Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 5 Nov 1975

Vol. 285 No. 7

Vote 44: Defence.

I move:

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £10,376,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1975, 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 certain grants-in-aid.

The main Estimate for Defence for the financial year ending on 31st December, 1975, which was passed by the Dáil on 15th May, 1975, was for a net sum of £48,946,000. The Supplementary Estimate which I am now introducing is for an additional sum of £10,376,000. Included in this amount is the sum of £6,029,000 to cover the cost of increases in pay and allowances granted to members of the Defence Forces, to civilian employees attached to Army units, and to the civil service staff of the Department. The balance of £4,347,000 is attributable mainly to the intake of recruits to the Permanent Defence Force; to the employment of members of the First Line Reserve on full-time service and of the FCA on additional duties. Increased compensation payments and social welfare insurance contributions, increased expenditure in respect of supplies and equipment for the Defence Forces due to the carry over of commitments from the previous financial period ended 31st December, 1974, price increases, and outstanding orders being met more rapidly than expected, are other factors necessitating this Supplementary Estimate.

Under subhead A—Office of the Minister for Defence: salaries wages and allowances—the sum of £126,000 is required to meet the cost of pay increases, £113,000, and increased overtime and social welfare employers' contributions, £13,000. There is provision for an additional sum of £5,100,000 under subhead B —Permanent Defence Force: pay— due to the cost of pay increases, £4,167,000, and increased strengths of the Permanent Defence Force, £933,000. The additional sum of £940,000 required under subhead C— Permanent Defence Force: allowances—is to meet the cost of increases in the rates of certain allowances. The sum of £1,414,000 is required under subhead D—Reserve Defence Force: pay, etc.—to meet the cost of increases in pay and allowances and the extra cost of members of the Reserve of Officers and Men, First Line, on full time service and of the FCA, on additional duties. There is provision for an additional £8,000 for pay increases under subhead E—chaplains and officiating clergymen: pay and allowances. Pay increases and the cost of extra posts account for the additional sum of £693,000 required under subhead F—Civilians attached to units: pay, etc. An additional £850,000 is required under subhead V—insurance —for increased employers' contributions under the Social Welfare Acts.

The additional sums required under subhead H—defensive equipment— £60,000; subhead J—mechanical transport—£65,000; subhead K— provisions—£393,000; subhead L— petrol, fuel, oils, etc.—£180,000; subhead R—solid fuels, electricity, gas and water—£175,000; subhead Y— Post Office services—£106,000; and subhead AA—military educational courses and visits—£17,000, are due mainly to increased costs.

Substantial increases under subhead M—clothing and equipment— £371,000; and subhead T—barrack services—£272,000, are due mainly to outstanding orders being met more rapidly than anticipated.

The additional sum of £59,000 required under subhead P—naval stores—includes the cost of repair work to a minesweeper and a provision of £10,000 for marine pollution counter-measures. Under subhead BB—Irish Red Cross Society (Grant-in-Aid)—an additional sum of £32,000 is required to meet increased costs and extra expenditure in respect of the Emergency Relief Fund. Provision has also been made for an additional £111,000 under subhead CC—compensation—which is required for increased compensation payments.

The total excess of £11,052,000, including a deficiency of £80,000 in receipts from Appropriations-in-Aid is partially offset by savings estimated at £676,000. The main savings are in subhead OI—general stores— £339,000, due to a delay in the delivery of Fouga jet aircraft; in subhead S—buildings—£307,000, due to delays in certain building works and in subhead DD—lands—£30,000, due to property purchases being less than anticipated. The deficiency of £80,000 under Appropriations-in-Aid comprises shortfalls in receipts, £144,000, from sales of hides and offals, payments in respect of discharge by purchase, refunds in respect of treatment and maintenance of patients in military hospitals and miscellaneous receipts, partially offset by additional receipts, £64,000, from sales of lands, sales of surplus stores and from issues on repayment.

I would like to take this opportunity to mention that the recruiting campaign which has been in progress since early last year is continuing to be very successful. Its success is a measure of the attraction of Army life now and Deputies can assure any suitable young men in their constituencies, who may be contemplating joining the Army that, if they enlist, they will enjoy pay and conditions which compare very favourably with those obtainable in civilian life. They will also have the satisfaction of serving their country in a very worthwhile way as members of the Defence Forces which are at present playing such a vital part in ensuring the security of the State and in safeguarding the rights of its citizens.

There is also before the House a Supplementary Estimate of £205,000 for Army Pensions, the main Vote for which is a net sum of £10,337,000. The Supplementary Estimate comprises £259,000 for increased pensions, gratuities and compensation, plus £61,000 for increased grants in respect of free travel and free electricity allowances, offset by increased Appropriations-in-Aid of £7,000 and savings of £108,000.

Under subhead B—wound and disability pensions and gratuities, etc.— an additional £45,000 is required to meet the cost of new and increased disability pensions of retired members of the Permanent Defence Force and veterans of the War of Independence.

A sum of £207,000 is required under subhead E—Defence Force pensions schemes—mainly to allow payment of increased pensions and gratuities to ex-members of the Permanent Defence Force consequent on the application of a 5 per cent increase in pay retrospective to the 1st April, 1974.

Under subhead L, which provides for compensation in respect of members of the forces whose disability or death is due to service with the United Nations, only a token sum had been provided in the Vote. Compensation has however been paid in respect of disabilities which were found to be attributable to service with the United Nations. A sum of £7,000, which sum is eventually recoverable from the United Nations, is required to cover the compensation paid.

The £61,000 under subhead M— free travel, electricity and television licences—is necessary because of increased expenditure on bus and rail fares, £53,000, and ESB charges, £8,000.

The adjustment in subhead O— Appropriations-in-Aid—represents contributions to the pension scheme for widows and children which are deducted from the gratuities of retiring officers.

I apologise for the absence of our spokesman on Defence, Deputy Dowling. I am sure the Minister will understand that his absence is out of no disrespect to him.

The Minister must receive the support of the House when he mentions the continuing success of the recruiting campaign and his urging on Deputies, when they return to their constituencies, to promote the attractions of Army life and induce as many young people into the Army as possible. There is no doubt but that the Army, the only lawful democratic armed force of this nation, has not been found wanting in its service to the nation. There has been their distinguished record of service in the present difficult circumstance and indeed one must advert to their increasing use in aid of the civil power. Mention must be made of the increasing cost of maintaining the Army in aid of that power. If there is a very serious situation existing at present it is that the security of the State can be described, without being too, hysterical about it, as somewhat under siege. In these circumstances the Garda Síochána and the Army play a complementary role, both of which have discharged their functions well in present circumstances.

It is well to point out that the Minister is seeking an amount of £10,376,000 in addition to the moneys already provided. Of that money sought there is an amount in excess of £1 million for the use of the Defence Forces themselves in areas of security, the Reserve Defence Forces and Fórsa Cosanta Aitiúil.

It is as well to point out to those who might wish to subvert the institutions of this country that, as long as their attacks continue, they will be resisted within the capabilities of what law enforcement agencies are available. As long as these illegal organisations exist then extra moneys must be provided to ensure that such law enforcement agencies are kept on full alert, moneys which could be well diverted to other areas badly in need of them—education, the social services, health, right across the whole spectrum of society. As long as the security of the State demands the full alert of our law enforcement agencies, then moneys must be provided to ensure that they receive whatever they need in the circumstances. It is unfortunate indeed that such people who would maintain a situation such as that on a continuing basis would not recognise that, by so keeping those agencies at full alert, they are diverting moneys so badly needed in other areas.

There is a philosophy which states that the Army is provided and maintained to ensure the security of the State. This is as it should be, must be and will continue to be. Apart from its eventually offensive role—using that word in the proper context, "offensive" in the sense of coming forward to deal with a particular situation that arises, maintaining the security of the State from attack—and indeed its defensive role, the Army must be supported and continue to be supported by those people who believe in the importance of the democratic institutions of this nation.

Having said all that one returns to the recent exposé by the Fianna Fáil spokesman on Defence, Deputy Dowling, and relate that exposé to the attempt by the Government, in the present climate, to make a virtue out of one of their basic functions, namely, to secure our country from external and internal attack. Deputy Dowling rightly exposed the Minister for Defence in the matter of Army promotions, when it was quite clearly indicated that the Minister was attempting to play politics in that situation. It is very difficult to measure this against the Taoiseach's Louisburg speech on law and order. Politics are an important ingredient in any democratic society.

I am proud to be a politician and part of the society which provides the political framework of which I can be a part and of which my party can be a part. Nevertheless, there is a proper place for politics. I believe that the Army is not the place for the type of politics the present Minister for Defence was found to be engaged in. Our belief on this side of the House was ably and tenaciously exposed by Deputy Joe Dowling, spokesman on Defence. Playing at politics is harmful to the discipline of the Army at any level. That exposure having been accepted, if not by the Minister certainly by some members of the Government, it is very difficult to reconcile it with the Taoiseach's "law and order" speech in Louisbourg. The Taoiseach last Sunday night at 10 o'clock in the square at Louisbourg seems to have forgotten what happened in the past two-and-a-half years in this country. Whilst the most important aspect of law and order is maintaining the security of the country and ensuring the physical freedom of every single individual within that country, "law and order" so glibly used by the present Government also extends to our democratic institutions, and when the democratic institutions appear to be disordered by the ruthless placing of one's political pals within those structures, then disorder and cynicism effectively set in.

The Deputy is forgetting the arms trial and the Civil War.

Order, please, Deputy Andrews without interruption.

No. I have forgotten none of those things at all, but Deputy Coughlan, who is a fairminded man——

Sometimes—the Deputy's own words. He will reject hypocrisy, and my premise, particularly in the last ten days—whisper it, there is an election in Mayo—is that the Government have been making a special virtue of maintaining the law and security——

Not alone in Mayo but throughout the country.

——have been making a special virtue of maintaining the law and security of this country.

That was the result of the arms trial.

It is well to remind Deputies that in December, 1972, the present upholders of law and order—with two honourable exceptions, the Taoiseach and the Minister for Defence, his one remaining loyal comrade—roundly condemned the Bill which the Fianna Fáil Government saw it as their duty to enact and which was passed on that evening when the bombs went off. That is a matter of historical record. Any Government doing their duty to the elected representatives, to the electorate and to the nation must maintain the law and the security of the nation. As long as the Government continue to make a virtue of that, then we must follow them and expose them for their humbug and hypocrisy.

We in our party believe that the continual harping on the law and order issue may cause concern and, perhaps, panic in the minds of people. Let the Government get on with the job of ensuring the security of this State without making a special virtue of it, breast beating, triumphalism. Certainly they have the propaganda apparatus to put it on a pedestal.

We are taking a leaf out of your own book.

I do not understand what the Deputy is saying.

The matter is irrelevent to what is before the House. Debate is confined to the subheads, in the Supplementary Estimates.

There is just one final point on this, and one must advert to it. The day after the Taoiseach's speech in Louisburg there was a sum of £40,000 stolen——

This has nothing to do with the Estimates.

——in the Deputy's city, and £3,000 stolen here in Dublin.

Would Deputy Andrews listen to the Chair and deal with the items in the Supplementary Estimates?

We on this side of the House, in the light of the continued dedication of the Army, do not intend, naturally enough, opposing the money being sought by the Minister. Again, it comes back to the role of an opposition and its responsibility to the nation in a time of crisis. There are a number of items the Minister might specifically deal with. There is a sum of £111,000 under subhead CC—Compensation— additional sum required for increased compensation payments. Again, I am at a disadvantage in the sense that the spokesman would have a deeper knowledge of the subject under discussion than myself.

I also see under subhead Z— Appropriations-in-Aid—that there is a deficiency in the sale of hides and offals of £6,000. This is a small sum but is of undoubted interest to those concerned with the Defence Forces. I note it will cost us more to get to heaven. The pay and allowances of the chaplains and officiating clergymen is to be increased by a sum of £8,000. The ways of the Lord are, in human terms, not to be left untouched by inflation. Consequently these good people are to receive their just due from mankind.

There is an urgent need for Deputies to use every opportunity to point out to young people the need to join the Army. It is as well to include in that call our Naval Services. The Minister mentioned the Navy in his speech when he said that the additional sum required under subhead B—Naval Stores—includes the cost of repair work to the minesweeper and the provision of £10,000 for marine pollution countermeasures. If marine pollution was not such a serious subject one would consider that a sum of £10,000 in the context is derisory.

It is equally important to remember that in addition to the Army we have the Navy and when we call on young people to join the Army it is as well to point out that we also have a Navy, even though we believe it is not provided with sufficient equipment. The basic equipment of any Navy is boats. It is important to increase the role of the Navy. The Navy are very much used on fishery protection work. I believe that the corvettes should be mother ships for smaller vessels. The smaller vessels could operate nearer to shore. Perhaps the Minister might consider the use of many more smaller vessels for fishery protection work. If our trawlers can go to sea in force 7 or force 8 weather why can we not consider the possibility of converting some of the trawlers provided by Bord Iascaigh Mhara and built by Irishmen to protect our inland and off-shore fisheries? I should like the Minister to tell us the number of vessels engaged in fishery protection.

It is not fair to blame the Navy personnel for the lack of fishery protection because they are only given a small number of ships and can only do the job within their available resources. Fishing has become one of our great natural resources and we must protect our fisheries against intruders who use the rich off-shore waters to feather their national nests. I feel it is important that a large number of small type vessels be provided. They could be provided at much less cost than the corvettes. BIM, through their shipbuilding agencies, could provide those vessels.

We have the capacity in the country to do almost anything and we have the technology and the brains. Perhaps at the moment we lack finance. That brings me back to what I said about the redeployment of badly needed finances from several areas to ensure the internal security of the country. It is as well to be fair to the Minister for Defence that he has, like his predecessor in office Deputy Jerry Cronin, shown a concern for the well-being of the Army. He has continued with his predecessor's policy of ensuring the welfare of our soldiers and he has continued with pay increases. Would it not be as well for the Minister to state as often as possible the wages available to young people going into the Army at non-commissioned and commissioned levels? I believe they are fairly good. The Minister should publicise the wages offered in the first instance and also what they will increase to over a period of years. I hope he will deal with that matter when he is replying for the record of the House and for the knowledge of Deputies whom he calls on to propagandise the usefulness of joining the Army.

