Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 27 Mar 1958

Vol. 166 No. 9

Committee on Finance. - Vote 57—Defence (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:
That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration (Deputy McQuillan).

When speaking last night, I emphasised how important the F.C.A. was to the country. There are plenty of activities for the young people to engage in by joining the F.C.A. and we should encourage them to participate in those activities before they are taken away by other attractions.

The first improvement that needs to be made in relation to that organisation is the provision of a more attractive uniform. A great many people would join up if this were done. I also want to see members trained in the latest military equipment. At the moment they are being trained with obsolete rifles and as part of the regular Army they are entitled to be trained with modern equipment.

There should also be some type of school held for the F.C.A. once or twice a week to teach them love of country, love of self-sacrifice, respect for the rights of others and to foster our national traditions. The F.C.A. is the proper organisation for this type of training.

The Minister is a new Minister and I believe the Minister for Defence has an important role to play. He should be a man who keeps out of active politics. I listened to some speeches of his for the last month or so and one of them was nothing like what should come from a young man of the present generation. It was a narrow, mean, vindictive speech in which he tried to stir up the bitter feelings of the past. The Minister has the responsibility of moulding the youth of the country and he should steer clear of the old controversies and adopt a more enlightened attitude. He comes of good stock and he is a well-educated young man. He should be more temperate in his speeches and give the youth of the country a lead in the adoption of a new spirit. No doubt the remarks I heard him make in the course of contributions to debates here were made in the heat of political discussion but I express the hope that it will not occur again.

A recruiting campaign is a very costly affair. You do not always get the best type of person from such a campaign but in many cases people who cannot get a job anywhere else. The young fellow who has had a row at home makes his way into the Army. There is not much future for an ordinary solider unless he joins up for his lifetime. After a few years he is thrown out in the wilderness. Another thing we find is that after training our men, they join the British Army, and after a few months they have risen to the rank of corporal or sergeant. Of course, it speak well for their training here but I would rather see these people getting jobs at home.

The reason it is so hard to get the right type of recruit is that these people realise there is very little prospect for them in the Army. When there is a national emergency we say that they will get first preference when they are being demobilised but they have seldom got first preference in anything.

There is an ex-Army association in this country and it is important from the point of view of linking up the high ranks with the lower. It is the duty of the Government to give a generous annual contribution to that organisation. Nearly every country in the world contributes to such associations and we must do likewise if we want to have a worthy ex-servicemen's association.

A large number of young single men for when work should be provided are drawing the dole. The dole is only a pittance for them to keep body and soul together and perhaps keep them from emigration. There should be a means of giving these young men work on drainage, afforestation, bogs and so on.

The Deputy would not put an unemployed barrister on that?

I certainly would, and an unemployed Army general. There are too many idle men. We realise that our Army of 10,000 men is an insurance against danger, but they are idle men and they are not contributing very much to the national economy. There are too many idle men both in the Army and outside it. We should reorganise the Construction Corps which did such excellent work when it was previously in existence.

This is a very big Estimate and it should have been pared down. There is a sum of £47,000 provided in connection with the retirement of officers in recent years. That amount should have been spread over five or six years instead of one year only. There are many other expenses which could have been cut down, the number of lorries used, and so on. Greater economy must be enforced if we want to put this country's finances in balance.

I would ask the Minister, as a young man, to give a good lead and good guidance in future to the youngsters. The youth depend more or less on the men in charge of the Army for the proper spirit in the F.C.A. In the F.C.A. we want men of all classes, creeds and politics. If the Minister makes intemperate speeches, as he has done in the past, the young men will not come in. They will say: "Why should I go in there; did you see what he said yesterday?"

There is talk at the moment of efforts to take their minds in another direction, into a channel which is not democratic. Young men's minds are very open to deception. There are some men very active, and if things go on as they are, we will have two armies. There is room for only one Army, one police force in a democratic way of life. It is up to the Minister for Defence to make every effort to see that the youth of Ireland is fostered and brought into the F.C.A., so that every man worth his salt will be learning something and giving of his best for the betterment of the country. I would be satisfied then that the Minister was doing good work and that it could be left to him to carry on the proud tradition, handed to him from the past, to the new generation coming after us.

