I move:—
Section 1. To delete in line 20 the figures and words "30th day of November, 1934," inserted in Committee, and to substitute therefor the figures and words "31st day of July, 1935."
At our last meeting I asked the permission of the House to have the Report Stage of this Bill postponed for a week, because I believed that some particular matters in it had not been fully discussed. That was agreed to. It is rather natural that I should take a special interest in this particular Bill though my advice has never been asked on all these subjects. Very often it might be better if people who knew something about these things were asked for their advice. The amendment that was inserted on the Committee Stage of this Bill seemed very simple. It limited the duration of the Bill to the end of November instead of covering the full period to the end of July, 1935. Although it may seem very simple to do that, it seems to me to be a rather serious business because anything that has to do with the Army, especially here with us—anything that is likely to bring about conflict or discussion or to create a feeling of animosity—is extremely dangerous at the present time. We know that from our own experience here in the past. We know it also from the experience of other countries where things are in a still more desperate position.
I think that the supporters of the amendment are of the same opinion as I am: that a permanent Army Bill should be introduced as soon as possible. That, I have no doubt, was the object of the motion that they brought forward, but while I say that I feel that they have not sufficient understanding of what a permanent Defence Forces Bill means and what a serious matter it is. They pressed the Minister to promise that he would bring in the permanent measure by the end of November. I presume that their object in having an amendment inserted to this Bill in Committee was that the permanent Bill might be brought in as soon as possible. Although it is very important to get that done, to get finished with it and finished for ever, it is still more important that a measure of that character, when it is introduced, should be in a perfectly good state. That is a point that, I think, escaped the attention of the Senators who supported the amendment made to the Bill that we are discussing. They seem to imagine that a permanent Army measure is something like an ordinary Bill. That is not so at all. They pressed the Minister to declare exactly the time that he would be prepared to bring in the permanent Bill. In fact, I think, some of the Senators who spoke said that if he would give that promise they would not continue their objection to the present Bill.
The Minister did not see that he could go so far as they asked him to go. He promised that he would do so at the first opportunity. I think he said—I am quoting from memory— that he hoped to be able to bring it in before the end of this year. The objectors to this Bill were not satisfied with that, but pressed the Minister to state definitely when he would be able to bring in the permanent Bill. The Minister is, perhaps, not very experienced and is, therefore, very honest, because other Ministers that I have known here have shown that they were quite ready to promise anything in order to get a Bill in which they were interested passed. If the Minister had adopted the universal practice of Ministers, of promising that he would have it done by a certain date and when that date arrived said it had not been possible to carry out the undertaking given earlier, he would have got this Bill through. The Minister is too honest to do that. He explained what the difficulties were, and stated that he could not give a definite promise. The result is that we are meeting here to-day to consider the Report Stage of the Bill. The Minister did point out that the Bill had left his Department. I presume that it has now passed into another Department for examination, into the control of barristers and lawyers of all sorts. I think that anybody who has had any experience of lawyers will know that you cannot be sure of getting anything from them at a particular time. The two Senators who spoke to the amendment inserted to this Bill will, I am sure, agree with me in that. Shakespeare wrote of "the law's delays." Almost everybody has had experience of the delays caused by lawyers.
I ask the House to consider what the Bill before us is. I will give the House some figures. The measure that is in force at present consists of 167 pages, 246 sections and eight schedules. The permanent measure would probably be much bigger. The Act that controls and governs the army in England consists of 198 pages. To that we have to add the rules of procedure which covers 154 pages, while 35 pages are devoted to the Reserve Forces in that country. That measure is called in England "the Manual of Military Law." If we are to judge by the Bill that is in force here at present or by the Act that is in force in England, it is quite likely that our permanent Army Act will consist of at least 387 pages. I think that once a band of lawyers get hold of a measure covering 387 pages they will take some time to consider it. This is to be a whole new code of procedure, keeping the Army apart from the civil population, which is to be applied solely to the Army with all the details considered necessary to regulate the conduct and behaviour of officers, N.C.O.'s and men. All that is to be included in our permanent Army Act. I am not astonished at all at the Minister saying that he could not give a definite promise that such a measure would be introduced by a certain date. It would be impossible for him to tell how long the lawyers would take to consider it. It is very important that all its details should be well thought out before introducing it into the Oireachtas. Therefore, I ask the House to accept the amendment which I have moved. We know that the previous Bill took a long time to produce. Senator Blythe had some experience of that, and he knows that it was amended on many occasions. These things are very complex and for that reason I put down the amendment.