Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 21 Jun 1955

Vol. 151 No. 11

Committee on Finance. - Vote 56—Defence.

I move:—

That a sum not exceeding £4,742,830 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1956, for the Defence Forces (including certain Grants-in-Aid) under the Defence Act, 1954 (No. 18 of 1954), and for certain administrative expenses in connection therewith; for certain expenses under the Offences against the State Acts, 1939 and 1940 (No. 13 of 1939 and No. 2 of 1940) and the Air-raid Precautions Acts, 1939 and 1946 (No. 21 of 1939 and No. 28 of 1946); for expenses in connection with the issue of medals, etc.; for expenses of the Bureau of Military History; and for a Grant-in-Aid of the Irish Red Cross Society (No. 32 of 1938).

In introducing this Estimate I should, perhaps, remind Deputies that a token Supplementary Estimate of £10 was taken in respect of the last financial year after the Book of Estimates for 1955-56 had been issued. That Supplementary Estimate made increased provisions for 1954-55 under certain sub-heads to which I shall refer in the course of my statement on the present Estimate.

The gross Estimate for 1955-56 is £7,319,600 and the net Estimate, after deducting Appropriations-in-Aid, is £7,114,230. This represents a decrease of £1,153,080 on the net Estimate for 1954-55, including the Supplementary Estimate to which I have referred. In making that comparison, however, it is well to remember that the previous Minister for Finance in his Budget Statement for 1954-55 indicated that it had been decided that expenditure on defensive equipment under sub-head P last year would be reduced by £800,000.

The major portion of the Estimate is accounted for by provision for the pay, allowances and maintenance of the Permanent Defence Force. This provision is spread over a number of sub-heads and totals, in round figures, £4,000,000, or about 55 per cent. of the entire gross Estimate. As in previous years the Estimate is framed on, the basis of the full peace establishment, which is 1,273 officers and 11,542 other ranks. Deductions are made in the relevant sub-heads in respect of the numbers by which the actual strength is likely to be below establishments during the year. The net effective provision caters for an average strength of 1,193 officers and 8,000 other ranks. Twenty-two cadets are to be commissioned during the year; a further 39 are in training, and 46 are to be recruited.

I should, perhaps, dwell a while on this matter of strengths. The figure of 8,000 non-commissioned officers, privates and seamen for which this Estimate in effect makes provision is not an arbitrary limit set by the Government or myself but it represents, on the best estimate I can make, what the average strength is likely to be for the year. The strength of other ranks on the 31st May last was 8,347. Normal wastage takes a considerable toll each year which is difficult to replace. A recruiting drive was launched towards the end of February, but I am bound to say, however, that the response has not been satisfactory. I would like to appeal through the House to our young men to come forward and offer their services. In doing so, they will have the satisfaction of knowing that they are serving their country in the honourable profession of arms and at the same time they will enjoy remunerative employment under satisfactory conditions. I intend to continue the effort to get an adequate flow of recruits, and further recruiting drives will be arranged during the year.

Increased, provision, has been made for the Reserve Defence Force this year—£412,802, against £378,069 last year (including £43,050 taken in the Supplementary Estimate). There is, therefore, an increase of nearly £35,000. This arises mainly on account of the F.C.A. which is showing a welcome tendency to increase its effective strength and to report in greater numbers for training. The strength of the Reserve of Men (First Line) has also increased by almost 1,000, which is corollary to, and some compensation for, the decline in the strength of the Permanent Defence Force. On the other hand, there is a slight reduction in the number of Reserve Officers (First Line).

I may next refer to sub-head P— Defensive Equipment—which is the largest individual sub-head after Pay. This sub-head shows a nominal reduction of £1,000,000 as compared with the corresponding provision last year. I say "nominal" because, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, last year's provision had, in effect, been reduced by £800,000 before the present Government took office, so that the real reduction is £200,000. The sum being provided this year—£800,000— while not as large as in the past few years, is nevertheless a substantial one. In estimating for this sub-head, I had regard to the heavy outlay on defensive equipment each year since 1951-52— some £4,500,000 all told. Substantial quantities of new weapons have been procured or are on order and much has been done towards re-equipping our Army with modern basic weapons.