In the course of the debate there was reference to promotions in the Army. Last year, when I spoke in this debate, that was one of the matters to which I referred. It is something which does not arise in Fianna Fáil administration only; it seems to be a perennial source of complaint in the Army. I am not referring to promotions through political influence or anything like that. There is a feeling amongst officers and men that there is a certain amount of personal bias with the men on top, that they can sometimes hold back a person's promotion by transferring him from one section to another. If that is the case, it is something which should not be allowed. The opportunities for men to advance to the position of N.C.O. are very limited also. There are many men who, after a full term in the Army, have not advanced any further than the rank of corporal. It should be possible to provide greater opportunities for the serving solider to advance before it comes it his time to retire after long years of service.

During the year, the Minister made some reference to the conditions for N.C.O.s and men on retiring, and I hope he will keep that in mind. He has not come to any decision on that question, but an improvement on their present retiring position is desirable. I was glad to hear him say that, during the course of the coming year, there will be an improvement in housing and that housing schemes will be provided at some barracks in the country. There is still a great amount of dissatisfaction amongst the serving troops in regard to housing conditions and we would like to see much more done, particularly int he Curragh area, in that respect. Some houses have been built—a very welcome step— but there could be still further improvement.

In opening the debate, the Minister referred to the maintenance of barracks. While we have the buildings at present in use, they should be kept in the best possible condition. I accept the assurance that everything possible wil be done. It would be a pity if such fine buildings as we have throughout the country were allowed to fall into disrepair through neglect. There is some dissatisfaction amongst the men also, that some couple of years ago they were promised a walking-out uniform. That has been issued in some cases lately. I do not know if there has been any cessation of the issue of such uniform, but it is a thing the men would appreciate very much.

Deputy Giles mentioned the Construction Corp. I do not know if there would be agreement with the view he expressed. I would like, however, to pay tribute to the Apprentice Schools of the Army. These schools are at Naas and Baldonnel and the boys there certainly get very fine training. I want to pay tribute to the trade unions who co-operate in that and also to the vocational schools. I get many opportunities of meeting the lads from Baldonnel and Naas and they have nothing but the highest praise for the way they are treated in the barracks. They are getting a very fine training. Their educational interests are looked after also and during their couple of years they have the benefit of Army discipline. I should like to see that scheme extended, if possible. We are living in a technical age and the more technicians we can provide the better.

I should like to see as much as possible done for the F.C.A. In particular when they go to camp, the conditions should be as good as possible for these young fellows. Many of those who go are still school and they are possible material for the Army. If they get a bad impression at the annual camp, it may turn them against Army life, to which otherwise they might be led.

With regard to the Corps of Engineers, I wonder if it would be possible to do anything to provide permanency for the civilian employees of the corps. I understand that some of the Grade A and Grade B men are regarded as more or less permanent, but they really have no guarantee of permanency. If they could be assured of permanency and if a proper force could be built up, they would give a better return. Last year, some men were let off through redundancy. Some were taken back again since then. There have been cases where men were taken back and felt they had some hope of continuity of employment, but within a month they were let off again. It is not helpful to their work to have that situation.

I should like the Minister, when replying, to clarify the position regarding gratuities to civilian employees. I understand that after seven years, if a civilian employee of the Corps of Engineers is dismissed through redundancy, be is entitled to a gratuity. I should like a clear statement on that, and also if the gratuity is paid to others who leave when they come to the retiring age, that is, whether they are entitled to a gratuity. The work these civilian employees do, as I have seen on the Curragh, is high-class work. The houses they built there are a credit to them, and they built them at a very competitive price. It might be possible to arrange that any work to be done by the Army could be done through that corps of civilian employees and the Army men, rather than under contract, so that there would be a possibility of those civilian employees being assured of permanency in that way.

I think the Minister also mentioned that he had handed over some lands to the Department of Lands. I should like to know if there are other lands, particularly in the Curragh area, which he feels he could dispose of to them, without harming the interests of those who have cheap grazing rights on the Curragh grasslands or any other interest there. If there are lands available, they should be turned over to the Department of Lands, to be made available to the small uneconomic holders around the Curragh area,

I should like to pay tribute to the men of the Army whom I know pretty well in our area, Naas, Kildare and the Curragh. We in Kildare are very proud of them and they are of the finest character. I think it is a pity that there should be any disparaging remarks about the men who serve in the Army. There may be a difference of opinion as to whether we should have an Army, or as to its size, but while we have an Army, we should respect the men in it. It is regrettable them, particularly from men who were serving members themselves.

