As nobody else is speaking, I suppose that I might as well reply to the statements that have been made. I might say that I have listened with very great sympathy to the views which have been put forward by various Deputies on the motion before the House. I fully appreciate the feelings which imbue the various Deputies desiring that everything possible should be done for the members of our Defence Forces and their families. I might say that I myself yield to no one in the extent of my desire to do whatever is possible for these men, but at the same time I must point out that the language of exaggeration—and a fair amount of that has been used in the course of the debate upon the motion—does not in fact help me in whatever I desire to do.
Deputy Byrne (Senior) in the course of the debate gave us details of a case which he said was fairly typical of a soldier's wife. He pointed out that a soldier's wife had met him recently and pointing towards the child which she was carrying in her arms had said she was getting 3d. per day for the upkeep of that child and that a bottle of milk cost 4½d. I presume that that child that she was pointing out had to be at least the fourth child of the family. There would have to be three children as well as that child, and I should make it clear to the House that the first child is entitled to 7/-, the second is also entitled to 7/- and the third child is entitled to receive 3/6, and from that onwards it is 1/9 per child. Actually for these three infants, for that is all they could have been, there was some 17/6 available for the purchase of food. Now the Deputy also stated that the children would not be entitled to free milk. I understand that the question of the distribution of free milk is a matter purely and solely for the people who administer these schemes. If they deem the children of a family deserving of that free milk in the cities and towns where the scheme operates this free milk can be given to the children. The same thing I think applies in respect of school books. If the manager deems the family to be in such circumstances that it would be desirable to give them books he can do so, but the decision of course rests with him. Deputy James Larkin (Junior) in the course of this debate again referred to the fact that a sergeant's wife, I think it was, with nine children was only getting, I think, £2 5s. 6d. I pointed out that the husband was getting 28/- in addition to that. The point that the Deputy wanted to make was that the 28/- should not in any circumstances be considered in addition to the marriage allowance and the children's allowance which the wife was receiving.
I cannot see how he can in the circumstances relate that type of dis cussion to the fact that there you have a family with £4 8s. in the coin of the State going into the hands of the husband and wife. I cannot see how he cannot count that £4 8s. as being money available to that family for the purchase of the necessities of life. £4 8s. is a reasonably good wage. There are large numbers of people in this country at the present time who would regard themselves as being considerably well off if they had that amount of money. But apparently Deputy James Larkin wants to divorce the 28/- from the amount that the wife receives: in other words the soldier should have no responsibility whatever for his family but the State should be solely and entirely responsible. Now that is the sort of argument that is not helpful to me when I am making efforts, as I usually am, to secure improvements not only in the pay of the members of the Army but in the allowances of their wives and other members of their family. I suppose there is no member of the Government more harassed than the Minister for Finance especially at the present time. Everybody, at least every Minister, is trying to secure improvements for the particular people who come under his care.
I do not suppose there is any Minister who harasses that Minister more than I do in trying to secure improvements for the members of the Defence Forces. I can assure the House of that, but I do not think it is necessary for me to go into any great detail on this question, because, as I said in opening here, I fully appreciate the motives which have moved every Deputy who has spoken. They are in sympathy with my own ideas, and from that point of view we are at one. Beyond saying it is my intention as far as it is humanly possible to continue my efforts to secure still further improvements, if they can be secured, I do not think it is necessary for me to say any more on the subject.
