Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 15 Dec 1960

Vol. 53 No. 6

Defence (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 1960—Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

The Taoiseach

When the Defence (Amendment) Bill, 1960, was before the Seanad some months ago, I mentioned that permanent legislation to authorise the sending of contingents of Irish troops to participate in police actions under the auspices of the United Nations had been under consideration by the Government for some time and that proposals for that legislation would be submitted to the Oireachtas before the expiration of the six months' period mentioned in the temporary measure.

This Bill is intended to provide in permanent form a legislative basis for such action in future. Senators will note that before any action may be taken under it in any specific instance, the approval of the Dáil must be secured. Ireland, as a member of the United Nations, is committed, both by our signature to the United Nations Charter and by our general policy of supporting action by it in all circumstances where international peace appears to be threatened, to help it, when called upon, within the limits of our resources.

I think it is hardly necessary to restate Government policy in that regard. The Government's view, which is indeed shared by all the main political Parties in the State, is that it is in the interests of this country and of the world to encourage the growth of the United Nations authority and influence and the establishment of the rule of law in international relations.

We accept that the United Nations have the right and the function to act in any situation in any part of the world which may endanger peace and that we should be prepared to contribute to the fulfilment of these responsibilities by the United Nations. The immediate occasion of this Bill is the situation in the Congo where an Irish contingent at present is part of a United Nations police force, to which indeed we have been asked to send a further contingent when the two battalions already there are brought home next month.

The situation in the Congo has not been resolved during the six months which have elapsed since we authorised, by legislation, the sending of that Irish contingent and during which the United Nations have been involved in this police action there. Indeed, it has in many ways deteriorated. While there has been a reduction in the incidence of violence and loss of life, nevertheless it is clear that the federal Government of the Congo has since fallen into a state of confusion and ineffectiveness with rival claimants to the right to exercise authority there and the ever-present threat of civil war.

As I said in the Dáil during discussions on this Bill nobody doubts that the situation in the Congo would by now have been completely chaotic but for the United Nations presence and that a situation could well have developed which would have involved the great powers with all the inherent threat to the general peace if the United Nations had not intervened in the Congo when its Government so requested in July last. During the course of the debate on this Bill in the Dáil, and on other occasions, I have refused to comment on the present internal Congo situation both because of our acceptance of the official United Nations position in that regard and also, and perhaps, mainly, because of belief that if by making statements here the Government should appear to be taking sides between the political factions in the Congo it might very well increase the hazards which Irish troops there have to face.

The United Nations position is that the force is there solely to keep order and protect lives, that it operates for these purposes independently of any national authority and that it has no function of any kind in the resolution of internal political conflicts, constitution or otherwise. Senators may, however, be aware that a delegation from a United Nations Conciliation Committee has proceeded to the Congo and is endeavouring to bring about a situation in which the internal political conflicts will in some way be resolved. That, however, is a completely separate exercise and it is not contemplated that the United Nations force at present in the Congo will be used to enforce any political settlement. It is also true that United Nations personnel are endeavouring to ensure the restoration and operation of the normal machinery of civil administration, including health and similar services. Again their activities are distinct and separate from the responsibilities and functions of the United Nations peace force. In agreeing with the request from the United Nations to send a contingent to the Congo, we had no purpose in mind except to help a newly founded State, which was in grave difficulties, to get itself organised and into a position in which it could undertake for itself the basic operations of any Government, to keep law and order, to prevent the Congo situation deteriorating to an extent which might gravely prejudice the prospects of other new independent African States or those who are expecting or hoping to achieve independence in the near future, and to obviate the prospects of great powers intervening, either directly or in support of contending Congolese factions, which could very well endanger the peace of the whole world. We have no enemies in the Congo; we have no motives direct or indirect which could possibly raise doubts in any Congolese mind as to the bona fides of our intentions. There are many States including some African and Asian States which sent contingents to the Congo in the same situation as ours, but it seems to be established that the continued presence of non-African contingents in the Congo force is necessary to demonstrate its United Nations character and to emphasise that its function is limited in the manner I have stated, and that it is not involved and it does not intend to become involved in imposing any solution of political problems there.