There is a matter on which I find myself in agreement with the Minister. The Army should not be used as an alternative, where somebody who is found guilty of a crime is told he should join the Army or go to England. I reject that. The view of this side of the House is that the Army is an honourable and decent profession and nobody should be ashamed to join it. The Army helps to develop character, it provides discipline and an outdoor life and there is an opportunity for advancement, however slow.

Perhaps the Minister would deal with the Buggins' turn syndrome; there appears to be an impression amoung the lay community that promotion in the Army is somewhat slow. I have already dealt with the other aspect of what the Minister was engaging in and which was discovered. As a lay man looking at the Army I can only point out the impression among the public about the Army, with particular reference to the Buggins' turn syndrome and this is not altogether a good thing. If we want to prevent the feeling of cynicism among our people against politicians we must ensure that promotion is on merit alone. If we can get that message across we will be a better nation.

I should like to pay a special tribute to the Army, to the Reserve Defence Force and to the FCA. The FCA is an organisation that is often excluded from praise of the law enforcement agencies. It is a part-time defence force. I am a great believer in young people; there is an Irish saying, "Mol an oige agus tiocfaidh sí." We should praise and help the young; they are impatient. The FCA provides a perfect example of what the young can do. They perform a patriotic duty, where after their working week of five or six days, they engage in exercises to defend electrical installations or some other vital areas. Their's is a good and decent attitude and it is an active form of patriotism. We should encourage our young people to engage in such work.

The Army is a good and decent occupation and the rates of pay are not bad. Perhaps the Minister would publicity state the rates of pay. He referred to the success of the recruitment campaign. If it is not against the national interests, perhaps the Minister would tell us about the officer corps and the non-commissioned men who make up the Army and the numbers of recruits in the last 12 months. This would show young people that there is a move to join the Army, that a young man has a proud task to perform there. The Minister might produce those figures if he can although I realise he may not be in a position to do so.

These are just some points which concern us within the limits of what is before the House. It is understandable that the debate has to be somewhat curtailed; we have to pay attention to the Rules of the House and we have to operate within the limitations of those Rules and the possible strictures of the Chair.

I wish to congratulate the Minister on the manner in which he has handled his Department since he took it over. We have had other Ministers for Defence, some good and others not so good, but the present Minister has spent more time with the Army and he has taken a special interest in the manoeuvres and the exercises undertaken. That is evident to anyone who has an interest in national defence. We must congratulate the Minister on the interest he has displayed in the Army since he took office.

I come from what used to be a garrison city. In Limerick we have the Sarsfield Barracks and I am in constant touch with all ranks there and I have never had a complaint about conditions. They are all a very happy family. Naturally at times men have to be disciplined—that happens in this House also—but discipline is meted out in a fair way. If people go too far extreme measures have to be adopted and they have to be given their ticket but the general feeling in the Army is one of contentment with regard to the conditions. They are satisfied with their rates of pay.

Deputy Andrews was not acquainted with the rates of pay but they have got wide publicity for quite a considerable time. An item on television set out the rate of pay for a recruit as well as for a person about to retire. All of us were blue in the face looking at these advertisements on television every night. We were told about the kind of exercises the young men would undertake. I am sure television in Dun Laoghaire is far more varied than down in Limerick because they have channels that we have not got and, perhaps, it was because of these distractions——

The Deputy should keep to the headings of the Supplementary Estimate.

I am doing my best to keep within the Estimate but I want to make some suggestions in regard to the Army. Anybody can criticise but I want to make some constructive suggestions because of my associations with the Army. I would first impress on the Minister the need for the development of the School of Equitation. Much has been said about it here and about the personnel attached to it but I believe that the School of Equitation which existed in the past provided the best ambassadors that ever left this country when we sent competitors all over the world, the great men of those days, the Hartys, the Corrys——

This would be more appropriate to the Estimate than to a Supplementary Estimate.

I am including it in the context that I am surprised an allowance has not been made for the School of Equitation. I would ask the Minister to encourage the School of Equitation and I also suggest that the Army School of Music both in Dublin and Cork is not sufficiently exploited. We all pay for its upkeep in taxation and we should all have the benefit of recitals from the Army School of Music.

There is nothing in the subheads dealing with the school of music.

A plea for the Army band.

I missed that, Deputy.

I was trying to help the Deputy.

Again, I missed the Deputy. He had better join a school of elocution.

It might be the Deputy's understanding that is at fault.

I sat in the same desk with the Deputy. My articulation is, I think, normal.

We should stick to the subheads rather than personalities.

I should like to see greater co-operation between the Army and the Garda. We had experience of this in the last month or less in the case of Monasterevan but in the past there has not been the esprit de corps, the friendship, the joint effort, the exchange of views and the close co-operation that should exist between the Army and the Garda. I would ask the Minister to ensure that there are inter-group discussions between both bodies at frequent intervals.

Recruitment is a matter of special interest to me because we have a recruitment centre in Limerick and we have Sarsfield Barracks there. A number of people have been refused admission to the Army on what I would describe as flimsy pretexts. Any young lad of 18, 19, 20 or 21 who has had any kind of conviction is automatically debarred from the Army. I am not advocating that the Army should be a school for criminals or a remand home in any way. We all made slips—I made many of them and I am sure everybody else at that age is liable to these little misfortunes, particularly in our formative years. These mistakes are made and a young lad who would have reformed and realised his situation, perhaps, because of the fright he got or the threats of his parents or the authorities and would be as good as any other citizen of his age but because of his unfortunate slip he is debarred from the Army. That is not fair. Also, whenever he applies for any responsible post that fact is there against him— that he had been debarred from the Army.

This would be more appropriate to the main Estimate.

I am trying to get it into the Minister's head that there should be more flexibility in regard to recruitment of young men and I hope I have done that. Deputy Andrews spoke of the post office raid in Limerick involving £65,000 or £67,000 the other morning. I see no reason why these people who handle so much money should not approach the Army and suggest that they will pay to have a man on duty on particular days. In fact, it is their duty to do so and they are not doing it. They must suffer the consequences.

That is not appropriate to this Supplementary Estimate.

I am trying to be helpful and in doing so I have to range fairly widely.

This, perhaps, would be appropriate to a vote of the Minister for Justice but not on Defence.

We are allocating money here for many things and what I am talking of could be included under any financial heading. It is all money in all these subheads.

The Deputy may deal with any of the subheads in the Supplementary Estimate.

I have said it anyway and it is on the record. I was surprised the Minister did not include anything for An Slua Muirí in this Supplementary Estimate. Within their limitations, and they are very limited, An Slua Muirí are doing an excellent job, but there should be more encouragement for those who have joined that section of the Defence Forces. Their lot is a very challenging one. The Minister should have made an effort to encourage recruitment into the ranks of An Slua Muirí, something that has not been done by the Department of Defence for a long time.

More recognition should be given to members of ONE. Their numbers are depleting but they served this country well. Where there are active branches of ONE—the one we have in Limerick has won many national competitions— they should be given recognition in the form of the provision of a clubhouse or meeting room outside the local Army barracks. Recognition is given to men and women who served during emergencies and time of war in other countries but very little is given here.

I should like to know what is the position in regard to Sarsfield Barracks in Limerick and the sale of the land adjoining it. That land is not being used and it is within the Limerick Corporation boundary. That body could use the 118 acres there for housing. The land has not been used by the Army since we took in the refugees from Hungary. Limerick Corporation are anxious to acquire the land and it should be possible for that body to come to an agreement with the Department of Defence in regard to its acquisition. I should also like to know what progress has been made with regard to the purchase of the grounds at Mungret College.

One must always take advantage of the backdoor, or the half door, when considering Estimates like this and if I stepped out of line during the course of this debate I regret it, but the matters I raised are urgent. I should like to congratulate the Minister on what he has done within the ranks of the Army and to assure him that the Army, from the lowest to the highest rank, are happy with the way he is handling the Department. If the Minister keeps up the good work there is no danger that any member of the force will be lacking in his duty.

As the only member involved in the foundation of the Army I should like to make a brief contribution to this debate. Former Army personnel always have an interest in what goes on in the Army. When the Army was founded the total Estimate was in the region of £20 million but the Estimate passed this year was £48 million and this Supplementary Estimate is for £10 million. These figures show that the poor fellows who started the Army were not well paid, housed or fed. I am glad the Army are being looked after because I consider they are the top corps in the country. Every Irish man and woman should be proud of the Army.

Irrespective of the party which forms the Government the Army remains an Army of the people. We have too many armies here and too many people playing soldiers. Only one Army is paid for by the people and acting on behalf of the people. The people want results for the money they spend on the Army. Our Army are doing their job, even though a lot of money that could be spent in other directions is allocated for the upkeep of the Army. I hope we will not have long to wait when we will not have to spend so much money on the Army. While we could not hope to fight a big war with our Army we can protect the institutions of the State.

The Army should always have its place of honour on State occasions. At the time of the change of Government in 1932 the Army was handed over intact to the incoming Government. On that day it was proved to our people that irrespective of the Government in office the Army belonged to the people. The decision made by Mr. Cosgrave on that occasion was an historic one which will be recorded in the annals of Irish history.

I was sorry to see that none of the money in this Supplementary Estimate is being granted to An Slua Muirí. Our fisheries are not looked after as they should be. Foreigners are coming too close to our shore when fishing and it is the responsibility of the Department of Defence to provide ships, men and money to look after this very important matter. I hope in the near future our territorial waters will be extended and this will help us to protect our fishery interests.

I was very disappointed that those who fought in 1920 and 1921 were not treated very satisfactorily by the Department. The number of these men is diminishing yearly and their pensions are very small. They should be treated much better by the Department, because if they had not fought in the Civil War we would not be here today. These men are neglected and forgotten. A comrade of mine wrote to me from London asking me to find out about an allowance he was getting. I sent him the information he wanted and in his reply he told me that he hardly ever got back to Ireland but was glad I had got the information for him. As the only Member on these benches who took part in the fighting in those years, I ask the Minister to make an effort in the next budget, to provide for these people in their old age. That is not asking too much; they deserve it.

I note there is provision being made for the Red Cross. We should support this organisation because they have done wonderful work throughout the year. I was very sorry to learn that the grand old lady who was chairman of the Irish Red Cross for a number of years is seriously ill in hospital. I am sure everybody will join with me in sending our best wishes and hopes for her recovery. I am speaking of course of Mrs. Tom Barry of Cork. As I said, I hope the Minister will try to do something in the next budget to make life more bearable for those who fought in the Civil War.

Like the previous speakers I would like to pay tribute to the Minister for the confidence he has established within the serving ranks of the Army. There is no doubt he has brought a new look and confidence into the people who make up the personnel of our national Army and I do not think anybody, particularly the Army personnel, has any doubt about this.

I would also like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the Army for the excellent work they are doing under very trying circumstances. Unfortunately, in some cases they have been pushed into positions more proper to the police force than the Army, such as looking after ordinary run-of-the-mill criminals and so forth.

As I said before, I would like to see an end put to the situation where civilian prisoners are being held in the Curragh. I will not continue on this point because it is not dealt with in the Estimate, although prisons are mentioned. I would also like to pay a tribute to the military police who are acting as warders and are doing an excellent job. There is a slight grouse among those people because the hours are too long and they are understaffed. These difficulties could be overcome and I hope they will be.

I note that there has been a saving on housing. I hope this does not mean that there has been a slackening off in the provision of new buildings. I also hope the work the Minister has so ably set out to do in the provision of new houses and accommodation within the Army will continue at full pace. I would like to ask the Minister to do something about providing houses for people who retire from the Army and find themselves in the unfortunate position of overholders. I will not elaborate on these people's problems because it would not be in order on the Estimate. The Minister knows what I am speaking of and I hope he will continue the dialogue with Kildare County Council to see that something is done for those people who have no option but to remain as overholders because they have no where else to go.

The increases provided here are necessary. A substantial amount of the money is due to increases in the pay of officers and men and of civilian employees attached to barracks. Army rates of pay are reasonably good and serving people are reasonably satisfied with their conditions. I was glad to hear the Minister asking Deputies to try to encourage young men to join the Army so that the recruiting drive can be continued successfully. There has been a feeling abroad that there was a slackening in this drive, that the Army were not as anxious now to recruit as they were six months ago. I was glad, therefore, that the Minister asked us to suggest to any young men in our constituences looking at career prospects to think of joining the Army. This is particularly desirable in times of high unemployment.

It has been suggested that the cost of the Army is excessive and that if present security considerations were not there we should slacken off. I am in absolute disagreement with this because I believe we should continue to build up our Army so that we will have a proper Army of which serving men and the State can be proud. Some years ago the Army were allowed to be run down and then we had an overnight rush to bring them up to a proper basis. This occurred when the present troubles in another part of our country broke out.

From any point of view we should keep our Army at full strength by increasing the numbers and improving techniques and equipment so as to ensure that our democratic institutions will be preserved and that we will be able to sleep in our beds in peace at night in the knowledge that we have an adequate Army to defend us. This should be the policy no matter how peaceful the climate might be.

We seem to be getting away from the Supplementary Estimate.

I want to assure the Minister that I will be behind him in his efforts to continue to provide the moneys for the things he has now begun to do. We should continue to provide any necessary money irrespective of the circumstances so that the Army will never be run down to the level of a few years ago.

I fully appreciate the Chair's problem in regard to this Estimate. It is a Supplementary one and I am as anxious as any other Deputy to co-operate with the Chair who has a difficult task of judgment here. This Estimate provides for increases for something that has been, so to speak, foreseen and it also provides in effect for increases in the strength of the Defence Forces, that is if we are to look at it by comparison with another Estimate for increases in activity. Where a Supplementary Estimate merely provides for increases for incidentals of course strict rules would require that comment should be limited to that, but I respectfully submit that where a Supplementary Estimate imports something that was not definite in the original Estimate, something that is an expansion of it in the sense of being a developed activity, something which the original Estimate left open, then correspondingly the debate must be somewhat broader.