With reference to the previous Deputy's remarks, I do not think that anybody in this House wishes to disparage the individual members of the Army, either officers or men of other ranks, although there is considerable difference of opinion as to the size of the Army and, possibly, the overall efficiency of the Army. Whether we like it or not, we must have regard to the cost of the Army in our present circumstances. In view of the necessity for devoting a very substantial annual sum to productive enterprise, whether we can continue to bear the cost of over £6,000,000 is a question that has sufficiently engaged the attention of the Government. Personally, I do not think we can.

I should like to see the Army the best and most efficient unit we could have, with the proper ratio of officers to other ranks, well-paid and clothed, with the opportunity for the ranks to come up to the officer class and with every encouragement given to them, together with proper retiring benefits and pensions. I would rather have a small well-equipped, well-trained Army than a force regarded, judging by some of the remarks that have been made, as more or less an outlet for employment. I do not think that is the way to look on an army. It was suggested here yesterday that if certain barrack were closed down, it would lead to unemployment. Certainly it would, and I think the spookeepers in the areas would suffer, but surely there are other ways of utilising the expenditure that would be saved by keeping on a barracks for the only reason that it is providing employment.

I presume it does not arise on this Vote, but I should like to mention the question of national service which I think is closely associated with the Vote for Defence. I would like to see national defence service introduced in this country. Despite the goodwill and the loyalty that has gone into organising the F.C.A., it is extremely difficult, particularly amongst the young people—who naturally rise to the occasion in time of stress—to keep peacetime forces operating. The Minister should seriously examine the question of introducing some form of compulsory national service that would apply to all young men of a given age—18 to 20 years—with sufficiently liberal provisions to extend either above or below that age limit.

I do not mean that they should have purely military training, but also technical training which is so necessary to-day, and in that regard I quite agree with the previous speaker. There should also be physical training and ordinary training in citizenship. All that could be incorporated in national service. I think it would be a good thing for the country and a very good thing for young men of every class. There should be no question of drawing distinctions and it should apply to all men, in the age groups concerned, throughout the country.

I do not know enough about defence matters to criticise in any specific way the present organisation of the Army. I should merely like to suggest to the Minister that he should make a very close examination of its present organisation and of the type of Army we should have, in the light of developments over recent years and having regard to the speed with which the picture is changing. That might be put into effect by himself. He is a young man and a new Minister and I feel he has the right drive and the interest in the Irish Army to ensure its streamlining in the modern sense and having regard to our capacity to support a force of this kind.

Then, there is the question, as I have already mentioned, of barracks in outlying areas an whether it would not be better to concentrate on barracks in the larger and more populous districts and have them better equipped, rather than have barracks throughout the court merely as a means of giving employment to men who otherwise would not be employed. I know that the Minister is familiar with the question of housing for soldiers. In regard to Limerick, I think his attention has been drawn to the dire necessity for providing houses for soliders and not leaving it to the already overstrained local authorities to provide the housing accommodation. I think he intimated here that the question of providing soldiers' houses in Limerick was actively engaging his attention, and I hope that the matter will come to fruition very soon.

The type of housing in most of the older barracks, such as Sarsfield Barracks, is indeed very primitive, and I should like to see a newer and more attractive type of house, again in the larger centres. I do not think it is a practical proposition to seek to add to the number of old barracks in the rural areas by building soldiers' houses there. I would say we should rather concentrate on the building of houses in larger centres.

Finally, I suggest to the Minister that, having regard to our present circumstances, this figure of £6,000,000, while I know that, in terms of modern defence, it is only a fleabite, might be more than carefully looked into, as we need to devote every single penny we can to productive enterprise. That and the organisation of the Army and the conditions of the men, are points. I should like him to consider, and I should like to see him taking the initiative in regard to some form of national service.

The Minister has intimated that it is necessary in the near future to embark upon a recruiting drive. Happily, changes have taken place in this House in regard to what the target should be for the numbers to be recruited to the Army. When I came into this House seven years ago, I remember there was very strong feeling and it was intimated that the previous Government, the Government now in office, were too pessimistic in relation to the numbers which should be engaged in full-time membership of the Defence Forces. It was advanced at that time that their policy was in some way inimical to the interests of the Defence Forces, that they were concentrating overmuch on our Second Line of Reserve.