We can hope that, through the efforts of the United Nations Conciliation Committee or otherwise, there will emerge in the Congo an accepted and representative government which can at some early time take over the functions which the United Nations forces are now performing and so permit of their complete withdrawal, in that a stable functioning Congo Government will emerge to develop their state and promote the welfare of their people and to which there can be given, through the United Nations, the aids, financial, material and moral, from the many countries willing to help in that way.

Whilst this Bill is, as I have said, a permanent measure which would be proposed by the Government to the Oireachtas, if the Congo situation had never arisen, that situation is very relevant to it. Indeed, it is well the Oireachtas should understand that it is not intended to be a mere gesture of goodwill to the United Nations but represents the acceptance by us of a very real commitment which may require action by the Government from time to time, in relation to our obligations to the United Nations and indicates our willingness to take action in accordance with these obligations when we may be so requested and our resources so permit. The Government recommend this Bill to the Seanad.

Mr. Barry

Although the Bill is general, our mind must be focussed on the Congo. I think that, despite the comments that are made the people are satisfied that Ireland is doing her job well. There is great pride in the Army abroad and the more thoughtful will know that the difficulties of this very awkward situation will be handled as well as it is humanly possible. In this issue, I think our men have clean hands and clear heads and and if the Congo experiment fails, it will not be for lack of goodwill and a more than reasonable contribution on our part. If it succeeds, I think we can feel grateful that we have helped to make that success possible.

Mr. McGuire

This is a matter about which at this stage a lot should not be said, except in relation to the Bill as a permanent measure. The Taoiseach has explained the occasion for the Bill, which may be the Congo and perhaps the Lebanon before that. It is, in fact, something that marks a new outlook by Ireland on the world. In the beginning, we were more or less preoccupied with our internal problems, setting up the State and Government here and putting our economy in order. Now we are beginning to develop a world outlook. I think that is an attitude that is welcomed and not only by our own people but by many people outside.

I had occasion during the past week to speak to some representatives from nations here—diplomats. All of them spoke in the highest terms of the prestige which Ireland has enjoyed in recent times through not only its participation in world affairs but the quality of its participation. That is particularly noticeable in the Congo which is the immediate situation with which we are concerned. I think everybody is in full agreement with the actions and the attitude of the Government in this matter. Naturally, there is a certain amount of concern about the situation there which has now become very confused.

It is true that when the sending of troops to the Congo was under consideration, everybody here had full regard to the obligations, the difficulties and the dangers that would arise. Not to have regard to these things would have been absolutely wrong. Our action in sending troops to the Congo was decided on after much examination and with great deliberation. Therefore, now that the position has arisen where there is a confused situation—there has been death—there is all the more reason why we should not withdraw from our obligations until the position is untenable and is no longer any use. I do not think it could be said by anybody that that situation exists at present, even though other people are pulling out. They are pulling out for the reason that they are taking sides. As the Taoiseach pointed out, quite rightly, Ireland is not there taking sides. We are there undertaking a dignified and responsible task—the establishment of law and order. In the past, that mission was undertaken by bigger nations and very often with very many ulterior motives.

This is one of the first times it has been possible for the small nations of the world, who are committed and who have not any ulterior motives, to do a job of international importance which will ultimately lead to peace and justice for all people, regardless of their size or strength. Therefore, I should like to say that this Bill has the full support of everybody I know of in the Party of which I am a member. I feel that if we always conduct ourselves in the future—we are only starting—as we have conducted ourselves so far, this Bill will be fully justified.

Dr. Sheehy Skeffington

I listened very carefully to the Taoiseach and I read his statements in another place in support of this Bill and have noted its implications. I should like to say that I support everything he says. I think the Bill contains provisions that are necessary if we are to fulfill, as he says, our obligations to the world, to the United Nations and to the growth and influence of the spirit which is symbolised by the United Nations for the purpose of the promotion and maintenance of the rule of law. I feel that the Taoiseach today as elsewhere has put before us a very sober, moderate and, I think, convincing statement of the reasons why this Bill, and the Government promoting this Bill, deserve our unreserved support on this issue.