It is because of that submission that I ask the Chair's indulgence in allowing me to refer to the strength of the Army as it relates to the provision of nearly £1 million of the Supplementary Estimate. There is also the tradition of the House that a debate can be conditioned by its scope and as certain matters have been raised— I am not referring to questions that were raised in face of the Chair's direction but matters that have been allowed—the scope of the debate is correspondingly widened and I should have the opportunity to refer to these matters. However, I have no desire to be disorderly and will not seek to pursue matters should the Chair intervene and say they are out of order. I trust that the Chair will accept those general submissions on my approach to this Supplementary Estimate.

Basically, this is an Estimate which the House will accept unanimously. It is right and proper that the matters concerned should be provided for but the occasion raises the question of our outlook in regard to the Defence Forces and we must ask why a situation can arise when as large a sum as £10 million is asked for by way of Supplementary Estimate. Some other speakers in various ways touched on this point, particularly Deputy Bermingham and to some extent Deputy O'Sullivan.

The situation arises because there has been a tendency to forget about the Defence Forces until there is a need in practical terms for them. The tendency has been to play down their importance and, inevitably, this means that the Defence Forces are starved of finance and resources during periods when they do not appear to be needed. Consequently, when the need for them arises there has to be a corresponding demand for resources but the tragedy is often that the demand for them is so sudden that it cannot be met in the most efficient or the most economical way.

Similar remarks could be made about the Garda Síochána. Most of us in this House have experienced traditional times of secure order, times in which the confidence of law and order were built into our society and during which there did not appear to be any need to provide for its protection to any great extent. This situation is not unique so far as we are concerned: it is one for practically all democracies. Furthermore, there has been a tendency in our society to treat the administrative side of the State as the most important and to neglect to some extent certain executive arms of the State. This has meant a disproportion between the position of that part of the public service which is called the civil service and these other parts such as the Army.

On many occasions when this party were on the Government side I tried to point out, particularly on the Estimates for Justice, that the day would come when there would be experienced the need for gardaí, prison officers and the Army and that inadequate provision was being made in this regard. I pointed out that the administrative people and also the ministerial element, in taking a shortsighted view of the overall social position would ultimately, in another situation, have to face the consequences of that outlook. It is no harm that we should reflect on the fact that the whole basis of our society as an ordered entity depends as much on the executive parts of the State service such as the Garda, the Army and teachers as it depends on the administrative staffs. I may cause confusion by the use of the word "executive" as distinct from the Government. However, staffs without fighting forces, to draw an Army analogy, are non-effective just as fighting forces cannot operate efficiently or effectively, if at all, without the staffs. I am endeavouring to point out that all the State services must be considered as an integrated unit and that common standards should be applied. The distinction between civil or any other service in the State is an unhappy one if it is pushed beyond a certain point. This Estimate recognises and provides for an area which, like the Garda, has been neglected in times when it was not needed.

I remember the situation before the last war. When I was fresh myself I put on the record of this House detailed information for the benefit of one of the Minister's predecessors in the first Coalition Government. I recorded my detailed memory of what I had learned of the situation that arose when the need for adequate Defence Forces became acute in 1939-1940. In the preceding years, because of narrow administrative and economic thinking, the Defence Forces were deprived of the means of developing. They were deficient in strength, in material, in resources and in organisation. The effort that had to be made in 1939-1940 to remedy that situation was one that taxed all the resources of the community to the utmost and were it not for a fortunate accident which resulted in time being available for an expansion of the forces the results could have been disastrous. At the time there were those who issued warnings.

Peace time strength had been realistically worked out in the context of post-war needs. That strength was eroded in order to save money. Gradually the strength of the Army was let run down and so was the reserve. It was a pity and I refer to it now not for the purpose of recrimination but to point out that we are now attempting to correct that situation because of a particular stimulus. In correcting it we should not miss the chance of driving home the lesson learned. I say this not just for the benefit of the Minister but for the benefit of those who will succeed him in his ministerial office. We find ourselves with an Army insufficient for our current needs.

I am glad the Army is expanding. The Minister is doing the right thing in this but I feel that the Army is geared towards a security job. That is wrong. The Army should not be regarded as an auxiliary police force. I am not saying the purpose is to make it an auxiliary police force; I am merely arguing this way to emphasise the situation. I do not accuse the Minister of looking at the Army in that way. If it is to be regarded merely as an auxiliary police force then a great deal of expenditure on the Army is an extravagance. An auxiliary police force could be achieved much more economically.

I take it it is still our desire to provide Defence Forces in the fullest sense in so far as the resources of the State allow. There was a time— Deputy O'Sullivan referred to it— when the Army's principal function was internal security. That was true of the middle twenties. In the following decade the principal role of the Army was in the sphere of national defence in the more conventional sense and the Army and the Defence Forces as a whole played a unique and very necessary part in the negotiation of this State through the difficult period of World War II. Then, because of our established internal peace, we looked at the Army primarily as an aid to the civil power and, because of the situation now developing, I am afraid we may go to the extreme of regarding the Army as an auxiliary police force and nothing more. That impression should be corrected. The Minister will have difficulty with his civilian colleagues and even difficulty in making the public understand the long-term need but I would advise the Minister to encourage Army personnel to look on themselves as soldiers and not as policemen. When I say that, I imply absolutely no slight whatever on the Garda who have their proper functions, and very admirable and necessary functions for the community they are. We are talking here about the Army. In a modern context they should be encouraged to be the professional soldiers they are, that is, the regulars with their unshakeable professional loyalty, steadiness and efficiency, loyalty to the State, steadiness and reliability in whatever tasks they are called upon to perform, and efficiency in carrying them out.

That is the best approach towards the tasks they are called upon to undertake in the sphere of domestic security or in a wider area. It is also the best approach towards ensuring that pride, morale and esprit de corps which are so necessary in such organisations are maintained. I would ask that of the Minister in particular. I would not presume to tell him or to suggest what the doctrines should be in 1975. About 30 years ago I could, perhaps, have over-confidently offered my opinions and prescriptions, but we must all recognise that water flows under the bridge. When it comes to such matters, I feel I have been washed a long way down the river. I shall not attempt the armchair punditry anybody who takes an interest in such matters might be tempted to indulge in.

I hope the Minister will take my point. If the Army, from the officers down to the most junior privates, are encouraged to take that professional and patriotic view, this country will have a measure of general security which will be of great value to it, and the Army will be proud of themselves. If they are proud of themselves and satisfied with their role, there will be no question of the rest of us not being proud of them.

I am glad the Minister has provided in this Estimate for an increase in strength. I am all the more pleased when I find that the recruiting campaign which has been in progress since early last year is continuing to be very successful. The Minister said:

Its success is a measure of the attraction of Army life now and Deputies can assure any suitable young men in their constituencies, who may be comtemplating joining the Army, that, if they enlist, they will enjoy pay and conditions which compare very favourably with those obtainable in civilian life.

That is a sentence I am glad to read. I should like to add to it that they should be encouraged to join because there is a worthwhile national job to be done. Not only is it, so to speak, in modern cynical terms, a job worth having from the point of view of economics and social conditions, but it is a job in which one can fulfil an ideal of service to the community and in which one can achieve the personal satisfaction of feeling one is playing a role in the community that is worth while from the community's point of view.

The security angle is, of course, the issue of the moment. I have the greatest sympathy with both the Garda and the Defence Forces who are called on to co-operate because, under modern circumstances, it very much seems like putting a man into a ring to fight and tying his hands behind his back before he starts. They have a very difficult job to carry out. The restrictions put on the forces of law and order nowadays in comparison with the indulgence, shall I say, available to those who are prepared to exploit the forces of disorder are one of the anomalies of modern life. These young men who join either the Army or the Garda have to exercise a degree of self-restraint which must make the sustained effort of discharging their duties very difficult.

From my own limited experience of uniformed life, I can appreciate that point. All I can say is this: it is admirable how in both forces, in the Garda and in the Army, this disciplined restraint has been evidenced and it should be appreciated by the community as a whole. They should, therefore, get the support of the Minister, and the administration behind the Minister, and the State as a whole, and from every individual citizen there should be sympathy for a spirit of co-operation with them collectively and individually. They are serving the community under very difficult conditions and this should be recognised. I for one, do not grudge at all the expenditure involved in providing for them.

In this modern world where an allcorrosive liberalism seems to have eroded traditional concepts of order, the tendency is to decry, even despise and obstruct orderly action and the will of the majority. In situations such as that it almost takes the quality of a religious vocation to accept the responsibilities of either a police officer or a soldier. Therefore, we should do all we can to support and help them in their trials, because trials they are, in a practical way, emphasising at all times that order and discipline are the key-notes—I am speaking about intellectual discipline—and, in order and discipline, will one find the strength to carry out the task, that order and that discipline being the hallmarks of people in these services and the key to self-respect and efficiency. There can be no morale without discipline; discipline is something that has to be fostered through encouragement.

The approach varies with the time. The trouble about the application of all these fundamental ideas is that the circumstances vary from time to time and applications that were valid in one period of history are completely invalid in another. I would not dare to comment how these principles should be applied when it comes to practical detail in a modern context. I leave it to the people whose business it is to know. But I would ask the remainder of us who may not know— and particularly those of us who are generally classed as civilians—to try to understand that there is something special here, to sympathise with it and encourage it because through it ultimately we are an ordered society and able to function as a peaceful society. I do not know whether the Minister will quite appreciate the point I am trying to make. In a sense it is abstract and I thank the Chair for allowing me to say this on a Supplementary Estimate.

When it comes down to the net, there is a sizeable amount involved here as a Supplementary Estimate which requires justification. The justification most certainly is there but the ultimate justification must be along the lines I have mentioned. Therefore, the things that have been said should be said. Do not let us ever again forget what we have twice forgotten before—when the acute need has passed the need itself does basically subsist all the time. I shall not speculate on what might have been. One wonders at various times at things that have happened; had the lamps been kept lighting and not lit at the 11th hour how much inconvenience, to say the least of it, could have been avoided? That may well apply in the not so distant past also. However, we are dealing with the present and the future. It is right that the Minister should make this provision. I am glad to note from these figures that the proportions appear to be much more balanced than they were many years ago. Where the Permanent Defence Forces are concerned they must be served and their numbers kept up to strength. That is the message and, in so far as the total moneys do that, the Minister has the unanimous support of the House.

The question arises on this Supplementary Estimate of reserves. I am constrained because it is a Supplementary Estimate and I do not wish to go into detail on this question. There must be, and there is, a limit to the size of the permanent force that we or any other State can maintain. The aim must be to have that force as efficient as possible, adequate for the immediate demands made upon it, having within it some elasticity and reserve so that there is an opportunity afforded for rapid expansion. That would be common doctrine anywhere. Certainly it is a valid conclusion from 50 years' experience of our Defence Forces.

The matter of the reserves of the Defence Forces has never been adequately catered for since the war. Before the war, in extraordinary circumstances, we were fortunate in our reserve position. Let us recognise it was due to a large extent to certain internal factors. In the first instance it was due to the fact that, within a workable period the actual First Line Reserve, that is discharged soldiers or those who had served in the Army and officers also, who could be considered trained, were still in the age group that rendered them perfectly effective when the need arose in 1939. Indeed, without them I do not think we could have expanded then. Then for other reasons there were other reserves and, in one particular instance, the volunteer force was developed. With those two amalgamated, and with their training, the material existed—some of it partially and some wholly processed. Then was the ultimate expansion in 1940 made possible, if only barely so.

Since the war years I do not know— one hesitates to ask for a lot of information from the Minister by way of parliamentary question on matters of this type—the exact position in regard to the reserves. In any event, for certain roles, one must make allowances for two facts; firstly, that reserves are not easily called up for useful service, whole-time or even part-time, without considerable dislocation, without very compelling cause and, when they are so mobilised, it takes time to assimilate, order and deploy them. That applies even if one had reserves who had served with the colours for considerable periods. It is much more difficult when the bulk of one's reserves are operating on a part-time basis without much whole-time experience.

That is a remark that goes generally, but when you are dealing with the question of security the use of citizen reserves becomes a ticklish problem. I do not think it would be very helpful for me to analyse the ticklishness of the problem in detail but I am sure it will not have escaped either the Minister or his advisers, civil or military. Therefore, whether in the present context for a number of reasons including security, or in the broader context which does not seem to arise at the moment, what we must always remember is that it might and it could arise and looking at the forces in the world today I would not like to say it will not. In either context, the problem of the reserves is something that would need attention, and there is a considerable sum here required under subhead D for Reserve Defence Forces. I am glad to see that attention is being given to the matter, and all my comment is made to underline the importance of that element.

I am in a certain amount of difficulty in comparing figures with inflation going as it is and the value of money changing. It is very difficult casually to reach any conclusions in which one could have confidence by merely scrutinising sums of money. In so far as they are allocated for necessary purposes there can be no complaint. The only question that arises is: are all necessary purposes provided for? In relation to the question as to whether the sums provided are adequate for the purpose for which they are provided I confess that I find myself in no position to judge, and can only encourage the Minister and his advisers to do the right thing by unhesitatingly committing myself as a Deputy to this expenditure and, in so doing, taking equal responsiblity for it with the Minister and other Members of this House.

There are very many things that could be said on this matter but I think they are more appropriate to a general debate on the Estimate for the Minister or some general debate on the Army, and even then there are few of us in this House that are competent to give worthwhile criticism in this field. There are certain things one may comment on in so far as human factors are involved, but on the technical and professional aspects I think it would be wise to refrain from comment because much of that comment inevitably will be fatuous through ignorance. The thing for us to do is to recognise the need for the provision of these forces, to recognise what they are doing, to try to strive for that rapport between the community whom they are protecting and themselves that will develop a mutual loyalty and understanding, so that the community will do everything to support these forces.

At present the Defence Forces are primarily involved in internal security duties. It is not a nice role for an army; in a sense it is not an army's proper role at all, but it is a necessary role at the moment and, as with the Garda appreciation of the way in which they are discharging their duty should be recorded. In particular the House and the ordinary citizen can do much in silent support, because there is a tendency by people who may not have the same ideas as the majority of the community have to seize on every opportunity to denigrate, to complain about or wrongfoot either the Garda or the Army. It is futile to complain about this, particularly as, unfortunately, some people who will do this will do it out of mistaken convictions. There you are up against the problem of human conflict, and one of the anomalies of the present day is that we refuse to recognise the fact of conflict. I touched on that in the broadcasting debate last night, and I do not intend to go into it any further now.

