asked the Minister for Defence if he will alter Army regulations to provide for a more humane and less demeaning relationship between officers and soldiers; if he will impose a ban on the paraphernalia of senior officers such as moustaches, gloves and batons; and if he will reject suggestions of military service or conscription as a solution to the unemployment problem.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Army Regulations.
3.
I do not accept the implication in the first part of the question. Defence Force regulations provide that officers and men will, in their treatment of subordinates, adopt such methods as will ensure respect for authority and at the same time engender feelings of self-respect and personal honour which are so essential to military efficiency.
The answer to the second part of the Deputy's question is "No".
As regards compulsory military service, I refer the Deputy to the reply given to Question No. 11 on 13 February 1986.
Is the Minister saying that he does not reject suggestions of military service or conscription as a solution to the unemployment problem? Did he mean "yes"? He said "no".
That is a separate question.
That seems to be a separate question.
The Minister said "no". On the first part of the question, would the Minister not agree that there is an excessive show of superiority suggesting superior versus inferior in our Army and that that is evident in the quarters and in the messes, that there is not the same equality as there is, for example, in the Garda force between gardaí and their officers? It is a ridiculous 19th century carry over, where soldiers of 25 years' service have to bow down and salute greenhorn officers of 20 years of age. Will the Minister not accept finally, if he said “no”, that military service is not a solution to our unemployment problem?
I am afraid the Deputy is under a misapprehension on two fronts. Taking the second one first, I do not accept that military service is a solution to the unemployment problem. In relation to the substantive issue mentioned by the Deputy, he mentioned a moustache as paraphernalia. I do not accept that either. That is a purely personal choice by members of the Defence Forces. It applies to no particular rank and I do not accept, or indeed propose, that action should be taken to deprive people of making individual choices in relation to whether they should wear moustaches. It applies to all ranks and there is no discrimination whatever. In regard to gloves, that is a prescribed form of dress, again for all ranks and there is no discrimination there. In relation to the carrying of batons, the only batons carried are those carried by conductors of military bands. Therefore, I see no discrimination whatever there. However, in order to preserve efficiency and discipline, which is badly needed in military service and possibly elsewhere, there is a long standing tradition that officers and men have certain respect for one another and they show it in a prescribed way. I think the Deputy is under a misapprehension in relation to the implication of his question.
In the interests of creating an egalitarian society would the Minister consider removing this sort of paraphernalia and changing the disciplinary codes so that ordinary soldiers will be treated in the same respectful way and with the same dignity as the officers in the Army?
I do not accept that ordinary soldiers are not treated with respect. Indeed, they are, and officers expect the same respect in return from men in the Army. That is the way it ought to be and I have no proposals for changing that.