I must say that personally when I read that Mr. Hammarskjoeld, on behalf of the United Nations, had invited us way back in June, I think it was, to be one the nations to send our troops to the U.N. police force, as the Taoiseach rightly calls it, I felt very proud that we should have been one of the first nations to be invited. I feel that it was by reason of our behaviour in the Parliament of the world, that we had deserved this honour. I was very conscious of the fact that it was an honour, and I was very glad that the Government had the imagination to accept the invitation at once.

We know of course that when our troops went out there, many of them were killed in most wretched circumstances, and in circumstances which could not have been foreseen by us here, or indeed by anyone at the time. Consequently, there has been a very real sacrifice in human life as well as the original token sign of our willingness to co-operate. The Taoiseach has found himself in the situation of having to recognise that conditions in the Congo, about which we are most immediately concerned, have since since unfortunately deteriorated. It is quite obvious that the situation with which we as a participating power are trying to cope, is extremely difficult.

I feel that the Taoiseach is right again when he says this is a matter for United Nations action and decision, and really the whole situation stands or falls by the capacity of the different nations, of which we are one, to stand by the United Nations. I would have no patience at all, I am afraid, with those nations that say: "We are now withdrawing" or "We will withdraw our troops unless you do so and so." I do not believe that everything that is done by every section of the United Nations forces out there has to be underwritten by every nation. We are in this together, however, and we have to accept the authority of the United Nations, and it is under its banner that we participate.

The difficulty of the situation has been recognised by the Taoiseach. To a great extent, it springs from the chaotic conditions in the Congo, where the United Nations are committed more or less to try to establish unity, a unity which in fact has very little historic significance, except that derived from the previous Belgian administration. In that fact lies the dilemma with which we are faced, the fact that the unity which it is felt would be for the benefit of the country as a whole, has in fact no particular historic significance, except that derived from the earlier Belgian regime.

One has to recognise that it might well be that some particular portion of the Congo, as it used to be understood, might hesitate when the United Nations say to them: "You must stick together, and you in Katanga, for instance, must share your wealth with your poor brothers in the rest of the Congo." One might feel that perhaps Katanga should have the right to say: "No; we do not want to share." Nevertheless, I feel we as a nation have to accept the overall policy of the United Nations and attempt at any rate to maintain order to a sufficient extent in the Congo to enable the people there eventually to make their own decisions. Such decisions were made, after all, in another recently founded State, Mali. Its two States have recently separated again, one of them becoming the State of Senegal and the second State that which used to be the French Sudan.

In other words, as has been pointed out by the Government, our obligation is, as it were, to hold the ring and see that inside the ring whatever difference of opinion is manifested is manifested in terms of decency and fair-play, and not of chaos, civil war, murder and massacre. We are there consequently with other nations, many of them, one is glad to say, free African nations themselves, in a spirit of disinterested comradeship with those nations of the world who are concerned with decency and justice. Although we are a small nation, and consequently our contribution is small, we take legitimate pride in that fact.

The Taoiseach has said—again, I think he is right—that he will not make any public comment on the internal political situation in the Congo. The reasons he gave for not wishing to do so are sound ones. I should like to urge, however—in a sense I believe that it is not necessary to urge it—that behind the scenes everywhere, our influence should always be felt, put forward, urged and made operative on the side of decency and justice, and against such things as arrest without trial or detention without the right to see representatives of international organisations and so on. That is the kind of thing upon which we can have influence behind the scenes, and about which, for reasons the Taoiseach stated, it might be injurious for the Government to make a public statement. I am convinced, however, that our influence is already being used on the side of decency there.

This Bill makes it possible to send a contingent of our permanent forces abroad which is a departure from policy in this State. It is quite a new thing. Yet I feel it is absolutely necessary, because I think that perhaps not all of us realised that there was in fact an error contained in the method of recruiting volunteers only, because of the fact that when volunteers are sought, many come from different sections and different regiments, with different training and so on. In other words, the most effective contingent we could send would be trained contingents of our permanent Defence Forces.