A stage has been reached where we cannot close our eyes to the startling progress being made by the Great Powers in the development of nuclear weapons, guided missiles and other super-scientific instruments of destruction. It is too soon to say how armies, great and small, will adjust themselves to this situation but it is evident that military technique and strategy will undergo considerable changes in the coming years. As far as our Army is concerned, it does not seem likely that our man-power and economic and scientific resources would be adequate to sustain the employment of these enormously costly weapons even if we were willing, and it was open to us, to procure them. Nevertheless, it would seem wise to adopt a cautious attitude towards the purchase of conventional weapons of the heavier and less mobile types. This is a situation which is receiving the constant attention of the General Staff.

It is hardly necessary for me to refer to all the sub-heads of the Estimate, but I will comment briefly on those which show appreciable variations from last year's provisions.

The reduction of £99,436 in sub-head A—Pay—is due entirely to the lesser net number of non-commissioned officers and privates being provided for. The provision for officers, however, is increased by £21,369 due mainly to incremental increases in pay. The increase of £3,000 in sub-head A (1) —Military Educational Courses Abroad —is due to increased fees and charges for these courses. Sub-head B— Marriage Allowance—shows an increase of £18,000 as an increased number of personnel is expected to qualify for this allowance during the year.

Allowing for the Supplementary Estimate of £69,370 last year under sub-head C—Pay of Civilians Attached to Units—this sub-head shows a reduction of £38,019. This reduction arises mainly under engineer services—tradesmen helpers, etc. as certain fairly large works which were begun last year will be completed this year. The Supplementary Estimate also increased sub-head G—Subsistence and Other Allowances—by £9,880 to cover the payment last year of increased allowances, with arrears from April, 1952. There is, therefore, a reduction of £11,033 in this sub-head.

The reduction of £15,520 in sub-head J—Mechanical Transport—arises almost entirely on the purchase of vehicles. Appreciable numbers of new vehicles have been purchased in recent years and it is felt that expenditure this year can be reduced without seriously interfering with the efficiency of this service. The saving on vehicles is partly offset, however, by an increase of £5,000 in the provision for road tax to meet anticipated expenditure. The rather substantial reduction of £111,809 in sub-head K—Provisions and Allowances in Lieu—is due to two causes; firstly, the lesser net number of men being catered for, and, secondly, a reduction in the daily cost of the Army ration and in allowances in lieu. The reduction of £48,249 in sub-head M—Clothing and Equipment —is due partly to the lesser net number of men for which provision is made, and partly to the omission of provision for reserve stock on grounds of economy.

The increase of £27,835 in sub-head O—General Stores—is due almost entirely to the purchase of aircraft and to increased provision for aircraft maintenance. This year it is proposed to initiate purchase action in respect of three jet trainer aircraft, delivery of which will not be taken until next year. The Estimate, therefore, provides only for an advance payment on these aircraft. Provision is also included for the completion of purchase of four piston engined trainer aircraft, the order for which was placed last year for delivery in the present financial year.

The gross Estimate for civil defence as shown in sub-head P (1) is £61,451. As it is anticipated that all the equipment to be ordered may not be delivered within the year, a deduction of £20,000 has been made, leaving the net provision at £41,451. This is a reduction of £21,207 on the corresponding figure for last year and represents the total amount which, it is believed, can usefully be spent during the financial year, having regard to the present stage of developments. The principal items of equipment provided for are six rescue training sets and 11 rescue vehicles. The training sets were included in last year's Vote but were not completed during the year owing to problems of siting and technical supervision. Most of the equipment required for the initial stages of local training and which had been provided for in previous years' Estimates has now been purchased. This equipment will be issued to local authorities within the next couple of months, and it is hoped to make a beginning with civil defence training throughout the country towards the end of the year.

