to senior rank.

The question of military acommodation has been referred to on many occasions in the past. There, again, there is a continuing process subject to the availability of money from year to year and improvements at the various posts have been carried out. I hope and expect that the rate of progress will be greatly stepped up. This is subject naturally to the availability of moneys for that purpose.

As regards military locations in Dublin, the cold hard fact emerges that until such time as the Defence Forces can be assured of suitable alternative accommodation they will not give up the property they occupy in Dublin. I am hopeful that an arrangement will be possible under which a new barracks will be guaranteed for the Defence Forces on their vacating the very valuable properties they now occupy. This is something to which I look forward. It is something the military desire and it is something the Government, as a whole, would wish. The properties vacated would, I think, fully compensate for the establishment of one new barracks.

Mr. Clinton

It would be extremely sensible.

Mr. Cronin

It would. It is a matter which has given me much concern. I am hopeful the negotiations will result in a modern barracks being built. That will benefit the nation and the properties vacated will be very valuable to those who take them over.

Deputy Clinton, Deputy Tully and Deputy Byrne referred to the inadequacies of the Air Corps. I can assure the House that I am giving very serious consideration to this matter and particularly to the question of purchasing additional aircraft. The Air Corps is both useful and valuable and I am conscious of its potential. Within the available financial resources every effort will be made to ensure that the Air Corps receives its due attention, with particular emphasis on the desirability of purchasing additional aircraft. We are fully mindful of its deficiencies and we hope to be able to do something substantial to solve this particular problem in the not too distant future.

Mr. Tully

Is it true there is no antiaircraft practice?

Mr. Cronin

We have a problem in connection with that.

Mr. Tully

The Minister has not even got the old plane that used to drag around Gormanston and keep me awake.

Mr. Cronin

There are many priorities and we must keep our priorities right. The Air Corps is receiving very keen attention. I have indicated my intentions and expectations in connection with it.

Mr. Tully

How do they engage in anti-aircraft practice on the ground?

Mr. Cronin

I suppose any practice is better than none.

Mr. Tully

But how can they?

Mr. Cronin

Deputy Byrne expressed concern about the purchase of ex-British Army uniforms. No ex-British Army uniforms have been purchased. When it was necessary to buy combat uniforms in 1969 they had to be purchased from abroad because no tender was received from any Irish firm invited to submit quotations. A total of 2,000 combat suits were purchased, 50 having been bought in 1968, for training purposes. All the other uniforms, representing more than half the total cost, are supplied by Irish firms. We are mindful of how essential it is that materials and uniforms should, as far as is humanly possible, be manufactured at home. Only in very exceptional circumstances will that particular policy be changed.

Mr. Tully

In no circumstances should they be bought abroad. Surely a query to Irish firms would solve the problem.

Mr. Cronin

We explore the Irish market to its limits and we give exceptional facilities to Irish manufacturers.

Mr. Tully

Were the orders big enough?

Mr. Cronin

They were. Deputy Tully inquired about the age qualification of married personnel who wish to re-enlist. It is 38 years of age.

Mr. Tully

Fair enough. A man is too old for anything now at 40, according to the State.

Mr. Clinton

It is just as well that does not apply to public representatives.

Mr. Cronin

As has been stated, the primary role of the Army is the defence of the State against external aggression and helping the Civil Power when the occasion necessitates such help. The latter is one of the main tasks of our Defence Forces at the moment and all credit is due to the military personnel so engaged for both good judgment and common sense. Recently I visited four important posts on the Border and I found there a tremendous enthusiasm. The soldiers obviously relished being engaged in the task for which they enlisted. It was gratifying to observe the energy and enthusiasm and, indeed, the self-sacrifice of the troops at these posts.

Mr. Tully

Because there was some point in their actual service.

Mr. Cronin

That is correct. This all adds up to very high morale on the part of the troops engaged in Border activities. It was a very enlightening exercise for me.

Mr. Tully

Is the Minister aware there was another incident there today?

Mr. Cronin

Yes.

Mr. Tully

And is he aware how essential it is to ensure that something serious does not happen?

Mr. Cronin

The Defence Forces have also been engaged in the very important task of guarding installations. The FCA have rendered invaluable assistance in this connection. They have greatly relieved the heavy strain on the permanent Defence Force. In the main, they performed their duties in a very military-like fashion. They have made a major contribution to this particular aspect of security.

Deputy Cosgrave made specific reference to the FCA. It is the hope and expectation to involve this force more deeply in the day-to-day activities of the Defence Forces. I hope there will be greater involvement by the FCA in duties such as guarding Border posts and in the other duties performed by the Defence Forces. Deputy Dowling suggested that fatigue duties should be abolished.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.