asked the Minister for Defence if any ceremonies are planned to mark the 50th year of the existence of the National Army.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Army Anniversary Ceremonies.
59.
I propose to have consideration given in due course to the question of marking appropriately the 50th anniversary of the day fixed for the establishment of the Forces under the Defence Forces (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1923, that is 1st October, 1924.
If "consideration in due course" in the context of the Department of Defence means what it has meant in the past, the 50th anniversary will have passed before any action is taken.
That is the Deputy's interpretation. I am acting in accordance with an Act of Parliament.
The year 1972 will have passed before anything is done in this regard.
The year 1974 will not have gone by.
Is the Minister implying that there was no national army prior to 1924?
The Defence Forces (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1923, provided, among other things, that it shall be lawful for the Executive Council to raise and maintain an armed force to be called Óglaigh na hÉireann consisting of such number of officers, non-commissioned officers and men as may from time to time be provided by the Oireachtas. Section 22 of the Act provides that the Forces shall be established as from a date to be fixed by Proclamation of the Executive Council in the Iris Oifigiúil. The date fixed in accordance with section 22 of the Act was 1st October, 1924, and that shall be commemorated suitably.
Is the Minister not aware that there were properly constituted forces in existence in this State acting under the orders of a lawful and properly elected Government prior to that Act? Is the Minister denying that the forces led by General Michael Collins was not an army of the State?
And by General Seán MacEoin?
Now that celebrations have taken place to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the Garda Síochána, would it not be proper that the men who founded this State and kept it alive should be commemorated also? When this question was asked before, the Government ignored it. Is it not about time that the Army which operated under the first Government of this country was honoured suitably?
I am afraid the Deputy is making mileage out of something that is not there. I am working within the provisions of Parliament and I intend to continue to do so.
I want a "Yes" or "No" answer from the Minister. Was there not a legitimate Army of the State subject to the order of a lawfully elected Government in existence prior to the Statute to which the Minister referred?
I will reply to the Deputy by asking why this Act was necessary.
The Army were established in 1922.
A little latitude at this stage would not be out of place.
Is it not the position that members of that first Army were pensioned off from a date in 1922? Surely, then, it was a properly constituted Army.