Happily, we now have more realism in relation to the number, that are adequate to our requirements, and it seems to be pretty well agreed that what we require is a competent and trained cadre of officers and N.C.O.s with just the requisite number of men to man the military institutions we have. In fact, it has been said by, I think, Deputy Booth, among others, that a number of the institutions are surplus to our requirements. I thought that may apply to centres in country areas, but those speakers were emphatic that they were referring to the City of Dublin.

I could well imagine that the closing down of some of the barracks in Dublin would not bring in its train the social consequences that would arise from the closing down of a barracks in a rural town. Deputy Russell appeared to think there was some advantage, from the point of view of efficiency, in concentrating our Regular Army in the larger centres of population. I do not agree with that point of view. I think it desirable that we should have a diffusion of our troops and should retain the centres throughout the country. If barracks are to be closed down, they should be closed down in Dublin.

We know that in many rural towns to-day conditions are not good in relation to business and, therefore, the impact on a rural town, if spending capacity is reduced, due to the removal of a number of soldiers from it, must be borne in mind. It would be brought forcibly to the attention of the Minister when such things are mooted. It would be more advantageous to retain the centres throughout the country, because we must bear in mind the connection which it is vital to maintain between the people and the Army. It is also important to have available fully trained and full time personnel to assist in the training of, and encouragement of recruitment for, the F.C.A. In relation to the F.C.A., it may have been an oversight, but I think this is the first occasion on which a Minister has not paid tribute to the voluntary effort which these men are making and to the spare time they devote to this service.

Numerous Deputies have expressed concern at the situation relating to the general trend and present position of the F.C.A. A number of them referred to the fact that at least a better fitting uniform is desireable. It is only natural that when young lads go out on parade, they should attract attention, and they feel very self-conscious because of the type of uniform which is all too conducive of the kind of sneer which so quickly comes from the hurlers on the fence, from the fellows who are not prepared to give their time or efforts to this service. There is an obligation upon the Minister to see that the boys who are entering the F.C.A. are provided with the best facilities we can afford to give them.

I should like to say, before I pass from the Regular Army to deal more fully with the F.C.A., that we are at the moment in a transitional period. We are now losing from our Defence Forces and from the administrative side officers and men who have been in the Army since its foundation, and the respect which our Army has earned is no mean tribute to these men. Now that they are departing from the Army, it is to be hoped that the men who are becoming career officers will emulate the standard of conduct of the men who preceded them.

There was at one time a feeling that the F.C.A. was a force that could readily be officered, administered and trained by its own members. I agree it is vital that it should be officered from within its own ranks, but we had to revert to the regular N.C.O. to train F.C.A. members. There is in the Irish character that geniality and habit of mixing with one's neighbours and becoming friendly with one's neighbours. That might be all right in other countries and among other people, but, because of the character of our people, we cannot discard that friendship at the hall door and command the respect which rank must acquire, if it is properly to train young lads, particularly in rural areas. Therefore, the contribution that has been made by the regular trained N.C.O.s has been considerable in that respect. It has assisted those who are officers in the F.C.A. to overcome many difficulties.

I suggest to the Minister that he should initiate a drive through the Irish National Teachers' Organisation and Macra na Feirme to secure the best type of member for the F.C.A If the F.C.A. is taken up with any enthusiasm in colleges where these men are being trained as teachers, they will being their enthusiasm to whatever part of the country in which they work later, that enthusiasm which they imbibed in the first instance in the schools, or whatever societies in which they first became interested in the F.C.A. The need at the moment is to do something for our young people and there is within the framework of the F.C.A. an opportunity to provide physical training equipment and facilities.

The major difficulty in getting good attendances at parades is in urban centres. It is more readily available, extraordinarily enough, where men work longer hours and work harder. Where they do that, they are prepared to come to parades, under very adverse conditions of weather, bad roads and so on, to their regular training centres. The difficulty of getting good attendances is not as great in rural areas, as it is where young lads have other activities in which they can engage, where they are attracted by amusements and so forth. In rural areas, many boys who would otherwise have left the country have been held at home by the spirit of comradeship which develops in an organisation such as the F.C.A. It would do many boys all the good in the world if they entered such a force and learned the temperament and control which can be an advantage to them, even in their civilian lives, apart from any contribution that might be required from them in the defence of the country.

