Special Committee Defence Bill, 1951 debate -
Wednesday, 5 Mar 1952

SECTION 8.

Captain Cowan

I move amendment No. 5:—

In sub-section (1), line 3, to delete " shall be made " and substitute " shall, unless the Defence Forces, or a portion thereof are on active service, be made ".

This again is for the purpose of getting a word from the Minister. The section says:—

" Any regulations made under this Act which involve a direct or indirect charge on or a payment into public funds . . ."

that is somewhat of an extension of what we used to have:

". . . shall be made with the consent of the Minister for Finance."

I agree that, in ordinary peacetime, that is all right, but regulations have to be made in regard to war, a state of emergency, and I think that when the whole or portion of the forces are on active service, the Minister may have to issue Orders in circumstances in which he cannot get the sanction of the Minister for Finance. Deputy McQuillan earlier talked about how rapidly things happened in modern warfare and in face of the enemy you cannot wait 12 hours for the Dáil to come together. Here we are putting into the Bill a provision that in such circumstances the Minister has to wait until the Minister for Finance says : " You can fire this ", or " You can do that ".

Mr. S. Collins

But it is a change that in these circumstances the Minister for Finance will be far more amenable than in peacetime.

Captain Cowan

I do not want the Minister for Defence in such circumstances to be held up. We will come later to another section under which the Army cannot lay a mine without the authority of the Minister for Finance. It is contrary to all our ideas about how a war is fought. I know the ordinary technical difficulties in respect of the Department of Finance section, but I do not think the Department should come into active service unless they are readily available. Put the Minister for Finance on active service too.

Mr. S. Collins

Might I ask this question: In the normal way, save the homage paid to him in statutory regulations, would the Minister for Finance in fact be consulted ? I do not believe he would.

Mr. Traynor

In fact, he would, but he would perhaps be more amenable to viewpoints at a time like that than he would normally be when he has to examine every penny of expenditure ; but I can say this from my own experience of the emergency that in regard to anything we required, and which we could prove was necessary, we had no delay in getting authority.

Mr. S. Collins

Does the Minister think it would help him in any way if we put the Minister out of it for active service purposes ?

Breanndán Mac Fheórais

The Army would be pleased, anyhow.

Mr. Traynor

Everybody except perhaps the Department concerned might be happy, but it is a fundamental provision in all legislation, and we will have to accept that position. If any circumstances of a serious character should arise, I am pretty certain that the necessary action for expediting financial sanction would be taken.

Breanndán Mac Fheórais

It is a consolation to know that his consent is necessary for payments into the public funds as well.

Captain Cowan

I was impressed by what the Minister said earlier about the desire and the anxiety of the Defence Forces to do things quickly. I am surprised that they have not forced their view that on active service they should not be subject to the Minister for Finance having a say in whether they can do certain things, although their own Minister agrees that they should be done.

Mr. Gallagher

Surely in a state of emergency the whole resources of the Government are at the call of the Department of Defence.

Captain Cowan

We are putting into the Act a provision that the Minister cannot make the regulations without the consent of the Minister for Finance. I do not want to do that. I want to give the Minister freedom.

Mr. S. Collins

I do not think that the limitation imposed here is of any real consequence because there must ultimately be an accounting somewhere, and I should imagine that in a state of national emergency of any description the situation might operate very well, as it did in respect of Finance and Defence before—in theory, the Army could not fire a round of ammunition without the consent of the Minister for Finance. It is, however, theory and not fact.

Mr. Traynor

I think that in this case our fears would be more imaginary than real.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Captain Cowan

I move amendment No. 6:—

To delete sub-section (2).

I can see no necessity for this sub-section. The Minister has power to make regulations governing the permanent Defence Force, the Reserve Defence Force and different classes of the Reserve Defence Force. He has that power further on in the Bill. He can make any regulations he likes, and then to say here that he may make different ones in regard to the permanent Force or the Reserve does not seem to me to be necessary. I do not think it was ever questioned that the Minister could make regulations relating to the Reserve or any classes of the Reserve or the permanent Defence Forces, and for that reason it seems to be unnecessary to put it in. Could the Minister advise us that there is any purpose in it ?

Mr. Traynor

Except that it has always operated in practice. There is no reason why the Minister should not be given the power. Again, I am pretty certain that any Minister operating it would operate it in practically the same way as Deputy Cowan himself would operate it.

Captain Cowan

I do not think it is necessary because he has the widest powers to make regulations under the Act.

Mr. S. Collins

We are not conferring any more extensive power on the Minister in this case and my feeling with regard to it is that a position which has already existed has never been crystallised into statutory words. If Deputy Cowan examines it he will find that it is but a crystallisation into statutory form of an already existing power, giving the Minister no greater power than he had but giving it expression in black and white.

Captain Cowan

I had practical experience of it myself. There were regulations governing enlistment and discharge. A new Reserve was set up and immediately a whole set of regulations dealing with recruitment were drawn up, although they had to join the regular Army for a period of three months instead of three years. A completely and absolutely new set of regulations were drawn up to deal with that right up to discharge. Then the O.T.C. was formed, and under the old Act they still had to join the regular Army and be transferred to the Reserve. The period—whether a man came in for a day, a month, a year or two years—made no difference but a whole set of regulations was brought in, when the one set of regulations with a few sub-sections inserted could have covered the whole thing. I am afraid that once you put a provision like this in, whenever something new is started they will have a book of regulations of a huge size drawn up in regard to it.

Mr. S. Collins

I feel that the reverse is going to be the case. We have had all this duplication of regulations, with amendments, amendments amending amendments, and so on. We had all these during the emergency and the Chairman, Deputy Cowan, Deputy McQuillan and anybody else who served in the Forces at that time will know what we had to put up with. This, I think, will serve as a means of eliminating all that duplication.

Captain Cowan

It is a justification in the end for doing all the sort of thing we used to do.

Mr. Colley

But if the Deputy's amendment were carried, it would not prevent it happening again.

Captain Cowan

I am afraid it would not—I agree; but it seemed to be an unnecessary sub-section to have to read. It is mere ballast.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Sections 8 and 9 agreed to.