I do not think it is a proper or right thing for the Ministry to be using this force for political purposes, and inspiring members of this force with political prejudice against the largest political party in the State. As indicating the attitude of the people generally and their assertion of commonsense it is worth our while to look at the results of certain actions that were taken against certain detective guards in the city of Dublin. I shall take four cases which occurred and the results of which were published in the Press.
There was a case of Donal O'Donoghue who took proceedings against Detective Officer Rogers for having been arrested, searched, detained and assaulted. He got damages from a judge and jury amounting to £50. In the course of that case certain things were stated to which I would like to draw the Minister's attention. It appears that Superintendent Ennis remarked afterwards to Mr. O'Donoghue that he did not know he was in prison. It, also, came out in the evidence that Detective Officer Rogers had not told the station sergeant what was the charge, and, further, in cross-examination, he refused the name of the person who gave him information against O'Donoghue. The other detective officer, who was with Rogers at the time, was not proceeded against, and he was not called as a witness. I would like to know from the Minister what disciplinary action he took in this particular case. Obviously when a judge and jury bring in a verdict like that, the officers have exceeded their powers, they have been excessive in their zeal, and some disciplinary action should be taken.
After all, no matter how heinous the crime is, no matter how necessary it is to detect that crime, at the same time, the procedure must not be of such a kind as to become a danger to ordinary citizens in the community. If an ambulance has to go out in an urgent case of accident, no matter how urgent that case is, the driver of the ambulance is not allowed to run over people and to maim them or to kill them. He has to take ordinary precautions which will protect society and the individual. So, too, there must be some limit, some control of those forces which are there to carry out certain onerous duties that are difficult to carry out. The counsel defending the detective in this case tried to press home the point that Mr. O'Donoghue and others were members of the I.R.A., but the jury and the judge paid secondary consideration to those matters. Their common sense asserted itself against a sort of feeling of panic and over-zeal, apparently, that was existing, and generally they reflected public opinion in the matter that the force had gone too far.
[An Ceann Comhairle resumed the Chair.]
I think O'Donoghue was arrested six times. The other persons who took actions were John Sugrue, who was awarded damages amounting to £40; Charles O'Neill, who was awarded damages amounting to £80; and Patrick McKee, who got damages amounting to £75. One of these men was asked if he recognised the court, and he said he recognised the court to the extent of its being a necessary operation in the country, but that he was a Republican and had strong Republican views. He recognised the court very much in the spirit laid down in that famous letter—he did not say this, but it occurred to me on reading his evidence—of Cardinal Mercier when the Germans were in occupation of Belgium when he told the people that they should recognise the courts for necessary purposes; and that appeared to be the attitude taken up by this man.
Although that was the attitude, the jury seemed to take a thoroughly sane view of his evidence and they did not allow themselves in any way to be influenced by the political opinions of that particular individual. Really the Minister should thank God for the Sinn Féiners because if they did recognise the court in cases where they do not recognise the court they could take action after action. Thousands of actions could be taken against his Department and awards given upon exactly the same lines as these have been given. In fact, if they were to adopt that policy and to have recourse to the Courts on the principles I mentioned they could do very much more effective work in bringing the Department of the Guards as administered by the Minister for Justice very much more quickly to a sense, shall we say, of normality. It is very little use for us getting up in the House and repeating time after time the delinquencies of the Minister as represented by the actions of his Guards because it simply means the same thing is repeated time after time. We are as much interested in the Guards as the Minister is. The Minister laughs but I can assure him that we speak with sincerity. We regard it as absolutely necessary to have certain forces of law and order in this country but we also think that force should, as well as politically also economically, be rationalised. It would be impossible to make suggestions how it should be done from the Opposition benches because we have not got the material before us. Anyone who had any experience on the Courts of Justice Committee would realise that the amount of statistics and details required to make any changes in the organisation is such that it would be impossible for us to suggest how the Guards should be reduced or how their work should be changed. One would require to have the programme of the day's work of the typical Guard or the week's work or the month's work and the various work done by the superintendents and other officers.
Unless some such inquiry were made it would be impossible to make any suggestion, but I think if an inquiry is entered into it should include some scheme whereby these men can be carried over into some industry or occupation suitable to their training. Even the Guards' barracks mentioned by the Minister as having been closed down, I suppose, like the empty unions, will be allowed to go to wreck and ruin. Surely the Minister should exercise his ingenuity, get in touch with the Minister for Industry and Commerce and see that these empty Guards' barracks be turned to some useful local purpose. While the Minister will not recognise the necessity of using rationalisation in the case of the organisation of the Guards his Ministry are all in favour of rationalising the industries outside this country which are affecting industries such as the milling industry in this country. Now, I think that the Government which thinks upon the lines of rationalisation at least in an acquiescent way in one case should be prepared to adopt the same attitude in the other case.
In the debate last year it was suggested that on account of the increased facilities of transport, telephones, and so on, that one could dispense with a certain number of the police force. One cannot dogmatise on that. The Minister offered an answer, and I am sure in some places that answer would hold good, but in a great many places more reliance could be put on methods of transport to bring officers around, and in that way actually reduce the cost. But at the same time, while doing so upon sane lines, it should not justify such an expenditure as occurs under sub-head D, where, in the Public Accounts Committee, it was mentioned that 126 officers were responsible for the spending of £18,000 per annum on locomotion expenses. The mileage rate is 6d. If you calculate that out you will find that it will constitute a single journey of about thirty times around the world, or it would allow for each of these 126 officers to go on a journey about as far as Persia. I would like to know from the Minister if he has a close check upon the duties carried out on those journeys, and whether he will give the House some idea of why it is that that particular item should be so high and why superintendents should have to travel so much.
Thirteen thousand pounds is spent annually upon cycling allowances at the rate of £2 10s. per head. I would like to know from the Minister whether all the bicycles now being purchased for the Guards are of Irish make. There are excellent Irish bicycles, quite up to anything that can be imported. I mentioned this matter and drew the Minister's attention to it before, and I would like to get an answer from him in reference to it.
Deputy Ruttledge pointed out the increase under sub-head B in reference to the detective forces. The total increase is something over £3,000. On sub-head H there is an increase from £1,000 to £1,300. The significance, although it is a small increase, is that it is also an increase in the transport of the detective branch outside the Dublin metropolitan area. I do not know why all this increase should have taken place in the Department. I do not know whether it is the result of the recent sudden menace of a change of Government or not that we saw Ministers and others with an enormous number of Civic Guards surrounding them. Perhaps some of us have too strong a sense of humour and not a sufficient sense of the possibilities of the situation, but really the increase in the number of guards for these people seems to be altogether out of proportion to the results; certainly we do not grudge them all the protection they can get.