There is reflected in this Estimate, and it is the first Estimate to come before the House this year, a small but significant contribution which flows from the budgetary policy of the Government in withdrawing the food subsidies. It is our intention, on every Vote that comes before the House, to indicate that, because of that policy, what was supposed to be a saving is not, in fact, a saving. There is no Department of State which will not reflect in its Estimate some small amount put there to meet the impact of the withdrawal of the food subsidies.

There is one activity of the Army which, down through the years, has brought much credit to this country. That is the Army jumping team. I know that the jumping team, if it goes off or is not too successful, cannot recover overnight. However, it is gratifying to see the improvement which has taken place in the past few years.

It has been reported that some of these men who, as Irish Army Officers and as members of the jumping team, have brought great credit to this country, have suffered as a result of the niggardly expenses which are allowed to them. That is regrettable. They are only seven or eight in number, and we are not in the position of some of the great countries which can send units of their navies to visit various other countries and be received by those other countries as emissaries of the country they represent. Among the few emissaries of good will that we have in this country are the jumping team, and they should be treated as such. With the tradition we have as regards horses, the jumping team is certainly an ancillary industry. If we have in the Army a small group of competent horsemen who can go out and compete in the world's capitals and who have, in the past, brought honour and prestige to the country and to the Army, they should be properly treated and in the coming years, we ought to give the jumping team the chance and the encouragement which they require, if they are to continue to bring credit to this country.

I think it was Deputy Giles who suggested a reintroduction of the Construction Corps. That is a matter which should at least receive examination. It has often been said that there are necessary works of national reconstruction which cannot be undertaken, due to our limitations in many respects. It is possible that an organised force such as the Construction Corps could undertake such work. Perhaps the Minsiter would look into that matter and see if anything could be done in that respect.

Would that corps be for unemployed or would the idea be to have it compulsory?

Deputy Russel referred to compulsory service or national service, which is a different thing from the Construction Corps. I would not make it compulsory, but I should like to have an outlet for a certain class of young man who, through parental disability or for some other reason, is unliekly to be given an opportunity of advancing himself. In a force like the Construction Corps, he could get technical training, and at the same time he could contribute in some material way to the creation of some project which would be of assistance to the country.

I should like to ask the Minister, in all sincerity, to review his decision regarding the attendance of the Army at the annual ceremonies at Béal na Bláth. Since Michael Collins was the founder of the National Army, it is only right that the simple little tribute paid by the Army should be continued at the annual commemoration. If that commemoration had, in the past, been used for the making of political speeches or for the advancement of the political interests of any Party or person, then I would say that the Army should not be in attendance there.

However, the pattern has been, through the years, to gather there and recite the Rosary, and disperse. On some occasions we have had a tribute from the Army itself and now, if the Army is divorced from it, somebody will have to step into the breach. I would ask the Minister to review his decision on the matter and to permit the Army to restore the simple tribute which it has, on occasion, paid to the memory of its founder. We know that there are men who held different views from those of General Collins, but still they gather there now to do him honour, and I suggest the Minister review his decision and make it possible for a small unit of the National Army to be present at the annual commemoration. If he does that, the view will follow from it that the National Army is outside politics and it will be an inducement to young men, who have no interest in past times, to some into the Army as recruits to the regular forces or to join the Second Line Reserves.

Coming as I do from a constituency where fishing is a very important industry, I want to refer to the protection of our territorial waters. I believe the Department of Defence is responsible for such protection. On the establishment of the State, there was one old ship—I forget its name—which was responsible for protecting our territorial waters.

Would the Minister for Defence be responsible for this?

I think so. The Department of Defence is responsible for the protection of fisheries. Whenever I put down a question in the House in connection with the protection of trawlers, I have always been told that it is the responsibility of the Department of Defence.

The patrolling of the waters is.