The purpose of the Bill is to enable us to make the most effective contribution possible and for that reason, too, I support it. Otherwise, there might be a measure of unpreparedness in any contingent we send, deriving not from any lack of goodwill, but, on the contrary, perhaps even from an excess of enthusiasm, and we might again get a situation such as the lamentable situation which arose in which so many of our men were killed. Despite all the difficulties, and I think the Taoiseach is aware, and has suggested, that they may be increasing, I feel, and I think we all feel, this is no time either to falter or to withdraw, and the credit, in so far as we will be judged in the light of history, will go to those who have had the fortitude to stand firm with the United Nations.

At this juncture, I should like as a member of the Oireachtas to pay tribute to Mr. Hammarskjoeld who is a great international statesman. He can legitimately be personally identified with what is being attempted in the Congo, and I think it is of vital necessity for us to give him the maximum support. We must stand as we have stood, and the Government have rightly seen that, publicly and privately, we have stood four-square behind the line proposed by him and implemented by him in accordance with the instructions of his Council.

It was a splendid thing that, at the Autumn Assembly of the United Nations, that policy was publicly tested, and a vote of confidence was proposed and Mr. Hammarskjoeld gathered the support of an enormous number of nations of the African States, who voted their confidence in the policy of the United Nations in the Congo. Seventy nations, including our own, voted for, and only three abstained, to their eternal shame, the Communist bloc, South Africa and alas! France. I think it was very moving to see these new nations coming together, because they have their differences and dissensions and criticisms, behind the policy that was symbolised for them in the person of Mr. Hammarskjoeld.

This Bill before us today, and the actions which will be taken under it, is in accordance with our intelligent, generous, honourable and very well presented foreign policy at the United Nations over the past years, and for that reason I have pleasure in supporting this measure.

Mr. Carton

I should like to endorse everything that has been said and to support the Taoiseach on this measure. Every member of this and the other House and every person in the country is proud of our troops in the Congo. There is no doubt about that. We have cynics who may be spreading the idea that our people were not trained, but I know that they are as well trained as any other forces of the United Nations that are overseas.

This measure authorises the sending of troops overseas to serve with the United Nations forces. Deliberately they may be sent now on active service without any question of volunteering. Heretofore, the 32nd and 33rd battalions went overseas and I believe that, generally speaking, they were volunteers. Senator Sheehy Skeffington feels that deliberately to form a battalion and send it out without asking its members if they would like to go is a far better arrangement, but my view is that the Minister ought as far as possible to adhere to the volunteer idea, even if he has the power to send them, that men should as far as possible get the opportunity of volunteering. In my experience, though it is not very wide, as a regular soldier and an old I.R.A. man, I always found a volunteer was far better than any half dozen conscripts. I have no doubt the Minister will keep that in mind.

When the original group was going out, there was a point which we did not raise here. When one of our soldiers is now going overseas on active service, is it clear that the Defence Forces Acts cover that active service duty fully? As we know, certain offences committed on active service could by court martial possibly entail death. If these men go on active service, are they quite clear about that, and are we quite clear that where an offence committed here at home might not be grave, a similar offence committed overseas on active service might be a tremendously serious matter? I have a feeling that the Minister will cover that aspect in relation to any future contingents that go out, but it is important that it should be mentioned.

Finally, I should like to reiterate and endorse the words of Senator Barry, that we wholeheartedly support this measure and fully appreciate how delicate it is for the Taoiseach even to speak at any length at all on this matter when his words could be misconstrued by people who would like to build a story on a misconstruction. It has been said in many places that one is perilously poised between the cliché and the indiscretion, and the Taoiseach is more or less in that situation now. I wholeheartedly support this measure.

Pádraig Ó Siochfhradha

Is dóigh liom gur ceart cuidiú leis an mBille seo agus leis an dlí atá á dhéanamh faoi. Tá ceangal idir an tír seo anois agus na Náisiúin Aontaithe. Tá meas mhuintir an domhain tuillte againn mar gheall ar an dtacaíocht a thugamar do na Náisiúin Aontaithe, go háirithe sa Chongo. Is mór an méid sin maidir leis an dtír seo. Is eol do na náisiúin anois gur tír neamhspleách í Éire, gur dheineamar ár gcion agus go bhfuilimid ag comhlíonadh ár gcuid dualgaisí idirnáisiúnta i neithe den tsórt seo. Uime sin, tá oibliogáid fé leith orainn.