Training is continuing at the Civil Defence School. During the year, I intend to review and examine afresh the whole problem of civil defence, especially in the light of developments in nuclear weapons to which I alluded earlier.

In sub-head P (2)—Naval Service— there is little change as far as the pay of the personnel is concerned. The net provision for vessels, including maintenance, stores and equipment, however, shows a reduction of £30,860. The main capital items are a store and training ship for the transport of stores and for general training, and two seaward defence boats required for training personnel in harbour defence duties. These items were included in last year's Estimate, but negotiations for their purchase have been unavoidably protracted. The full cost of these three vessels may be of the order of £200,000, but provision has been made only for the sum likely to be required this year; in the case of stores and equipment, there is an increase of almost £6,000, mainly for the purchase of various types of essential training equipment.

The increase of £16,747 in sub-head R—Fuel, Light and Water in Kind and Fuel Oils—is due mainly to the fact that reserve stocks of coal which were drawn on during the past few years are now running out, and consequently increased quantities of fuel must be purchased this year.

As regards sub-head S—Barrack Maintenance and New Works—the Supplementary Estimate increased last year's provision from £179,019 to £202,759. Consequently, the net figure for this year shows a reduction of £2,759. Under the heading "Miscellaneous New Works", it is intended to undertake a variety of works, numbering about 90 in all, most of them fairly small. A new item is included in the sub-head this year: Kit and Rifle Racks—£3,650. This arises from the necessity for improving the security arrangements for rifles held in billets and stores. The provision of £1,000 as a contribution towards public road repairs relates to the road leading to the Glen of Imaal Artillery Range in County Wicklow, which is much used by Army traffic. The rather large deduction of £89,870 in respect of work not completed during the financial year is accounted for by the fact that, due to the variety and scope of the works proposed to be initiated during the year, the necessary administrative and technical preparations may not be completed in some cases until rather late in the year; consequently, only a part of the full cost of such projects will fall to be met in the present financial year.

The provision in sub-head U—Compensation—last year was increased by the Supplementary Estimate from £5,500 to £13,300, as payments were exceptionally and unexpectedly heavy. It is difficult to estimate accurately for this sub-head, but I hope that the provision of £5,500 for the present financial year will prove adequate.

The increase of £5,418 in sub-head V — Barrack Services — is required mainly in connection with improvements in men's billets and dining halls. The reduction of £5,506 in sub-head W—Insurance—arises solely from the lesser number of non-commissioned officers and privates being provided for. The full reduction under this heading is partly offset, however, by slight increases on the other services covered by the sub-head. The reduction of £16,178 in sub-head X—Incidental Expenses — arises mainly from the reduced provision for advertisements. A recruiting drive was concluded in March last, the cost of which was borne on last year's Vote. As I indicated earlier in my statement, the effort to obtain a satisfactory flow of recruits will be continued during the year.

Sub-head X (3)—Grant-in-Aid of the Irish Red Cross Society—is increased by £8,100 to help to defray the expected expenses of the society during the year. I think it is fitting that I should take this opportunity of expressing my warm appreciation of the society's activities and, in particular, the part it played in the relief of flood distress last winter. I am sure the House joins me in this expression of gratitude.

As regards sub-head Y (3)—the Reserve Defence Force—An Fórsa Cosanta Aitiúil and An Slua Muiri (Grants-in-Aid), there is a reduction of £1,000, when account is taken of the increased provision made by the Supplementary Estimate last year. The system of assessing the grants in the case of the F.C.A. was changed last year from a per capita to a battalion basis, and the results appear to have fully justified the change.

The increase of £7,697 in sub-head Y (4)—Bureau of Military History: Salaries, Wages and Allowances—is due to the employment of additional staff and increased activity in field work. The object is to speed up the bureau's work and bring it to a conclusion as soon as possible.