If there is a steady realisation by the individual citizens of the role that the Garda and the Army are playing and of their importance to the community, then the individual citizen can by his quiet support and his approval or disapproval as appropriate—not disapproval of the forces but disapproval of those who take advantage of the discipline and restraint of the forces in carrying out their job—secure the effectiveness of the role these forces play, because the force of public opinion can be stronger than any protest or anything else. This is something that all in the political arena should realise and promote: this feeling among the citizens that it is their Army; that it is their police force, their protectors, their kith and kin. If that is achieved a very large contribution will be made towards security itself.

This Estimate, as I say, stimulates a lot of comment which, strictly speaking, would not be in order on the Supplementary Estimate. However, I urge the Minister to see that this money is efficiently applied to the purposes it is intended to serve, that there will be every effort to continue to recruit and to build up the Army and the Defence Forces morally and in numbers, that everything will be done to develop the morale, pride and esprit de corps of our Defence Forces. In doing that we can be certain that whatever our comments on individual cases are fundamentally the Minister will have the support of the House and of every thinking citizen in the State.

As the debate on this Supplementary Estimate is restricted I hesitate to say a lot because no matter how I tried to avoid it I would repeat what has already been said by other speakers. I would like to remind the House of the words, as far as I remember them, of Deputy de Valera when he spoke about keeping the lamps lit and said that "if they were kept lighting rather than having to be lit now". This is the kernel of the problem of the Army in recent times. Numbers were let run down to such an extent that they became the sick joke about all chiefs and no Indians. That position has changed dramatically and we can see from the Supplementary Estimate that the amount being asked now for pay and allowances for the recruits of recent times, in addition to those already there, is a large sum.

As I live adjacent to the Curragh I know that the recruits there are of the highest integrity and the highest possible calibre. They realise that they can make a career of the Army. It was difficult to get young lads to embark on a career in the Army in the past because the conditions were not as good as one would have liked them to be. Conditions are so good at the moment that many former soldiers are now anxious to re-enlist. Many of those who are prepared to re-enlist realise they left reasonably good jobs. The Minister should be as sympathetic to them as possible. They should be given every encouragement.

Our Army will be as good as the equipment provided for it is. The Supplementary Estimate provides for additional equipment. This is a good sign that the Minister has an eye to the future. He is anxious to provide the most up-to-date equipment possible for the Army. The amount of money asked for in this Supplementary Estimate and that provided in the Supplementary Estimate for the Garda last week is a formidable sum. This brings home to everyone the cost of security at present.

Deputy de Valera said that it was wrong to regard the Army as subsidiary police force but that cannot be avoided at present. It is encouraging to see the co-operation there is between the Garda and the Army authorities. I have only to travel a short distance from my home to Monasterevin to see that co-operation. This is very necessary at the moment in view of our present security problem.

There are a couple of items in the Minister's speech to which I would like to refer. He stated that there is provision for an additional sum of £8,000 in the Supplementary Estimate under subhead E for pay increases to chaplains and officiating clergymen. I know the Army are pretty well catered for by the various Churches. There are a number of chaplains at the Curragh. Most of them are Roman Catholic chaplains. I believe there is one Church of Ireland permanent chaplain there as well. Have all the other denominations got permanent chaplains with the Army? If not, why not? Our Army does not belong to any one denomination and every encouragement should be given to young men in other denominations, besides the majority denomination, the Roman Catholic denomination, to join the Army. If they were given encouragement I believe young men, other than the majority denomination, would make a career in the Army. This is something which in the long run will help to solve our problems between the North and the South. We want to cater for all sections. We could make a significant start if we began under the heading of chaplains and officiating clergymen.

The Minister has stated that the additional sum of £59,000 required under subhead P—Naval Stores—includes the cost of repair works to a minesweeper and the provision of £10,000 for marine pollution counter-measures. Those last words are of considerable significance. I am sorry the sum is so small because I do not think there is any group in a better position to deal with pollution at sea than the Naval Service. It should not be left entirely to the local authorities. It could be included in the work of the fishery protection vessels because they are in the centre of things when it comes to dealing with this matter. In view of the enormous amount of what can be done with such a small money necessary to deal with pollution, perhaps the Minister will tell us sum of money. We hope to hear from the Minister that it will be regarded as one of the duties of the Naval Service to spot and to deal promptly with the growing menace of pollution.

As other speakers have pointed out, there is much we would like to say but we are restricted to the Supplementary Estimate before us. The Minister referred to solid fuel, electricity, gas and water. Apparently there has been a switch from electricity to solid fuel. I do not think the Army have abandoned the use of solid fuel; apparently they still have huge grates at the end of the dormitories in which the soldiers are billeted. One would want to be sitting beside the fire to feel any heat. I am not decrying the use of solid fuel, particularly native fuel, but the time has come when solid fuel could be used to provide central heating rather than the open fires so prevalent in every barracks. I know it will be costly to change but, while the men are prepared to sleep under canvas when on manoeuvres or in the country, when they return to barracks they are entitled to some measure of comfort. The provision of central heating would be a definite improvement. With regard to soldiers on Border duty, if there is any complaint it is that the allowance while on this duty could be substantially increased. This is one item the Minister might keep in mind.

As I said at the outset, the Supplementary Estimate we are discussing is for a formidable sum but I do not think anyone will have any complaint about the amount. People know it is being put to the good use of providing national security, including internal security.

Perhaps I shall be the only Deputy who has not the happy knack of getting round the Chair to depart from the Supplementary Estimate before the House. I agree wholeheartedly with the amount of money being provided here and I consider it absolutely essential. I wish to comment on something Deputy de Valera said regarding the role of the Army, whether it is a back-up security force or a defence force. I consider the Army a defence force. I was a member of the LDF during the last war and I can assure the House that the training we got ensured that while it might have been easy to take this country it would have been a very difficult job for an enemy to hold it. I know that the Army are being kept up-to-date and I compliment the Minister. We should not forget that they are there to defend the country and they are quite capable of doing that. Just because we are a small country does not mean that we do not need an Army.

Deputy Andrews commented on one of the subheads which deals with the Naval Service. A question that has been debated in the west is the matter of safeguarding our fishing limits which we are hoping will be extended. There is a lot to be said for Deputy Andrews's suggestion regarding the acquisition of a smaller type of boat. There is no use in our pressing for fishing limits if foreigners can poach in our waters. This is of vital importance and I would ask the Minister to give special consideration to it.

Deputy Coughlan said we should not be too exact about the type of people in the Army—although he did not put it in quite that way. My opinion is that even though there may be some minor charge against a person he could be granted entry into the Army. On the other hand, it is good that the public should know that the Army are strict with regard to reeruits. It is not like the time of the Black and Tans when people were taken out of lunatic asylums, workhouses and jails and put into the service. On one occasion I made representations on behalf of a young man who had a small blemish on his record but he was not accepted into the Army. I thought they were a little over-exact.

Subhead B—wound and disability pensions and gratuities, £45,000—was mentioned I think by Deputy Sullivan. I would again ask the Minister to consider those who took part in the War of Independence, who have rather small pensions. Very few of them are left. I should like to repeat the case I made before; I hope it will not fall on deaf ears. When the holder of a military pension dies the widow continues to draw a pension but there was a special allowance which was given to people in poor circumstances who did not qualify for a pension and when they die the allowance dies with them. The special allowance was given because they were in poor circumstances and I would ask the Minister to take this into consideration. Many people do not understand the difference between the special allowance and the pension and they approach their local TD complaining that the widow of an old IRA man down the road is getting a pension while they themselves as IRA widows are not. The difference, of course, is that one is in the pension category while the other was a special allowance case. Some people might be getting pensions because they were entitled to them having had active service and might be pretty well off. I ask the Minister to give serious consideration to paying an allowance to the widow of the holder of a special allowance.

As one who served as a private and never got further than sergeant in the FCA I always felt that every man entering the Army should start as a private because in my time there I had the feeling that there was a little snobbery there, especially outside the barracks. You must take orders from your officer in barracks but when you go to a dance hall or anything of that kind—"man is man and who is more?" I remember a time when that was not so; the officer almost wanted one to be the little boy outside as well as inside. I should not like to see that happening. I know some people feel that this is the case although they will not say it because they are in the Army. I should like every boy to start at the bottom and work his way up. Without giving numbers, could the Minister give an indication, perhaps in percentages, of the numbers who have joined as privates, as cadets and so on in the last two or three years? Numbers might be dangerous for security reasons.

I am sure everybody will agree that the Army is the show piece of every country. I agree with Deputy Couglan's reference to the Army equitation school. I know the Minister is very interested in it. I am proud of the Army because they have brought credit to the country in the past and I pointed out previously to the Minister—I agree an improvement has taken place—that nothing was more annoying than when the Army would attend shows with very bad horses. They are our best ambassadors, as anybody who watches the international shows on television would agree. It is a thrill to see an Irish jumper winning. No money should be spared in that area.

There has been no criticism of this Supplementary Estimate from any side of the House; everyone agrees that this money is absolutely necessary. As Deputy de Valera said, when there is peace there is always a feeling that we need not bother with an army, that they are an unnecessary luxury. That view should not be taken. The Army are important; without them you cannot talk of an independent nation. You must have an Army which is fully equipped, able and prepared to defend the country. This is vitally important. We should be unanimous in agreeing to these Supplementary Estimates; some are high, some very small for what is covered in the subheads, but I suppose it is as much as the country can afford.

I think the Minister is ensuring that the Army will be fully equipped and efficient and if they are ever called upon, which God forbid, to defend the country they will acquit themselves with distinction. I am glad that the uniforms which cost a great deal of money are being supplied quicker than was anticipated. In the days of the LDF everybody was in the Army and it was difficult to keep up the supply of uniforms. I have seen soldiers recently on security work with the gardaí on the roads and some of the uniforms they wear are not smart by comparison with the Garda uniforms.

Are they combat uniforms?

They are, but they do not look well and I wonder if they could be improved. Like all the other speakers I consider this a very important Estimate and I think it should be passed without dissent. We must treat the Army as an army able to defend the country and I am sure they will do so with distinction if ever called on. The Minister is doing a good job with the Army and I have no hesitation in supporting this Supplementary Estimate.

This debate has proceeded for some time and I have listened to a number of speakers, some of whom have had Army experience as I also have had. I was pleased to hear the Minister say that the recruiting campaign which has been in progress since last year was continuing to be successful. When introducing the main Estimate the Minister said that a successful defence force, even though small, should be in a position to broaden the scope of its activities at any time. The success of the recruiting campaign is founded on the proposition that, even though we started small on two occasions in emergency conditions, the elements of which were more unknown than the emergency which has to be dealt with at present, we were able to increase the personnel of the Defence Forces within a short time. That indicates that at all times we had a hard core of well-trained Army personnel.

The role of our Army has been mentioned by most speakers. While 20 subheads are listed in the Supplementary Estimate some subheads are not mentioned. Technically, if I go outside those subheads I can be held to be out of order but we must have regard to the stem of the problem, which is the regular Army and the main Estimate for the Department of Defence. I welcome the success of the recruiting campaign because if we were not able to keep replacing retiring personnel of the Defence Forces on an annual basis, there would be the danger of the numbers running down. It would be a pity if we reached that stage. It is pleasing to know that one's service in the Army can lead to a good job in civilian life. With the training provided those leaving experience little difficulty in obtaining employment. I hope the Army personnel take full advantage of the openings presented to them. Those who join the Army for a short period should avail of the training facilities so that they can make a good start when they return to civilian life.

The change in regard to training in the Army is welcome. I also welcome the fact that we have an Army which is capable of changing course and tactics to meet whatever emergency may arise. It is all very well to say that the function of an Army is defence, but there are many sides to this defence. Regrettably, the function of many armies today extends to guerilla activities. We live in an age when on occasions the civil authority is not able to combat the aggression against it. That is happening in many countries. For that reason it is good that the civil authority can call in the Army for assistance in the manning of check-points. On many occasions I have been stopped by gardaí at check-points at which soldiers were also on duty. We have got away from the traditional concept of what an army is for.

Today there are all kinds of criminals, urban guerillas and other types. It is good to have an Army geared to cope with difficult situations as they arise, because of the lawlessness of urban guerillas or anybody else. To this extent we may accept that, whether we regret it or not—and many of us do— for the future we shall be faced with this proposition. That is why when Deputies make comparisons between the Defence Forces of 20, 30 or more years ago with the Defence Forces of today, they realise that that concept is completely out of date. We must face the fact that in future we must have the services of an Army which will be capable of taking on the kind of people I have just mentioned.

As Deputy de Valera said, some Members of this House were trained in musketry and open warfare. It was not foreseen then that we should have to change so rapidly to other forms of modern guerilla tactics. Our course covered a number of subjects particularly, as I said, musketry. I have not been near an Army unit for some time, but I imagine they have to be trained in different methods of fighting than musketry. Today is the age of the demolition expert and the bomb. We recognise that our Army personnel must be expert in this work because they may be called on at any time to defuse a bomb. We also recognise that they have to be trained for this highly skilled and dangerous work. It should be recognised that such training is expensive because the specialists must be trained to a very high degree.

The military man, whose function was mainly offensive in the past, today not merely protects lives but saves them. When one thinks about defence today one is overwhelmed by the range of subjects in which Army personnel must have training. When one reads the daily papers and meets those people on the roads at night, one immediately realises that they are there for our protection, to guard property and lives. Now as never before the people of this country owe a debt of gratitude to the personnel of the Defence Forces.

Regrettably in the past very little interest was taken in the welfare of the soldier, especially when he left the Army, or in his training. That has all changed today, happily for the better. When one dwells on this one is glad that even though the numbers in our Army, especially in peace time, were allowed to run down, there was always a trained unit in the Army.

I should like to discuss some of the subheads in this Estimate. When discussing the main Estimate last May, the Minister dealt with the training of cadets and gave the number of cadets in training. He also indicated that he hoped to be able to announce a number of promotions from the ranks.