Tugadh cuireadh dúinn a bheith páirteach in obair seo na Náisiún Aontaithe mar mhaithe le síocháin agus le leas an Chongo. Ghlacamar leis an gcuireadh sin. Ó thosach, bhí a fhios againn nach raibh an gnó seo gan chontúirt. Is daor a cheannaíomar an t-eolas nár chuid dár samhlaíocht é an chontúirt ach go raibh sí ann dáiríre.

Is eagal liom go bhfuil gluaiseachtaí sa Chongo ag iarraidh dul i bhfeidhm ar na daoine bochta ann ar mhaithe le cuspóirí seachas na cuspóirí úd a labhartar go hoscailte fúthu. Is é mo thuairim féin nach ceann amháin ach dhá nó trí cinn dena gluaiseachtaí seo atá i mbun saothair agus ní ar mhaithe leis an gCongo ná le muintir an Chongo a leantar leo.

Dá bhrí sin, ba cheart dúinn a bheith an-chúramach agus an-aireach gan seasamh le taobh seachas a chéile. Ba cheart dúinn gníomhú ar son cúis na síochána agus cothram na Féinne do na daoine seo. Tá áthas orm gur chuir an Taoiseach in iúl gur dualgaisí póilíneachta is cúram do na saighdiúirí a chuirtear go dtí an tír sin. Tá súil agam go leanfar leis an bpolasaí sin.

Níl aon tairbhe le bhaint ag Eirinn sa Chongo ach amháin an cháil a thiochfaidh chuice de bhárr cabhair a thabhairt sa Chongo chun a chuid ghnothaí a chur ar bun go seasamhach agus riail agus ord agus cirt a chur ar bun ann. Is é tubaist an scéil fé láthair ag na Náisiúin Aontaithe nach bhfuil aon duine le fáil go fóill acu sa Chongo gur féidir leis labhairt ar son an Chongo uilig agus pobal an Chongo uilig. Is é mar dhealraíonn an scéal d'aon duine ná go bhfuil aon duine a labhair go dtí seo ag caint ar a shon féin agus ní ar maithe leis an gCongo ach ar mhaithe leis féin.

Ní foláir bheith aireach i dtaobh daoine mar sin. Dá bhféadaimís dea-mhéinn na ndaoine ann a fháil ba rí mhaith an rud é. Tá níos mó ná 20,000,000 sa trí sin, ach an bhfuil aon duine ann a labhrann ar son iomlán na ndaoine atá ann?

An Cathaoirleach

B'fhéidir nach ceart dúinn teacht síos ar an taobh sin den scéal san mBille seo.

Pádraig Ó Siochfhradha

Ní dhéanfaidh mé amhlaidh. Ba mhaith liom go mbeimis aireach i dtreo nach dtiocfaimis anuas ar thaobh aon dreama. Is é an cuspóir atá againne agus ag ár saighdiúirí sa Chongo ná síocáin a bhunú ann agus saol agus beatha na ndaoine uilig ann do chosaint. Dob é sin an cuspóir a bhí rómhainn an chéad lá agus ár saighdiúirí ag dul ann faoi chúram na Náisiún Aontaithe.

Is maith liom gur labhair an Taoiseach faoi sin arís. Is maith liom go nduirt sé go soiléir gurb í an gnó a bhí againn agus ár saighdiúirí do chur ins an Chongo ná go mbeidis ann mar Ghardaí Siochána agus gurb í an tsíocháin a choimeád agus saol agus beatha na ndaoine a choimeád na cuspóirí a bhí le baint amach acu. Leanaimis leis sin agus bíodh tionchar forleathan ag an obair sin ach ná leomhaimis páirt nó taobh aon taoibhe ann a thógaint suas.