Appropriations-in-Aid are estimated to yield an additional sum of £28,898. This is mainly due to the sale of surplus land necessarily acquired a few years ago in connection with the construction of concrete runways at Baldonnel Aerodrome.

That concludes my survey of the Estimates for Defence. I am well satisfied with the discipline and morale of the Defence Forces and I am happy to recall the splendid efforts made by all ranks to aid the victims of the floods last winter.

I move:—

That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration.

To the uninitiated, this particular Estimate would present a certain amount of complexity by reason of what would appear to be a number of contradictory statements. For instance, in sub-head A we have a decrease of £99,436. That amount would normally represent, I think, something like 500 men. If we get down to examining that particular sub-head in detail, however, we find on reference to page 326 of the Book of Estimates that in fact there is an increase in the pay of officers to the extent of £21,300 and then looking further into it we find the rather startling figure of a decrease in respect to the pay of other ranks of £120,700. That is a very large decrease in expenditure in respect to men. It probably represents a reduction of between 600 and 700 men. That is what we appear to be estimating for.

To my mind, that can suggest only one thing and that is that the policy of the Coalition Government from 1948 to 1951 is being continued. I think that is a pity. I think it is a pity from the point of view of the Army. I think it is a pity from the point of view of the public. However, we will deal with that later on.

If we look at sub-head B, we find there is an increase of £18,000 in relation to marriage allowances. Normally one would imagine that that increase of £18,000 was caused by increased personnel and that possibly is the point to which I was referring when I talked about the kind of paradox that exists in this Estimate. In a decreasing Estimate, such as we have here, it is had to reconcile an increase in the marriage allowance with the fact that we are providing for a considerable decrease in relation to the pay of N.C.O.s and men. However, I suppose this is due in the main either to increasing families or to the fact that more of the existing personnel are being admitted to the marriage establishment.

Sub-heads G and K both show a decrease; it is small in the case of sub-head G but rather large in the case of sub-head K. The point is that that denotes preparations for what would appear to be a reduced Army. Sub-head M, clothing and equipment, shows another decrease of nearly £50,000. That still further emphasises the point that we are in fact in this Estimate catering for a greatly reduced Army.

Sub-head P, a very important sub-head, deals with defensive equipment. I think the figure there is somewhat misleading. The Minister referred to the fact that last year the Minister for Finance in the last Government had that sum of £1,800,000 reduced by £800,000; perhaps the Minister will explain why that is being brought in again in this year's Estimate. I think the £1,000,000 was all that it was necessary to show in this case. It was explained in detail by the then Minister for Finance last year that the £800,000 which was taken out would have been sufficient to have cleared the issue and, therefore, it was necessary only to show the figure of £1,000,000 or the £800,000 which is being shown in this particular Book of Estimates.

The only thing I would like to emphasise in relation to that particular sub-head, is that I sincerely hope that the Minister will make every effort to use that £800,000 for the purchase of the equipment which our Army authorities are always seeking. If we place upon the Army authorities the responsibility of providing for the safety of the State it is only fair that we should give them the equipment with which they can effectively carry out that task. In relation to the reduction made by the Fianna Fáil Government last year the then Minister for Finance, Deputy MacEntee, made a statement on the matter and I want to quote that statement now in order to give the present Minister support in his efforts to equip the Army properly. The then Minister for Finance at column 553 of Volume 145 of the Official Report in the course of his Budget statement said:—

"The Government have, therefore, decided that an expenditure of £1,000,000 under this head will suffice this year as against £1,800,000 for which provision was made in the Estimates. This brings a saving of £800,000 and, on last year's precedent, we may permit ourselves some additional relief by again charging no more than £400,000 of this expenditure against current revenue."

I do not know in what form the Minister will get the money but he might perhaps examine what was being done then in order to bring a certain amount of relief to the people from whom the money has to be found.