It is a good proposition that every recruit entering the Army should regard himself as carring a field marshal's baton in his haversack, and it would be a great incentive if the ordinary recruit knew that he could achieve commissioned rank through diligence, discipline and hard work. I agree the Army will always need to have a unit for cadets but I would push the point that we should keep in mind the incentive represented by promotions from the ranks to get a better type of personnel entering the Army. From my experience in recent years the men entering the Army have been of a high standard and are capable of improving that standard in training to such an extent that a number of men would be able to make the grade from NCO to commissioned rank inside five or six years. At one time in the Army it was a much slower process.

The Minister referred briefly to Defence Force pay and allowances and so on. Pay in the Defence Forces is very good, comparable with and better than most occupations outside the Army. From my limited experience, the conditions are also good. The catering has been much improved from the days when they had the enamel mug and so on. The general standard of living in the Army has improved out of all recognition and this will be conceded by the most severe critic.

This is only as it should be because when one looks at the expenditure, if one includes the supplementary as well as the main Estimate, it reaches nearly £60 million a year. We are getting value for it and in any man's language, in any country, no matter how hardheaded a people may be, if they get value for money they can hardly complain. This is looking at it in the commercial sense, which I do not want to do when considering the matter purely from the point of view of the work the Defence Forces do.

Of course there are many other auxiliary units which back up the Army and which give the Army supporting legs. I cannot mention them all here because they are not mentioned in the subheads, but if you consider the stem, the sap goes up into the branches, and if you were to consider the activities of the FCA, the Civil Defence units and the Army Nursing Service, you could dwell a long time on them. During the flat years, the years in which we had what were regarded as a small Army, the FCA played a great part in keeping up activity as part-time soldiers, in helping the general pattern of Army work here and in keeping alive the idea that we had an Army committed to defence activities. Whether it be small or large, we are committed to supporting a Defence Force of a proportion or size that would guarantee a measure of protection and safety here. The same goes for the Air Corps and for the general idea of equipping the forces we have.

The Minister mentioned the purchase of equipment. Today one cannot have an Army without having the proper equipment. Equipment for a modern army is highly expensive but one would hope that we will always be in a position to pay enough out of the national income so that whatever size the Army we have they will be equipped to meet any eventuality.

Very briefly, we have the Permanent Defence Forces and the auxiliary forces which support the permanent stem, and I should like in this context to say a special word in favour of the local defence forces, though they are not mentioned in any subhead. They play a part in the general defence of the country and minimise the calls that would otherwise be made on the permanent forces. One must realise that we have this aspect of defence work in regard to the personnel who compose the local defence units.

There are a number of aspects of the Army with which one could deal. For example one could dwell for some time on the social side of Army life or on equestrian matters but these are aspects which are not on at the moment and, so, I shall leave discussion of them for another occasion. Suffice it to say that this Supplementary Estimate has met with general approval in the House. Most of those who have contributed to the debate have had some experience of Army life. There are those who, like myself have had experience in the Permanent Defence Forces and those who have been in auxiliary forces. However, nobody was over-critical either of the role of the Army or of its place in our society. To this extent it is recognised generally that the Army has had and continues to have a great role to play.

During the past couple of years I have been glad to note the weapons purchased for the Army were of the highest calibre. These included rifles as well as armoured cars and jeeps of various kinds. It is only right that if we have an army in which we all take an interest we should ensure that it is equipped to a standard which compares favourably with larger armies in Europe and elsewhere.

I note that Votes Nos. 44 and 45 are being taken together. There is mention here of an element of compensation in respect of duties performed by our soldiers abroad. In this context I appreciate a periodical which is published by the Department of Foreign Affairs and which in its most recent issue pays tribute to the personnel of our Defence Forces who have played an active part in peace-keeping operations in Europe and elsewhere since 1958. It is not often that we mention the work carried out by those men in such places as Africa and the Near East but for a small country with a rather small army we can be proud of the part which our soldiers have played in endeavouring to maintain peace in The Congo, the Near East between Egypt and Jerusalem and in Cyprus and The Lebanon. It would be remiss of us to allow this debate to conclude without putting on record our appreciation of the activities of the members of the Defence Forces in all those places. Our efforts in this regard began by way of very small numbers but increased substantially. Regrettably some of those men came under fire on occasion but they were able to handle any situations in which they found themselves abroad in the same way as we should hope they would be able to cope at home.

We have had the signal honour of having two or three officers who, having gone on those various missions, were placed in complete control of the situations and who found themselves acting as negotiators between the various combatants. It could be said that all those involved accomplished the various missions in fine style. We can be rightly proud of their achievements.

I do not wish to indulge in the enumeration of what we would like to see being achieved in regard to the Army because we must have regard to the pressures of the moment and the amount of money there is at our disposal. In conclusion I can only express the hope that on another occasion we shall be afforded the opportunity of discussing these various other aspects of Army life.

There is not very much that I wish to add to this debate except to point out that for some extraordinary reason it is the Supplementary Estimate we are dealing with although we have not had an opportunity of dealing with the main Estimate. One is inhibited because these Estimates have to be taken at a particular time and cleared out of the way, with a promise that an opportunity will be provided later for the purpose of discussing them fully. Because of the shocking inflationary situation in which we find ourselves we are here dealing with Supplementary Estimates of quite inordinate size. They are a reflection of the Government's mismanagement of affairs. In a short period of ten months various Departments are seeking additional sums under various headings, sums greater than the original main Estimate voted by this House. I know circumstances alter cases but, looking at the subheads here, I find under the subhead "Reserve Defence Force Pay, et cetera”, the original Estimate was for £1.3 million. Here we have a Supplementary Estimate for £1.4 million. We have to accept that circumstances are such it is necessary to spend this money and I am in full accord with every other speaker in saying that the Government need have no apprehension in regard to our consent to the spending of these additional moneys on the security of the State.

Extra moneys are being sought under Army Pensions and to pay wound and disability pensions to the Old IRA. Deputy Andrews referred to this earlier. He said specifically that we fully support the granting of these additional moneys to ensure security. Security is, of course, also linked with the Department of Justice. Despite the enormous sums provided over the last two-and-a-half years for this purpose it does appear as if this wonderful self-proclaimed law and order Government have not been in a position to bring any more security. Indeed, one can honestly say that we have far more lawlessness now in this month of November, 1975, than we had in the same period in 1972. Lawlessness has got completely out of hand, so much so that a blind eye has been turned towards what might be described as less serious offences, offences which mean a loss of revenue to the State. The Report of the Public Accounts Committee refers to offences in relation to motor taxation. I appreciate it would not be in order to talk about motor taxation on this Supplementary Estimate but under subhead J we have "Mechanical Transport, Petrol, Fuels and Oils". All these are costing the Department of Defence more money.

The Minister for Industry and Commerce permits increased charges or allows the Minister for Finance to put on increased taxes and all these are reflected in the Estimates of many Departments. Should there be an unexpected pay increase, no matter how justified it is, it will also mean increased expenditure and a bigger Estimate. All these increases are due to the mismanagement by the Government of affairs of state. Significant increases have been brought about by Government action. An additional sum of £106,000 is required for Post Office services. An additional £850,000 is required for increased insurance rates under Social Welfare. These are serious impositions, creating difficulties for employers because of schemes introduced by the Government, allegedly for the benefit of the working man——

This Supplementary Estimate does not entitle the Deputy to go into this detail. He must keep to the subheads.

I invariably seem to run into difficulty when I come in here to speak. Surely I am entitled to talk about the additional moneys now being asked for over and above the original Estimate. There is an increase of something in the region of 70 per cent to 75 per cent under the heading of "Insurance". Is it suggested that I am to come in here and say: "O.K. We must pass this Estimate" without any reference at all to the constituent factors?

What the Chair is saying is that the Chair is following the Standing Orders. Standing Order 124 says:

In the discussion of a Supplementary Estimate the debate shall be confined to the Items constituting the same, and no discussion may be raised on the original Estimate, save in so far as it may be necessary to explain or illustrate the particular Items under discussion.

I thought I was doing that. I am talking about the £850,000 which is being sought in the Supplementary Estimate. I was relating it to the original Estimate of £1,379,000 The revised Estimate to which we are asked to agree is £2,229,000. I am drawing attention to the fact that the additional sum required in this Estimate is £850,000, almost £1 million, roughly an increase of 70 to 75 per cent on the original Estimate. This reflects the huge imposition which has been placed on the shoulders of the employer, in this case the Minister for Defence. I am taking that example to refer to the same impost on all other employers.

The Chair does not wish to inhibit the Deputy but he must confine himself to matters appropriate to the Supplementary Estimate.

I accept that. Am I entitled to refer to this £850,000?

Yes. The Deputy may refer to it.

It is a sizeable increase and it has been brought about by Government action. It is an additional demand on the taxpayer for almost £1 million for this purpose. We are also asked to vote an additional £175,000 under subhead R. In the explanatory note we are told it is an additional sum required for increased prices of solid fuels, electricity and gas. That is rather remarkable. I have not been to Mayo but some of my friends have. They tell me Government Ministers, including the Minister for Defence, are clapping themselves on the back because they reduced the price of electricity and the price of gas, not that that makes any difference in Mayo. It pleases Ministers to talk about any reductions. We are told there is a reduction in the price of electricity which was brought about by the June budget. We are told there is a reduction in the price of gas in the city areas and that this was brought about by the very intelligent and far-reaching action of the Minister for Finance in his June budget—belated action, as we saw it, because we told him to do it sooner.

The Minister is now asking for an additional 22 per cent, roughly, over and above the original estimate. This increase from £767,000 to £942,000 is to meet the increased cost of solid fuels, electricity, gas and water. Perhaps the secret lies in the solid fuels. In the explanatory memorandum there is nothing about having to pay for water. I find this extremely difficult to understand. Naturally the Minister will have an opportunity of replying to the debate.

Whenever whoever the Deputy is waiting for arrives from Mayo, not before.

I would expect that, on such a serious estimate, the Minister would have somebody in the House to back him and that the whole business of this Dáil would not have to be carried on by Opposition Deputies. The question I put to the Minister is very logical. We are told that, since June, the prices of electricity and gas have been reduced. In the six months following the drawing up of the original estimate there was overspending of £175,000 which may have been due to increased activity. We may have had to use more electricity and more gas. The explanatory note does not say the additional sum is required because of increased usage of fuel, electricity and gas. The Minister categorically contradicts the statements and the claims made on the Government's behalf by the Minister for Finance that those prices have been reduced. It says here that this increase is required for increased prices of solid fuel, electricity and gas. I do not want to be accused of repeating myself, but it is worth drawing attention to it.

The Minister appealed to Deputies to join him in encouraging people to join the Army. He said:

I would like to take this opportunity to mention that the recruiting campaign which has been in progress since early last year is continuing to be very successful.

I presume that has to do with the increased demands on the House here this evening. He went on to say:

Its success is a measure of the attraction of Army life now and Deputies can assure any suitable young men in their constituencies, who may be contemplating joining the Army, that, if they enlist, they will enjoy pay and conditions which will compare very favourably with those obtainable in civilian life.

I do not want to take from the Minister's campaign to increase the numbers in the Army. He says that, if we have suitable applicants, we should encourage them to join. I fully recommend the Army as an occupation for a young man. This is an exhortation by the Minister but he should tell us why the television advertisements asking young men to join the Army and enjoy the outdoor and responsible life have disappeared. This gives the impresson that the Minister has achieved his target, that they have reached the full complement in the Army, and do not want any more recruits.

There is nothing in this Estimate to convey that the Minister is asking us to vote additional money for a recruitment campaign. If the Minister asked for that money for recruitment purposes, I would be willing to give it to him. Perhaps it comes under the heading of Post Office services. The Minister for Posts and Telegraphs has an extraordinary way of extracting money from all Departments. Here is another £106,000 the Minister is seeking solely because of increases in postal charges, an increase of approximately 35 per cent.

The Minister is satisfied with the recruiting campaign. He was so satisfied with it he has given it up and simply makes an appeal in the House here that if we meet the right type of young man to send him along. He says it is continuing to be very successful. I think Deputy de Valera asked him if he could spell out how the recruiting campaign was going, how many more men we have, and I hope the Minister will furnish that information to us. I doubt if Deputy de Valera's worry about breach of national security would prevent the Minister from so doing. Certainly, if it was as successful as the Minister appears to convey, he would be shouting it from the rooftops. Perhaps the Minister would let us know what percentage increase we have had.

I shall tell Deputies.

There are a number of matters on which I would like some information from the Minister. Even Deputy Bermingham, supporting the Minister's call for extra recruits for the Army, admitted that this was a good time for them because there is no alternative employment. Were we to be really honest about it the Minister would have to say a little more than he did in his statement today.

Its success is a measure of the attraction of Army life now....

I accept that it is a measure but any great success it may have had, to my mind 90 per cent, arises from the inability of these young people to find alternative employment. Were the statistics made available to us by the Minister for the Public Service we would find that the application lists for all jobs this year, which the Minister for Defence could confirm with regard to cadetships, were twice and three times the size they were in recent years, because young people are desperate for jobs. Certainly I will not say they are so desperate they will join the Army; because that would be wrong. But I can say that more than 50 per cent of what the Minister describes as a successful recruiting campaign has been brought about by the lack of opportunities in other directions. I would not ask him, as a responsible Minister, to concede that. But anybody looking objectively at it would have to admit that this was the case.

I put down a parliamentary question about two weeks ago, but unfortunately was not here for the reply. It had to do with recruiting and the transport costs mentioned in this Supplementary Estimate. It had to do also with the appeal made by the Minister today that we encourage suitable young men. There is a great chance afforded the Army at present, because of lack of opportunities elsewhere, of recruiting a really good type of young man. The views I express here are with the object of encouraging the Minister and helping him in this respect. I suggest that the Minister should open discussions with CIE with a view to introducing a scheme of subsidised transport for a certain number of Army personnel. I am not suggesting that he introduce a scheme like the school transport service, which could not be operated in regard to the Army.