Professor Quinlan

I desire to be associated with the support for this Bill and to be associated with the tributes paid to our soldiers in the Congo. I do this essentially from the point of view of the graduates of the National University who have contributed their bit to the development of those African states. We have been associated, in the University, with the training of many of our priests and nuns who have gone into the mission fields. Likewise, we have been responsible for the training of many of our professional people who have gone to help those nations to develop into modern nations and to prepare for the day of self-government. We have had the privilege of training in our Universities some of the leaders of the new Africa. Admittedly, the numbers have been small but it is a great source of pleasure to us when we hear that students whom we knew in class some few years back are now in very responsible positions in some of the Governments in Africa. Unfortunately, our main contribution was confined largely to Nigeria but I think the work that has been done there can overflow into the councils of Africa as a whole.

This Bill, enshrining in permanent form authority to send troops abroad, really marks the fact that we are emerging as a mature nation. This maturity has been sealed in blood by the deaths of our soldiers on active service. We have come a long way in a few months. We are facing up to our responsibilities to take our part in preparing the world for a rule of law based on respect for the right of the human being. We are playing our part in preventing the spread of anarchy and in combatting the subversive influences of world Communism that are always at work. We should be very proud of the opportunity of doing it. I hope and pray that we can do far more in the future. We should regard this measure as only the start of our contribution. I hope that when our Government consider the long range plans, these will include an offer to enlarge our facilities here for the training of future African leaders.

An Cathaoirleach

We are now going outside the scope of the Bill.

Professor Quinlan

In so far as the Taoiseach and other members have suggested that the internal affairs of the Congo are very confused, with which statement we all agree, surely the root cause is lack of trained personnel? I was making the suggestion that this might be regarded as just an instalment. I conclude with a tribute to the Taoiseach for his handling of this affair over the past months and also for the way in which our Army have conducted themselves. We are all mighty proud of them.

Professor Jessop

I should like to associate myself also with what has been said about the Irish troops in the Congo. I should like to say, as a member of the staff of Dublin University, that we would have, I think all of us, the same feelings about these countries as have been expressed by Senator Quinlan on behalf of the National University of Ireland. We were proud —I was proud and we were all proud —when Ireland accepted the invitation of the United Nations to send troops there. We were proud, too, that there were to be found in our Army so many volunteers who were prepared to take up this challenge. We were proud to learn, when they found themselves in the Congo, that they proved so worthy of their trust. Therefore, I think this Bill that comes before us has nothing but approval and we are all proud to extend our approval to it today.

I think that the feelings that have been expressed in relation to the relative values of volunteer service and obligatory service by Senator Sheehy Skeffington and Senator Carton are both covered quite adequately by the Bill. While a member of the Force already serving is always free to volunteer, anybody joining from the time this Bill is enacted will know that when he volunteers to join the Army he is at the same time voluntarily accepting every obligation that that entails, including service abroad. That will be obvious and clear to him. It is a volunteer Army. In that sense, he will be aware of the position and he will be a volunteer for this service.

A point which may be covered in the Principal Act, to which the Bill is really an amendment—I am afraid I have not studied that Act carefully— is the question of allowances for families of these people serving abroad. Is any provision made for additional allowances? We all know that service in the Army takes a man away from his family. This is a small country. If he is serving in a small country, he may be in his own town or in the next town. He will probably not be called more than 100 miles away. Therefore, he is available for advice and for many kinds of help to his family from time to time. If there is an emergency, he can get home rapidly to deal with it. This is not so when serving in the Congo or in any foreign country, and there should be some notice taken of that and perhaps an allowance provided for the families of people serving abroad in this way. I am very pleased to associate myself with this Bill.

The Taoiseach

I wish to thank Senators who have intervened in this debate for their comments on this Bill and on the policy which the Government have pursued, all of which have again emphasised the unity of purpose and outlook which have characterised the attitude of our people in relation to these matters. We hope for the speedy success of the United Nations effort in the Congo, both because of its importance to the future of the world and to the United Nations and so that we can soon bring our participation honourably to an end.