Corvettes purchased some time after the cessation of World War II are not capable of protecting our territorial water and keeping poaching trawlers outside. I should like the Minister, in consultation with the Minister for Lands and Fisheries, to devise some scheme of adequate protection for our fishermen. Fishing is a very important industry. These corvettes should be scrapped and up-to-date craft purchased. We should have a naval service capable of protecting our fishermen. Such a service would add prestige to the country. Corvettes have never been of any use. They are expensive to operate. They are slow. They should be disposed of to the best advantage. For adequate protection, some type of underwater craft would be preferable. I heard one Deputy recommend helicopters. I do not think helicopters would be satisfactory. It would be easier to apporoach poaching trawlers under water rather than from the air.

That would be a matter for another Minister.

We spend £6,280,560 on the Army. I have no objection to that because we require an Army. The maximum is set at 12,500 men. I would be content with anything from 5,000 to 7,000 men and those men should be the best paid soldiers in the world. Everything possible should be done for their welfare and to ensure their efficiency.

Some people hold we do not need an Army. Every free country needs an Army of some kind. I appeal to the Minister to make our Army as efficient as possible and to ensure that both the officers and the men will be well paid, well equipped and well housed. Many of our barracks are entirely antiquated and out-of-date. The married quarters are most unsuitable. If one wants to have men satisfied with their conditions, then one must give them the best conditions possible. I think our people as a whole understand that money must be made available for the Army to ensure that the officers and men are perfectly satisfied. In the world conditions in which we find ourselves to-day, one never knowns when we may need our Army. It is expensive to maintain an Army admittedly, but an Army is essential.

People think the Army is no use because they never see it. Would the Minister consider the advisability of having manoeuvres in different parts of the country. Would it not be an excellent idea to have manoeuvres in the mountains and glens of Kerry? Would it not be a good idea to have Army bands available at certain public functions? Would it not also be a good idea to permit the jumping team to take part is sporting events throughout the country? As I am on the subject of the Army jumping team, may I suggest that the next horse purchased will be called "Killarney". Killarney is as well known as Ireland.

I thought the Army had manoeuvres in Ballybunion.

Very small ones.

Or political ones?

No. We want to keep the Army out of the politics. With reference to the F.C.A., I have had experience of F.C.A. personnel in uniform passing a meeting where representatives of all political Parties were speaking from the same platform. The F.C.A. were in full uniform and fully equipped. They shouted: "Up Dev,""Up Costello,""Up Fianna Fáil", and "Up Fine Gael", and "Up Sinn Féin". Once men are in a uniform they should pass such meetings and forget all about politics until such time as they return to civilian duties. I should like to draw the Minister's attention to that.

If we are to have an army it must be non-political. If we are to have the F.C.A. it must be non-political when on duty. I was ashamed on one occasion to have American and English tourists hear of something that happened. Nobody interested in the Army likes that. I think the F.C.A. should get every support. There is one small matter I should like to mention. I have seen members of the F.C.A. at fairs and going to creameries wearing their uniform overcoats. That should not be. They should be kept for duty hours.

Deputy O'Sullivan referred to the desirability of the presence of the Army at Béal na Bláth. I hold that, not only should they be there, but they should be present at the anniversary celebrations of all the great Irishmen who fought for the freedom of their country down the ages. It does not matter what side they took in the unfortunate Civil War. If they did their duty during the Black and Tan War, in ceremonial fashion. The people would be proud of the Army and would regard it as the nucleus of a bigger force if that were ever required.

This speeches on this Estimate in the main have been very reasonable and in certain respects they wil prove helpful. I thank Deputies generally for the manner in which they approached the debate. I cannot agree, of course, with all the criticism expressed but there were some useful suggestions made. I am satisfied that the majority of Deputies —with, of course, the one usual notable exception—approached the matter in a serious light.

A number of Deputies expressed the view that a large saving was very readily available. I cannot agree with that for one moment. I mentioned in my opening remarks that it was obvious from the Estimate that it had been prepared against the prevailing background of financial stringency. I repeat that. Anybody who examines the Estimate must agree it is obvious it has been prepared with those financial considerations very much in mind. It is obvious that no surplus expenditure has been provided for.

A number of Deputies have been making the point that what we should aim at here is a small, well trained Army as a nucleus for expansion in times of possible emergency. Some Deputies anunciated that idea as if it were a new idea, as if it were not, in fact, the basis on which the Army has always been organised. The peace-time establishment provided for—which has never been reached—was only intended as a nucleus which could be expanded in times of war. There is no point in that type of war. There is no point in saying that the Army is organised on too grandiose a scale and that we should now decide to go in, instead, for a small nucleus capable of expansion in times of emergency. That appears to be an attempt to create the impression that that is not being done at the moment and that, if it were done, there would be a considerable saving. There is no room for a saving in that way.