With regard to sub-head P (1)— Civil Defence—the Minister has made reference to that in his opening statement. There is a reduction of £21,207. Goodness knows, the sum of money made available to civil defence last year was meagre enough without reducing it still further this year. We have one of the finest civil defence training centres. I was present and saw some of the training carried out there by those appointed to undergo such training by the various local authorities. I was tremendously impressed, so impressed that I was considering very seriously the question of having this training carried out in the presence of the general public with a view, first of all, to increasing the public interest in civil defence and, secondly, to showing the public what was being done on their behalf. It is from that point of view I regret so much the meagre sum, as I have already described it, which we were making available last year being still further reduced this year.

The same thing applies to sub-head P (2), which deals with the naval service. Here is a service that deserves, and should be given, all the encouragement which it is possible for the Government of this State to give. I am not suggesting for a moment that the naval service could, of its own strength, defeat any attempt at invading this country but it could, at least, serve as a very useful and very necessary patrol force. If we are serious in regard to the policy of neutrality—and I hope we are—the least that would be expected from a nation with a coastline such as we possess would be that we would be capable of patrolling that coastline and ensuring that it would not in any way be used to the detriment of other countries. Apart from its use as a service or adjunct of the Defence Forces, it provides the means by which men can be trained to a very high degree in the work which a seaman does.

If we are serious about the building up of our mercantile marine—and I believe we are—then this could be the source from which perhaps the most experienced men could be secured men not only experienced but well disciplined. From that point of view again, I say it is regrettable that this particular sub-head P (2) is showing a further decrease. Coming near to the time when I vacated that office, I had sanctioned the purchase of some further vessels to strengthen our naval service and I would like the Minister, when he is replying, to let the House know if that was proceeded with, if the effort to secure these vessels was continued and, if so, with what success.

I note here under sub-head S, an increase of £20,981, the total for that sub-head being £200,000. Then, if we look back at sub-head C, we will find an increase of £31,351, the total for the sub-head being £713,519. If these two totals are added together they give the formidable figure of £913,519. Most of that large sum is being paid in wages to men who are employed in the Corps of Engineers, I take it, and then the amounts for the maintenance and repair and reconstruction of barracks would not be very much. But I would like to refer to an extract from the Minister's speech which will be found in Volume 146, No. 3, of the Dáil Debates, in which he referred to the fact that "most of the military barracks are old and quite unsuitable by modern standards. Much of the accommodation is in the poorest condition and hopelessly uneconomic to maintain. An effort is being made to provide suitable living accommodation and amenities for personnel and to provide additional storage and other accommodation." I presume that that is the type of work which this sum of money covers. I should be glad to know from the Minister if the items in the sum which he himself referred to on one occasion and which we discussed at a later period in this House, a sum of £117,000, are included in the sum which is covered by this Estimate.

Sub-head Y (4) deals with the Bureau of Military History and I would be very glad to know from the Minister if the bureau is carrying on as successfully at present as it was in the past. It is carrying out very useful and very important services, providing authentic stories of the period covered by the fight for our independence, and from that point of view it is of considerable importance. It was with regret that I learned recently that one of the members of that organisation, a man who had been with it, I think almost since its beginning, had his services dispensed with on the grounds of age.

We all know the individual and we know that physically he is a man who could carry on energetically for quite a long number of years. We also know that in regard to the particular work on which he was engaged, he was enthusiastic, and it is because of that enthusiasm that I think it was a mistake on the part of the Minister to allow this man's services to be relinquished because I think he was carrying out very useful work. All I hope is that the work will be carried out in his absence as successfully as he was carrying it out, and that in the future where there may be other men of that type, that we might strain a point to retain their services, especially in the cases of men who are not at present or have not been in the past, civil servants. I do not think it is asking too much of the Minister to see that the Bureau of Military History carries its work to completion as successfully as it is possible for him to ensure.

Referring to the sort of contradictions we come across in the Book of Estimates, we see under sub-head Z, that is (16) of the Appropriations-in-Aid, we come across a figure for receipts for fuel, light, and water and barrack services which has increased over £7,400. I move to report progress.

Progress reported; the Committee to sit again.
Barr
Roinn