I travel to Dublin almost daily. Going through the towns of Portlaoise and Monasterevan, so much in the news at present, and at other intermediate points along that road I pass —and "pass" is the operative word because one usually loads up in Portlaoise—a number of Army personnel hitching lifts to Kildare and the Curragh barracks. At the first pedestrian crossing in Portlaoise I can pick up a carload of three or four and I pass everybody I see between there and Kildare. I have spoken to these young men and asked them why they do not take the bus, which has usually passed a little earlier. They are due at the Curragh or Kildare at 9 o'clock in the morning. There is a bus that passes through Portlaoise at approximately 7.45 a.m., a suitable one for them. But they say: "The return fare to the Curragh is now about 80p, and for five or six days a week that is a bit thick. We come down here at approximately 7.30 a.m. and we usually get a lift." I have asked them: "What happens when you do not get a lift; when you are not in until 9.15 a.m. or 9.20 a.m.?" Their reply is: "We get the ears boxed off us." When I asked them if they are much later than that what happens their reply is: "We stay at home; we have a headache or something like that."

Here is a CIE bus, which I think starts in Mountmellick, leaving Portlaoise almost empty. I am not suggesting that they be given free transport but I do suggest that some deal be made to subsidise their transport. This would be of benefit all round. I am speaking about something of which I have had experience. I would calculate that approximately 20 to 30 Army personnel travel from Portlaoise and from intermediate points, places such as New Inn Cross, Ballybrittas and Monasterevin, to Kildare and the Curragh. A number of them have arrangements for lifts in cars. If one young fellow has a car, he alternates his passengers week after week; but there are people who thumb lifts continuously.

Perhaps the Minister could come to an arrangement with CIE whereby such men could get a bus from Portlaoise to the Curragh and back for, say, 20p or 25p. That would mean some additional revenue for CIE, because they do not get that revenue any way. That would help to lessen the need for the subsidisation of CIE transport. Perhaps an arrangement could be arrived at under which the subsidised ticket would not operate if the bus was full. This also would make Army life more attractive to people living within a certain radius of such barracks.

I have practical knowledge of the service that could be provided to the Kildare Artillery Barracks and to the Curragh. It is not a question of laying on special buses but of making arrangements within the existing service. I am satisfied that if the Minister for Defence and his officials sat down with CIE, they could decide on a scheme involving no charge to the Army but benefiting CIE. There must be a similar situation in regard to the Army barracks in Galway, Kilkenny. Athlone and various other centres that buses travel to and from. The scheme I suggest would help the recruiting campaign.

I had a parliamentary question down two weeks ago asking the Minister if he had considered this, and I got a negative reply. All I am asking him to do is to consider it, because I think there is a certain amount of sense in it. I give this much credit to the Minister.

From my knowledge of him as an individual and having faced him from the other side of the House on previous occasions in another Department. I can say if one sows the seeds of an idea he is sensible enough to look at it, and if it turns out to be a good idea he is willing to acknowledge it. I know he will not say: "This could not be a good idea because Lalor could not think up a good one" or "If we adopt it, Lalor will take credit for it." The Minister is too big a man for that. I have always had good relations with the Minister for Defence, and I give him that credit.

I wanted to refer to an FCA hut in a place called Ballyroan. Is there any heading under which I could introduce that, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle?

On the main Estimate.

I do not suppose there is extra money being sought for it. I just want to tell the Minister I shall be writing to his Department one of these days asking him to allow the Ballyroan Brass Band to use the FCA hall in Ballyroan, the use of which they have been deprived of recently. It is one of the leading bands in the midlands and should be facilitated. The Department have done it before and I hope they will do it again. When we come to the main Estimate I do not suppose there will be the need to raise this matter because I am sure the Minister will have fixed it up in the meantime.

I should be glad if the Minister, when replying, would give a little more information under the compensation heading. He says: "Provision has also been made in the Supplementary Estimate for an additional £111,000 under subhead C.C which is required for increased compensation payments.

I shall do that.

It is such a sizeable increase, over 200 per cent, on the original amount that I would hope to get some information about it. In regard to the savings arising from the non-delivery of the jet aircraft, perhaps he could tell us when he is expecting delivery. He is such a good flyer I am sure it would be disastrous following the Mayo by-election if there was any changeover and he did not get the inaugural run-in. I am sure he would be anxious to get the plane in as quickly as possible.

We have two.

I thought the Minister would like to run in the other one.

I will go up and loop-the-loop if the Deputy wants me to.

In this Estimate there was provision for the spending of £48 million, and now there is need for £10.3 million extra to cover the salaries and expenses of the office of the Minister for Defence, including services rendered. The Minister underestimated by £10 million what he required, but when he was calculating what he would get back in, he overestimated to the extent of £80,000. Under the heading of Sales of Hides and Offals, he estimated he would get £6,000 more than he got. Is it that hides have dropped in value? Is that one of a few things that have gone down in price?

There are other things in it as well.

There is a deficiency in the sale of hides and offal of £6,000. Are there other items?

There are other items.

He is £27,000 behind in receipts on Discharge by Purchase. I take it that that in its own way can be encouraging. I presume the Minister is pleased that he overestimated what he would get, that a number of Army personnel who, during the normal course would be expected to buy themselves out of the Army and go into some civilian occupation, decided to stay in the Army. I am assuming that is what that means.

There is an apprenticeship school in Naas. Very often boys go to the apprenticeship school; they serve in the Army for a while, then buy themselves out and get good civilian employment. They are well trained for it. The difficulty in trying to cover such a range of things in a debate of this nature is that we leave out some of the really good things in the Irish Army, and certainly the manner in which the boys are prepared in the apprenticeship school in Naas leaves nothing to be desired. I presume from their point of view it does, but my experience has been that a young man who buys himself out can move subsequently into whatever occupation he has been trained for and has no trouble in slotting into such employment.

I hope the Minister can say if men who would normally be expected to buy themselves out of the Army did not do so and if that can be attributed to the Army having become more attractive for them or, on the other hand, that it is attributed to the fact that there are no opportunities outside the Army. I would like the Minister to state if I am right in saying that the Army vis-à-vis outside employment has become more attractive.

I am surprised to note that there is a deficiency in the refunds in respect of treatment and maintenance of patients in military hospitals to the tune of £14,000. I wonder how much the original Estimate was in relation to that. Is that refund payable by the sick Army men or by one of the health boards? Under another heading we have an increase of 70 per cent in the insurance stamp, which is usually expected to cover hospital charges. How do the refunds fall short of expectations to the tune of £14,000? I assume that those refunds are due from the health boards. It does not say payment in respect of treatment and maintenance of patients. Surely we should not have the taxpayer, on the one hand, asked to make up this deficiency of £14,000 and, on the other hand, as a taxpayer, he is not paying it. I should like the Minister to indicate how this deficiency is accounted for.

Some Deputy welcomed the fact that in the Army we are getting away from the generals. It does not look well in a Supplementary Estimate to be told that repayments of sums advanced to officers for the purchase of motor cars fell short by £15,000. This does not auger well for the situation within the Army. Perhaps there is a very logical explanation but I consider this is bad and should not be allowed to go through without comment. The Minister for Defence is coming before this House and is asking for an extra £10 million for his Department. We are being asked to vote an extra £5 million to pay the Army personnel. It appears they are fully entitled to whatever increases have been given and if it costs a total of £31 million to keep our Army right we should pay that money. However, if there are arrangements whereby Army officers are facilitated by having money advanced to them to purchase motor cars we should expect those Army officers to be as honourable with the people of the country as I feel they are to them. I would hate to feel that I was exaggerating the position in this regard and that I was drawing attention to something which was easily explained. I am glad that the Minister will possibly have the opportunity of answering this query tonight because, although note should be taken of this £15,000, it would be bad if undue notice was taken of it. This sum of money was obviously not paid back as expected by the Army personnel when they prepared the Estimate last December. I am sure it must take 20 to 30 officers to create this deficiency of £15,000. I would hate to think that there are 30 Army officers who are not meeting their commitments in this regard. I hope there is a logical explanation for this.

I have not come in here, as the Minister assumes, to do some sort of stalling job. I was very anxious to talk about a number of matters in relation to this Supplementary Estimate. I cannot understand, after six months reduction in the price of electricity and gas, why an additional sum should be required for increased prices here. I also wonder about the deficiencies in the Appropriations-in-Aid. The four I mentioned intrigue me. I found myself putting circles in front of each of them because I found it remarkable that he should take in £6,000 less on the sale of hides and offals. I did not find it extraordinary that there should be a deficiency of £27,000 in receipts on discharge by purchase because I believe there is a justifiable reason for it. I would like to hear the Minister's explanation.

I cannot understand the refunds in respect of treatment and maintenance of patients in mental hospitals falling short by £14,000. I hope I am wrong in my assessment in relation to the shortfall of £15,000 in the repayments of sums advanced to officers for the purchase of motor cars.

I have a personal regard for the Minister and I believe he has an interest in the affairs of the people in his Department. He comes in for a lot of publicity, both fair and unfair. I accept he is doing all he can to improve the lot of Army personnel and that he is running his Department very well.

I should like to pay tribute to the Army and to add my voice to those who advocate the Army to young people who cannot find employment. During the years there was a traditional attitude towards armies and it can be said that it is only in recent times that people here have come to respect the Army. If ever there was a time to change the old traditional attitude, now is that time. There are many people who cannot obtain work and who are drawing unemployment benefit and the Army would be very good for such people, morally, mentally and physically. If young people will not join the Army, at least they, should consider joining the FCA.

In Cork the Army have integrated totally with the community. Those of us engaged in public life, either in a voluntary or in a professional way, have considerable admiration for the willingness of the Army to answer any call made on them. Any worthy cause has only to be mentioned to those in command in Collins Barracks, Cork, and the response is 100 per cent. A new man was appointed a few weeks ago and one of his first tasks was to visit the Lord Mayor to tell him that he hoped the amicable relations between the Army and the community in Cork would be continued.

I should like young people to regard the Army as a worthwhile career, one of benefit to themselves and their country. Deputy Lalor referred to the training school at Naas. There, as in many other centres, is the opportunity for those who want to improve themselves, to learn a craft or trade. The Army offers all those opportunities. Personally I do not think there has been any valid argument put forward against having able-bodied young men joining the Army for a few years. This is done in other countries and I do not understand why it cannot even be discussed here without provoking an outcry. I have not a great deal of experience with regard to other armies but I am very proud of the conduct of our Army personnel. I wonder if there is a better behaved army in the world? Their conduct at home and abroad is exemplary and all of us should be proud of them. However, more than anything else they should be proud of themselves.

Not sufficient attention has been focused on the Army as a career for the ordinary man in the street, not necessarily in the officer class because we also need privates. The better the private, the better will be the officer. If the recruiting campaign is successful I would urge the Minister to continue with it. Able-bodied young men should not be on the dole when we have an Army that requires recruits. I know some people will say they do not wish to learn how to fire guns or to kill people. That is all very well but there is no reason why they should not join the Red Cross or Civil Defence. These groups always require people and in this sphere much work can be done without firing a shot. Those who serve their time in such organisations learn discipline and this will be of great help to them later on in life. I have pleasure in supporting the Supplementary Estimate because the money will be spent for a very good purpose.

It is interesting to note that we spend almost £60 million on our Defence Forces. Not many years ago that would have represented our total national budget. I realise that inflation is responsible for a certain amount but the general upgrading of the armed forces accounts for a considerable amount. I wonder if we are right in putting all the emphasis on the Army? There may be an evolution, where the tendency will be forced on us to develop the Naval Service as much as the Army. There are two or three factors that may urge us to act that way.

First, there is the need for greater protection of fisheries. Every day we hear of fishermen protesting against the poaching or the deliberate infringement of our waters by foreign trawlers that are much bigger than ours. Therefore, we will need a much better Naval Service. As I said before in the House, the Minister should take the basic decision to build an extra naval ship each year. If we had a dozen ships like the Deirdre that was built in Cork, there would be employment given to the craftsmen. The steel and the furnishings required for these vessels could be made here and, consequently, the outlay leaving the country would not be great. We would be enlarging the Naval Service, providing employment in the shipyards and giving ourselves a sense of pride that we could build small defence ships as good as anyone else. It is obvious that we need more vessels for fishery protection work.

The Minister's statement referred to an additional sum required for marine pollution counter-measures. Pollution of the atmosphere, of the seas and the land is becoming a major problem and greater measures to combat it will be necessary. The people demand that we do our part to ensure that the seas are not polluted. Somebody must supervise the seas; we cannot depend on another power to do it for us, we must do it ourselves. We will need more ships for the inspection of any pollution incident on our seas and for generally patrolling territorial waters.

Despite the fact that we need oil so much I believe that when you begin to take it from the ocean bed you are interfering with nature, disturbing something that has been there for millions of years and that, therefore, one must expect nature will not take too kindly to our efforts and we may well have serious pollution in any part of the sea around our coasts. If the United Kingdom had its first oil brought ashore this week we can look, perhaps, to the next four or five years for oil to come ashore here and the neighbouring service must then be ready to supervise the operation purely from the point of view of pollution. In ten years' time we may very well not talk of an Army ranker or a naval rating but will have evolved a different type of defence figure who may well be a marine who will have experience of serving on land and sea, something like the figure so glamourised in films of the marine who can march to marshal airs or to a sailor's hornpipe. This will be the figure that will be in our defence set-up.

Earlier, the involvement of the Army with the Garda in the maintenance of peace was mentioned. I think, therefore, the role of the man or woman in defence will change so greatly in the future and I wonder if we are being too conservative in our outlook. While the Minister will ensure that the Army have the best possible equipment, are we considering the men and women who will serve in the Army and carry out the duties thrust on them? There was a time when if we saw a soldier in the street, at a bridge or road block we would raise our eyebrows. While we must always maintain the division between civil and military power we see a society now evolving in which it is not so easy to maintain this division and today few will cavil at the fact that the Army are on duty in a small town not so far away helping to prevent a frightful injustice. The Defence Forces in the future may be more costly but they will call for the type of person who will be at least up to today's high standard. The Minister must expand the thinking in regard to future development.

Educational services should also be expanded so as to prepare for the type of person we should have in the 1980s in the Defence Forces. When one sees cadets in Galway going to and from UCG this is a great thing: the Army is acknowledging the part it has to play in helping those cadets to reach a very high standard of education. These educational services should be available to every private, NCO and officer wishing to participate in further education. It must be our ambition to say and believe that every one of our soldiers carries a marshal's baton in his knapsack. We must, therefore, ensure that we can offer the best educational services to men in the Army and maintain and, if possible, improve the present high standard.