The Minister for Defence will be available to the Seanad during the discussion on the Bill in Committee and will be able to deal with any details which Senators may wish to raise or may wish to seek information about, including those mentioned by Senator Carton and Senator Jessop. Senator Carton was quite right in stressing the advantages of confining Army contingents going overseas in United Nations service to volunteers. The experience of the Army Command in relation to the Congo operation has been that volunteers have been coming forward in very much larger numbers than required. I think that is always likely to be the case and, therefore, the disposition of the Army Command is certain to be when time is available to permit of proper integrated units being organised on a volunteer basis, to confine them to those who express the wish to participate. The advantage is obvious and the possibility of so doing will normally exist except perhaps on occasions where speedy action requires the movement of an already existing unit.

When I express the hope that the situation in the Congo will be resolved soon and that the continued need for the presence of the United Nations forces will disappear, I must say that at the moment the indications do not justify the hope and unless the United Nations Conciliation Committee, through its delegation, are able to bring about a change in the situation, we must contemplate that the presence of United Nations forces will be necessary for many months to come. We have, however, decided that, having regard to the prevailing tensions and climatic conditions, it is undesirable to keep a particular unit there for longer than six months and therefore the term to be served in the Congo by the 34th Battalion after it arrives there, as in the case of the two previous battalions, will be limited to six months.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take remaining Stages to-day.

Bill considered in Committee.

Section 1 agreed to.

SECTION 2.

Question proposed: "That Section 2 stand part of the Bill."

Dr. Sheehy Skeffington

On this section which deals with the despatch of contingents, I should like to ask the Minister for information about what kind of training facilities are now available in the Congo—which is making this Bill immediate—for the type of police action and jungle warfare they may have to meet? Are there preliminary training schemes, and some kind of preliminary local training for them? What kind of provision is made for the general support, for instance, of the Engineer Corps by ordinary infantry forces, and what kind of local training is it possible to give them?

Minister for Defence (Mr. K. Boland)

In the case of the first two battalions we sent out—the two serving there at the moment—they had to be assembled at short notice and the whole operation conducted by the United Nation force in the Congo was being conducted as a matter of urgency and the troops had to be despatched to the area in which they were needed immediately on arriving. In the case of the battalion now being got in readiness, we have had longer notice and also the Army authorities have acquired some knowledge of the type of activity in which the troops at present there have been engaged. It has been possible to give reasonably adequate instruction and training to the personnel of the battalion which is being got in readiness to replace the two already there.

As regards the training that could be given in the Congo, that was a matter for improvisation by the officers on the spot and they could give only whatever training it was possible to give in the circumstances as they existed there. As it turned out, they did get a reasonable time to acclimatise themselves to conditions there and I am quite certain that the troops, officers, n.c.o.s and men, have become very efficient in the type of operations they have had to perform, but I have no real information as to details of training or anything like that.

Question put and agreed to.

Sections 3 to 8, inclusive, agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment.

Agreed to take remaining Stages to-day.

Bill received for final consideration.

Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass".

Mr. K. Boland

There were just two points raised which I think I should deal with. Senator Carton raised the question of active service. It is clear to all the troops in the Congo and to all those going that they will, in fact, be on active service. The implications of that are fully understood by them.

Senator Jessop raised the question of the extra allowances paid to the troops. All the troops in the Congo at the moment are paid the equivalent of 9/- a day by the United Nations and we, in addition to that, pay our troops 7/6 per day over and above their normal pay and allowances. The adequacy of that amount is under active consideration at the moment.

Professor Jessop

That was not quite my point. My point was in relation to what used to be called, during the first World War, a "separation allowance", which was paid direct to the wife. We all know that in these forces, where there are men from different countries with different standards of living, very often the amount paid to our people to keep them up to the standards of other people accustomed to higher standards is not quite enough. They may not send money home and the people at home may be in need.

Mr. K. Boland

I can assure Senators that our soldiers out there make voluntary allotments to their people at home. They authorise the Department to pay a proportion of their pay over to their relatives. My information is that in so far as the vast majority are concerned, the voluntary allotment has been increased since they went out. This money, which is payable by us, is not, in fact, being drawn by the soldiers out there. They are making do so far with the United Nations allowance and the remainder is either allotted to their dependents at home or lies to their credit.

Question put and agreed to.