I saw hints today—I do not know if they are correct—that we may be asked to join some international defence pact. I do not know if the Government have been approached but this country has loyally played its part in the United Nations. Our men have gone abroad and some of them have given their lives in defence of freedom and in helping developing peoples. I think that is as far as we should go in joining any defence pact. We have shown that we are willing to send our men abroad and some of them gave their lives for the principles of the United Nations. We are playing and will continue to play our part. We should show Europe that as a very small country in Europe we have so developed our Defence Forces that they are quite competent to maintain the seas around our coasts and deal with matters such as pollution and that they are also competent to deal with the protection of our fishermen. People will not begrudge the taxation involved in the expansion of such a force. At present the Army are being praised—and quite rightly —for the quiet and efficient way in which they work. The equipment we are buying under this Estimate will make our Defence Forces even more efficient.

I asked the Minister to bear in mind the great need to expand the Naval Service because this is the way things are pointing now. I suggest he should consider the preparation and establishment of a marine corps because we shall have to call more and more on these men as we discover oil or gas off our coasts and as we expand our fishing fleet. The waters around the coasts of other countries have become so polluted that their fishing fleets may well be driven to the Atlantic here where the sea is not quite so polluted. When one goes to Copenhagen or some of the continental cities, as we do as members of the Council of Europe, we are told that some cities in the Soviet Union and outside it are pouring refuse into the seas, such as the Baltic, which is terribly polluted. These are very powerful nations, but the lesson has been lost on them that a great nation today is one which can preserve the atmosphere from vile pollution. We will have to do that more in the future than we have in the past.

I am not a militarist, a tactician or a strategist but I believe I am right in saying that the emphasis should be on the building up of the Naval Service. I hope the Minister, who has more knowledge of these matters than I have, will consider this. He may find it difficult but in the future he will find that our great need is for an expanded Naval Service. The Army may always be necessary but we could combine the Army and the Naval Service into a Marine Corps which can work on land and at sea and continue to maintain the people's confidence in its efficiency. I noticed that the Army is often referred to as the "Irish Army" but we have only one Army here and it should be described as "the Army". To refer to it as the Irish Army would seem to indicate that we accept the presence of other armies and I find this annoying, although it is only a small point.

On that point the Deputy could look at it two ways. By using hyperbole one can often make a thing look bigger or stronger, or even by not using hyperbole one can obtain the same effect. In my view the phrase "Irish Army" is quite clear; there is only one army here and it is the Irish Army. One thing that came through this debate was the talk about the cost of the armed forces. Naturally, if a Minister comes with an Estimate of £48 million and later introduces a Supplementary Estimate for £10 million, he has produced a colossal increase percentage wise. Deputy Lalor pointed out that the cost of the armed forces for the year would amount to £60 million, which is very high.

Some time ago I drew attention to the fact that the cost of security services, between the Department of Justice and the Department of Defence, had risen to more than £100 million. This was repeated in a major speech by the Taoiseach later, and by the Minister for Local Government last week. While all that has been said is true we must face the fact that on security and justice there will always be need for policemen and an army. We should also face the fact that, whether we like it or not, there will be a need in the years to come for an Irish Army of considerable proportions and great equipment. We are not going to have a situation where we could be considering what to do with the money voted for the Department of Defence on social welfare. That is not on. We must face the fact that to get security for the State and create a situation whereby people can go to bed in relatively peaceful surroundings we must have these services and these services must be paid for.

We have to accept the cost of the armed forces. Deputy de Valera developed this theme a little further when he said that aid to the civil power was all right but to do it through an army, if one did not need an army, was waste and extravagance. He said that an auxiliary police force could do the job just as well. I would go entirely with that Deputy in relation to normal crime in normal times. If there was an upsurge of normal crime there could be an extension of the police force. Each policeman has a career until he is 63 and when he is accepted he can follow that career and, if he is good enough, can become the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána. But when one is dealing with subversion it is not possible to deal with it by extending the police force. In circumstances of subversion one has to deal with people who are prepared to up the stakes in the game of poker; those people are prepared to say that they will accept the highest sentence of the courts because they feel they will not be caught. They decide to take the most they can get, as was evidenced in Limerick recently in the shape of a raid in which £46,000 was stolen.

That sort of approach necessitates a back-up of the police force by the Army. Larger nations than ours resort to this and the reason they do so is that, naturally, in ordinary national housekeeping a normal police force is maintained or, if one wants to be absolutely safe, slightly more than what is necessary as a normal police force is maintained. But when—I use this phrase deliberately—the cancer of subversion breaks out one has a different situation altogether, particularly if one has, as we have in these islands, the concept of an unarmed police force. In those circumstances one must have behind that police force, when that subversion breaks out, the strength, the discipline and, as Deputy de Valera said, the restraint of the armed forces under discipline. They are needed to back up the police force and see to it that the cancer of subversion is stamped out. That is the concept and we have to accept it, even though we would prefer that all crime be dealt with by the police force. However, we are not dealing with ordinary crime and Monasterevan tonight makes that clear.

We are not dealing with a situation whereby young men may have been misguided on the path of crime and might have committed crimes which they would not commit if things were normal. Instead we have a group of people who are saying that the State must be pulled down, that the Establishment must be destroyed, that they will take over and put other people aside. The only strength there is to deal with that is the Army and the best way we could have an Army placed in this position is under the 1954 Act. We are in aid of the civil power and we provide the services when a Chief Superintendent of the Garda Síochána asks for them. That is more democratic than any other system. In Northern Ireland the right to search, the right to arrest, and all sorts of things, is given to the British Army. A much larger nation has had to resort to an Army to strengthen the police force there. Our concept is correct. When the police force need the service of the Army, need the strength of armed men to combat, let us face it, armed men and, worse still, armed women, then they are available. I do not say this in criticism of anybody else but in the realisation that our system is different. Some people may think it is not as good or as strong, but the move by the gentleman in charge of the North of Ireland in the last 24 hours was a direct movement towards our position here—trial by the courts and an Army in support of the police force —and that is the way it should be. I mention this because of the abstract contribution of Deputy de Valera, as he described it himself. I have found that Deputy's contribution very good and he displayed, as I would expect, a knowledge of the situation. I am trying to put what he said in a positive manner on the basis of what our position is and what the position of other people is also.

Deputy Andrews asked me what the position was in regard to recruitment and I should like to state that it is good. I was asked if, in the interest of security, I should give the position but there is no reason why I should not give it. On the 30th September, 1974, there were 1,201 officers, 3,420 NCOs, 6,656 privates and 114 cadets, making a total of 11,391 in the Army. On the 30th September, 1975, there were 1,239 officers, 3,745 NCOs, 8,125 privates and 134 cadets, making a total of 13, 243. The number of men enlisted in each month since the 31st December, 1974, is as follows: January, 380; February, 270; March, 295; April, 356; May, 257; June, 310; July, 354; August, 320; September, 486 and October, 300. The figure for October is estimated because it was too early to have absolute figures. That is altogether satisfactory.

The point was raised during the debate as to whether we were easing off. We are not. Our television and press advertising occur in planned cycles. We are at the end of a cycle. Soon another cycle will start and then we will be back on television and in the papers. This is merely an inbetween stage. We are advised that this is the way to do it. There has been no decision to stop advertising. We want more recruits. I am informed that at the moment there are 13,243 all ranks. Without going back to the Government, I can go to 14,521 all ranks, the present establishment figure. At that point, I can decide to go to the Government for an extension. I want to tell the House that I will.

Deputy Andrews asked me to read out the pay in the Army. This might be invidous for starters and would also take a long time. Any Deputy who wishes to know the pay of everybody in the Army will be given that information. There is nothing secret about it. It can be got in the Directory of State Services. I will give a few examples. A married sergeant major with 15 years' service has £73.65 per week. A married sergeant with the same service has £59.70 a week, and a three star private with the same service has £48.37 a week. Their single counterparts get sergeant major with 15 years' service £65.89, sergeant £51.94 and a three star private £40.61. A single company quarter-master sergeant gets £56.23 and a married man gets £63.99. The private grade 1, with less than three years' service gets £41.49. That is a very fair wage and I am sure we can look for recruits on that basis because we are offering them a good wage, a decent chance of promotion and a chance to serve their country.

The question of compensation was raised and there is nothing to worry about here. It happened that there were more traffic accidents than we budgeted for. The original provision on Subhead CC—Compensation— was £47,000 and the supplementary provision is £111,000. As examples, some road traffic accident settlements were £22,000, £20,000, £8,000, £5,000, and the death of a civilian employee, £22,000. Also, a number of cases arising out of controlled explosions by the Army Ordnance Corps were settled, one for the sum of £4,000. It would be very foolish to budget for no traffic accidents because nobody knows what will happen in the future.

I will be talking about the Naval Service later. Deputy Andrews is incorrect in what he said about corvettes because it is years and years since we had a corvette. His idea of mother ships to smaller vessels in the shape of a corvette is wrong. His statement that trawlers went out in force 7-8 winds is so incorrect that it would be very difficult even to comment on it. We have an all-weather fishery protection vessel and are in the process of ordering another. We have three British minesweepers which will not last for ever. The hoary old chestnut that we should have many smaller vessels is just not on.

The seas around our coast are so rough on so many days a year that we need all-weather fishery protection vessels. The best value that can be got, as we see it, is in the shape of the present design of the LE Deirdre and we hope to build another. If we were to look for a British minesweeper, it would cost us much more and would produce no better results.

The heavy trawlers of today are not as fast as the LE Deirdre, so we can catch any of them. In law what is known as hot pursuit arises. If one sees a foreign trawler within one's fishery limits, and one then pursues that trawler, it is necessary that the trawler is kept in sight, or on radar, until it is apprehended. If, because of a lack of fuel, that ship gives up, a further ship may, without a break in continuity, continue in hot pursuit and apprehend it. That is the position as far as the arrest and charging of poachers is concerned, and smaller vessels would be of no use. I gave information on this in the Dáil to Deputy Gallagher on 24th June and on that occasion described it as the hoariest old chestnut there ever was.

I have a sheaf of replies by previous Ministers on this subject which go back for the last ten years. Everybody wants a little boat in his own harbour. To pursue, board, arrest and bring to court, you must have an all-weather fishery protection vessel and we need more of them. Deputy Andrews said that trawlers put to sea in force 7-8 gales. I want to tell the Deputy, as one who got his feet wet a few times, that trawlers do not go to sea in force 7-8 gales: they are caught out in them, as we all are.

Deputy Andrews also raised the question of the judge in court saying: "Join the Army and I will let you off." I conveyed to the Adjutant General that this has happened. I want to say here and now that there is no such thing as: "Join the Army and I will let you off." If I have the responsibility of putting young boys in billets of 15 or 20, and if a young boy steals from his fellows, or maybe he does not have very clean habits, I will have five or ten of the other boys buying themselves out of the Army. There is no question of any district justice or judge in the country saying: "Join the Army and I will let you off." There is the suggestion of the Army authorities being too severe. If it were possible to put every private soldier into a private house or single chalet where he would live with himself and would not have dealings with his fellows, then it would be possible to say he is on his own. That is not possible in the Army because the spirit of comradeship is part of Army life. If through my neglect I were to allow persons charged and convicted to be recruited into the Army I would be guilty and I should resign.

There were questions raised about hides and offals and other such matters. There was a suggestion in relation to a deficiency in the matter of officers' advances for motor cars and so on. Here Deputy Lalor was operating on a wrong premise. The deficiency in respect of cars was £15,000 and the provision was £50,000. There is no question of officers not refunding advances. There must be an estimated amount of what officers will look for. If advances are not made up to the level of the estimate then of course there will be fewer repayments and what you gain on one side you can hand back to the Department of Finance on the basis of money not lent. If you have not lent moneys you do not get repayments. Deputy Lalor was making the classic error of looking at one side of the ledger and not the other.

Where is the other side?

The other side would be a hand back which the Deputy, as former Minister for Industry and Commerce, should know about.

Where was the hand back?

The situation is quite simple. The Deputy was looking at a deficiency in Appropriations-in-Aid. The position is that officers did not ask us for the full £50,000 and therefore the amount repaid was also smaller.

We are looking for another £15,000 immediately.

Yes, but on the other side of the ledger there will be the hand back.

The Minister is looking at the wrong side of the ledger. That is why he did not wind up in the Department of Industry and Commerce.

I am very happy where I am. I should like to deal with Deputy Lalor's suggestion about providing reduced transport charges for members of the Forces going to report for work at barracks. The Deputy, as a former Minister, knows that one of the worries we have is the question of people going to work and the cost of their transport to work. The accepted position is that everybody goes to work at his own cost and I reject the suggestion that any member of the Defence Forces, civilian employees or otherwise, should have his transport to work subsidised any more than any other member of the community. We cannot discriminate in that way. Every person who has a job and a wife and children to maintain has to get to work and I do not believe any member of the Defence Forces in the Curragh would thumb a lift as Deputy Lalor suggested. He said if they did not get a lift they would go home and get a headache. I do not accept that. It would be wrong for members of the Defence Forces in uniform to thumb lifts. I would expect a higher standard from them. Everybody agrees their wages are fair and good, and if being in the Army is a good job for the first time, it is not appropriate for them to be thumbing lifts to get to work. There are many ways of getting to work, if only on a bicycle.

We cannot have this interrupting. The Minister must be allowed to reply.

The matter of marine pollution was mentioned, oil spillages at sea. We and the Department of Local Government are looking at this. Some Deputy said the Naval Service was the ideal agency to control oil spillages. It is not. To deal with oil pollution at sea, detergents are applied. If there is a three-mile slick more than four boats are needed. The more boats the better. The start is the purchase of about £10,000 worth of detergents. The view is to have a large number of trawlers which would be most likely to defend their own fishing area if there was a spillage. They would go out and apply the detergent. There is no question of penny-pinching about it, no question of our being slow. The best solution is for us to supply the detergents and if there is a major spillage the detergents could be supplied to trawler owners who would go out and spread it. There is no decision on this.

Deputy Bermingham mentioned the civilian prison at the Curragh and the Curragh housing situation. I want to thank the military police who are looking after the civilian prisoners at the Curragh. They have been excellent in every way. They have a hard job to do. I should like to explain that if several of the people there were in another prison, possibly they would be assassinated. We have seen elsewhere in the country one group assassinating another group. We have to segregate prisoners of one group from those of another group of subversives and I extend my sincere thanks to those who are looking after the prisoners at the Curragh.

What has happened in relation to the Curragh houses is that we built 50 last year. They were started before the oil crisis and we built them with a communal gas tank which would supply central heating and cooking facilities to those houses. The houses turned out cheaply. Then the oil crisis came along and in building the second 50 houses we had to think again. We decided we should have one solid fuel grate in each house and had to change our minds about central heating and cooking by gas. We have not been able to start the building of these new houses but they will be built.

Regarding the housing situation at the Curragh, the study has revealed that the right number of houses there would be about 450. We hope to build those during the next eight or nine years and to evacuate, as we proceed, those dwellings that do not meet the habitation standards in modern times.

I take this opportunity of expressing my thanks to the Army personnel who are performing onerous duties, sometimes at risk to their own lives, in all the prisons.

Deputy Bermingham referred to the question of overholders. In this regard we are not too badly off in terms of numbers. I can understand the position of someone who, having served in the Army all his life, finds on reaching retirement that if he has not made provision for alternative accommodation, he cannot avail of his pension. However, the situation is not serious in that there are 36 overholders in the Eastern Command, 36 at the Curragh, 12 in the Southern Command and two in the Western Command. In addition, there are three other quarters at the Curragh which are overheld by civilians. I consider it to be the duty of the local authority concerned to house soldiers but on the other hand when there is the necessity to maintain a constant guard in times of subversion it is necessary that they be living close to the areas of difficulty. In this context, although I must not, for security reasons, divulge the number, we must have a certain number of men available at all times at the Curragh and at other barracks so that places like Portlaoise can be coped with at the shortest possible notice. This means that we need some housing and the overholders interfere with this situation. For instance, if it were not for overholders at the Curragh we would have a further 39 quarters available there for extra men.

In circumstances where it is necessary for a guard to be maintained for 24 hours a day for a seven-day week one must multiply by five in order to arrive at the number of men required for that duty having regard to a five-day working week. It will be seen, therefore, that such duties necessitate the deployment of a large number of personnel. All I can do is to assess the situation as best as possible and to endeavour to ensure that the most efficient situation is developed.

While we are on this question of accommodation I should like to express my appreciation of the work done by Kildare County Council in endeavouring always to give us as many houses as possible. The same can be said of other local authorities. In my own area they built a group of houses on what had been Department of Defence land and in that instance they were good enough to allot six of those houses to Army personnel who, I might say, qualified for them in the ordinary way. It must be realised that the Army man, like anybody else, is a citizen who is as entitled as anybody else to be housed. Should he have three children and be in the same circumstances in every other respect as a man with two children, he should be accommodated first.

Deputy Coughlan raised the question of Knockalisheen and of the possible purchase of Mungret. The ball in that regard is in Limerick's court. I could not forecast any possible decision but the situation so far as we are concerned is that Sarsfield Barracks is a very fine building. I understand that it was burned during the trouble times and for this reason it was renovated in such a way as to render it quite a modern complex. However, it has one major deficiency and that is that it has no facilities for recreation except for a small soccer pitch which becomes flooded from time to time. Where there are hundreds of young men there must be facilities, first, for military training and, secondly, for recreation. From that point of view the 190 acres in our possession at Knockalisheen are very important. It is not important from the point of view of buildings because the old buildings there are in very bad condition and have not been used since they were occupied by the Hungarian refugees. They could be written off. Fluidity must be preserved in dealing with Army property. Should it be the position that Limerick County Council and the corporation wish to come forward with proposals to the Department of Defence, the Department, the Government and the Department of Finance would deal with any such proposal.

Somebody raised the point about the two items in respect of which there was a saving. One area was in respect of the Fouga aircraft and the other was in respect of the Curragh houses. I have dealt with the latter and in relation to the Fouga jets the situation is that they were being assembled in the oldest factory belonging to Aerospatiale outside Paris where there was a strike because the workers in this factory had been there from the beginning of aviation manufacture and, consequently, did not wish to move to another area when the company wished to move them. When I was at the Paris air show I took the opportunity, together with the secretary of my Department and the OC of the Air Corps, Colonel O'Connor, of going to the French Minister for Defence who undertook to do his best in regard to our getting these aircraft. The result has been that of six purchases we have got two so far. These were brought in in their bare feet, so to speak, the arionic components being put in by Aer Lingus. I understand that one of these machines is back at Baldonnel now and we hope that the other four will arrive soon. This will mean that jet training can continue and will not cease with the end of the service life of the Vampire jets, the last of which I had a flight in at a time when it had only another six hours flying time.

On the question of the Naval Service the desire is to provide further services and to ensure that we have adequate fishery protection facilities. Because the boat we would build would be a warship we would not, under EEC regulations, have to go to open tender in the EEC. However, that produces another situation in that it is not feasible to buy something and then ask the seller what is the price. Therefore, the Department of Defence have retained Irish Shipping as their agents. This company have the expertise to enable them to deal with the builders of the boat. The operation is at an advanced stage and we can hope to have this fishery protection vessel in the water by this time 12 months. Somebody suggested that we might be able to purchase at the rate of a ship a year. I would not like to quantify any such purchase but if we can buy at regular intervals we can build up our fleet so that when the fishing limits are extended we will be in a position to afford proper protection.

Mention was made of Cathal Brugha barracks. Because of the upsurge in numbers we have had to use the barracks to accommodate these numbers. There is a Council of Defence recommendation to move out from Cathal Brugha and build a new barracks. This barracks covers over 40 acres in the heart of Dublin and it is a fantastically valuable site. We are working towards the stage when we will be able to present a concrete proposal to the Government and I hope it will not be too long before we can do that.

With regard to the landing of civilian aircraft on airstrips, we have got sanction from the Department of Finance to make a charge. Landings are being made at Finner Camp and other places. We would be anxious to facilitate local commercial interests by allowing small planes to use airstrips, but there is a certain constraint because the IRA seem to like light aircraft and helicopters. Naturally absolute security must be maintained. That will be done and, parallel with that, we would hope to facilitate as far as we can those anxious to use these strips.

The Border area is a constant worry. It has to be preserved. The works at Dundalk will be finished in December. The building will accommodate more than 100 extra soldiers for Border duty. It is possible that some might be elsewhere along the Border rather than in Dundalk itself and the probable number of soldiers occupying the barracks at any one time would be between 70 and 90. The work on the new barracks at Monaghan to accommodate 205 personnel is well in hand. I have not visited the site but I am informed the contractor is working at great speed. There is a great quantity of earth moving machinery on the site and work is progressing very well.

We have 27,000 people in Civil Defence, 21,000 fully trained and 6,000 in training. Britain disbanded her civil defence services in 1969. We have preserved ours. They will be there to deal with refugees should the necessity arise. Naturally, we would prefer that there would not be refugees but, if we have to cope, the service will do that. All the plans have been made but, for security reasons, I cannot tell the House exactly what they are. The House may take it, however, that a most efficient organisation will be available to handle any situation that may arise.

Deputy Coughlan raised the question of the Army Equitation Team. The money voted last year was sufficient. At the moment two quality horses are just not available. A selection team has been right around the country and seen all the horses on offer. They have advised me they could not make a bid. If we can advertise Irish horses all over the world by our efforts, then that will be done. I cannot interfere with the advice of those expert in this sphere. I have the utmost confidence in them. I hope, however, that they will find themselves in a position to make recommendations to me in the near future.

Reference was made to the Distinguished Service Medal. There were two instances involving helicopters. On each occasion a crew of three carried out a most hazardous rescue, one at Glendalough in 1970 when a man was rescued from the cliff face by a helicopter hovering within four feet of the cliff face, and the second was at the waterfall at Powerscourt in almost identical circumstances. I was pleased to have the honour of presenting the medals on the second occasion to those involved. I was also pleased to find that one of the noncommissioned personnel was in Canada on helicopter maintenance and was earning as much as the Minister for Defence here.

The question of service in Cyprus, Lebanon and elsewhere was raised by Deputy Carter and Deputy Healy. Up to the present over 15,000 tours of duty, all ranks, have been completed. The men have distinguished themselves and I have nothing but praise for them. I would draw attention to the fact that our relations with the United Nations are extremely good and payments by the United Nations are also extremely good. Already some £3,500,000 has been paid and the amount outstanding is relatively small. If we see happier times I shall be very glad to make our Army available for service abroad again. We send only trained personnel. Training takes three or four years. When things level out we may be able to send our Army overseas again. The Government are insistent on full co-operation with the United Nations, always cognisant of the fact that we have to maintain security here. When circumstances are such that we can co-operate once more we will resume our work with the United Nations. At the moment we have 21 officers with the United Nations Truce Supervision Organisation. They have distinguished themselves. It is an unarmed force engaged on observing breaches of truces and so on. We have trained four groups of Zambian cadets in the Military College at the Curragh. I understand they distinguished themselves there.

On the Border there are now ten posts. Some of them are new. It is my constant worry and preoccupation to see to it that every possible help is given to the police forces in that area, that vital installations are protected, that where it is necessary to defuse bombs, this is done, and that bomb disposal teams are available.

A point was raised, I think by Deputy Carter, about bomb disposal teams. My first reaction when I became Minister for Defence was to increase the numbers, and no more about it. That is just not on. A man in charge of a bomb disposal unit is a highlytrained Army officer, a man with the highest technical knowledge and training. He has completed many different courses. He has most sophisticated equipment including infra red, X-ray and so on. He must know how every piece of his equipment works. So far we have lost no man. Unluckily my namesake, no relation of mine, Inspector Donegan, Lord rest him, of the Garda was killed by a bomb on the Cavan border. The Army officer with him at the time escaped with severe injuries.

I want the House to understand that this is not just a case of training an NCO and sending him in. We must have a person with clinical knowledge, a university graduate if possible, a man who has done all his courses and can handle anything from ten to 20 pieces of highly sophisticated equipment. This Government are determined that so far as we can ensure it, every major city and every major group of people, and every difficult stretch of the Border, will have a bomb disposal unit available at the earliest possible moment to see to it that people do not lose their lives.

I should like to mention the question of the clinic at St. Bricin's Hospital. Old IRA veterans can go to St, Bricin's for an out-patients' clinic. Since this was started about 1,600 people have applied for the service. About 5,000 or 6,000 people are eligible for it. People say constantly: "You have empty beds in St. Bricin's and in the Curragh and why cannot you take in War of Independence veterans or 1916 veterans?" We cannot do that. On the occasion of the Talbot Street bombings and the Monaghan bombing, when 40 people lost their lives, many people had to be moved from the intensive care units in the other hospitals in Dublin to the military hospital, people who were adjudged by their doctors as capable of being moved. That left the intensive care units available to the other hospitals for the unfortunate people who had been bombed. These people were between life and death and 40 people eventually died.

I want the House to understand and know that it is absolutely necessary for military hospitals to be staffed with a minimum staff and with beds available because, at any moment, in these times of subversion, there may be a necessity to deal with 40 or 50 people who need beds. The House may take it that this Government will see to it that in the various military hospitals that service will be available. On that occasion I was told by the Government to sleep in McKee Barracks, which I did, because we were waiting to see were there more bombs. The House will realise how serious this matter is and how necessary it is to face it in the way in which we are facing it.

I should like now to refer to the question of Army pensions. Army pensions are fair and right. In relation to any pension there is a temptation to say it is not enough. Between wounded and disability pension, gratuities, allowances, military service pensions, Defence Force pensions, Connaught Rangers pensions—there are only five of them left—Local Defence Force compensation and special allowances, there are 24,941 people in receipt of pensions and allowances. That is a very large number. When you take the list of military service pensions you find that, under the Military Service Pension Act, 1924, 4,250 people were awarded pensions and, under the Military Service Pensions Act, 1934, 13,936 people were awarded pensions, or 18,186 people. Bearing in mind the fact that the events which led to these pensions happened a long time ago, it seems to me that there has been a pretty generous approach and that the number of pensions is quite large.

The highest rate of military service pension is £2,558.76 per annum. The average rate of military service pension is £190 per annum. The highest rate of widow's allowance is £1,279.38 per annum and the average is £132. Military service pensioners are dying, of course. In 1960, 351 military service pensioners died; 551 died in 1974 and from January to September, 1975, the figure was 406. We all wish them long lives and years to enjoy their pensions but we must face that they are becoming fewer in number.

The applications for special allowances are also reducing because of that fact. In 1960 the number was 1,097. In 1975 it was 330. In relation to special allowances for widows, there is a basic difference between a special allowance and a military service pension. A military service pension is based on active service. A special allowance can be given on the basis of membership only. Membership of the Old IRA in 1916 or in 1921 can qualify a person for a special allowance. A special allowance is also subject to a means test. As Deputy Carter said, it constitutes a little help only for somebody who is poor. From that point of view, the other agencies of the State would be the ones to look after a widow in this case. While I would very much wish to accede to the request made here tonight and to put something to the Department of Finance in relation to widows of special allowance holders, I do not think it would be appropriate.

Deputy Malone referred to the question of solid fuel in open grates in billets. Central heating is being introduced gradually and we are using native solid fuel for the priming of the central heating system. Where this is not feasible we are using gas. We are getting rid of the old billets with a fire at each end as quickly as we can. It is quite a slow business. When one considers the amount of Defence property in the country and the number of people now to be accommodated, one realises what the situation is.

I am thankful to the House for the way they received this Supplementary Estimate. I want the House to appreciate that the Government and I are approaching the security question not with any feelings of hate or opposition to anyone but merely with feelings of sadness. The work the Army can do to help the Gardaí is probably their paramount function. Deputy de Valera said that is not Army work. I have pointed out that, all over the world, when the necessity is there the Army must go out and do the job. Our Army are doing it. Any direction I can give will be given to the best of my ability. I hope we shall see a situation in which the Army can return to more military-like duties in the near future but I cannot extend to the House any hope that such will be so. It may be some years yet before we can make these people realise that they are doing something inimical to the State, to themselves, and of great hurt to the whole economy and people of this country.

Vote put and agreed to.
Top
Share