There have been other suggestions as to how money could be saved on this Estimate. Possibly it would be better if deal with them when I come to deal with the remarks of individual Deputies. One suggestion was that money could be saved by reducing the number of occupied posts in the country. I examined that proposition when I first took over the Department of Defence and when I found it necessary to make certain savings on the Estimates last year. On examination, I found that the saving that would accrue from that would be not worth while, would not be worth the disruption that would be caused in the lives of soldiers married and settled down in these different posts and would not be worth the inconvenience, and indeed harm, that would be caused to local traders in these areas. I discovered that there was really nothing in that, That saving would be very small.

The Minister will always get agreement to close the barracks in the other place.

Yes. Not alone would it disrupt the lives of the soldiers, but it would interfere with the defensive plan which has been decided on by the military people.

If you are going to close down one, you can send it to Wexford.

Send it down to Kerry.

Although Deputy MacEoin was highly critical of certain aspects of my administration during the past year, in the main his speech could be described as one of the most helpful and reasonable speeches I heard here. I can certainly agree with the majority of the sentiments he expressed. I am glad to take this opportunity of joining with him, with Deputy O'Higgins and others in the tribute they paid to the services rendered to the State by the outgoing Secretary of the Department of Defence.

I have only had 12 months' experience of him but, during that 12 months, I certainly formed the same impression that all my predecessors did. I know from other members of the Government that the services he rendered, in particular during the emergency period, will probably never be fully appreciated outside of the people who were associated with him at that time.

I must also thank Deputy MacEoin for the support he rendered to the recruiting campaign for the Army and the Civil Defence Service. His remarks in that respect will be of great help in these campaigns. It is a good thing to know that both the Government and the main Opposition Party realise the importance of building up the strength of our Defence Forces and it is certainly very important indeed that it should be realised that there is unanimity on the necessity of making our people conscious of the urgent need for a well-trained and extensive civil defence organisation.

There is no doubt about it but there is not a proper appreciation of the importance of civil defence in this country.

I mentioned in my opening remarks that the recent recruiting campaign had been reasonably successful. We secured up to 3,000 volunteers. At the same time, it is a fact that there is a great amount of apathy, particularly among the people who should be most concerned, public representatives, on the question of civil defence. Anything that any member of this House can do to dispel that apathy and to arouse enthusiasm for the expansion of the civil defence services will be very much appreciated.

And they will appreciate it afterwards, if any emergeney ever arises.

They certainly will. I can thank my predecessor, Deputy MacEoin, for his help in those respects. Deputy MacEoin went on to refer to the seniority list and I can also agree with the sentiments he expressed with regard to that matter. Unfortunately, the fact that he did mention it seems to imply that I have been ignoring the seniority list in regard to promotions. I want to assure Deputy MacEoin and other Deputies that the considerations with regard to promotions are based, in the first instance, on seniority. The first thing that is taken into account is the question of seniority, but in this Army, now as always, as in other armies, when you come to fill the higher posts it is necessary to consider also the question of suitability for the particular post. There is always a certain element of selection in filling these higher posts. That is not peculiar to this Army or to this particular Administration. It always obtained and always has to obtain.

I accept that, in regard to the higher posts.

Promotion can almost rigidly follow seniority up to a certain rank in the Army, but after that the question of outstanding ability must be recognised and the question of suitability for a particular post must be considered. I can assure Deputy MacEoin that I intend to pay proper attention at all times to the seniority list.

Deputy MacEoin also referred to the question of people who are interned under the Offences Against the State Acts having visits from solicitors of their choice. One or two other Deputies also dealt with that subject. The position in that respect is that all requests for interviews with solicitors have been granted, with two exceptions, and they were both for visits from one particular solicitor. The statutory instrument in this regard places the responsibility in this matter on the Adjutant-General but, of course, the ultimate responsibility is mine and I accept responsibility for it.

In this particular case there was a security objection to the particular solicitor who, it was requested, should visit the internee. I was informed that it was proposed to refuse admission to this particular person and while, as I say, the responsibility is placed on the Adjutant-General, I have no doubt that, if I had demurred, my view would have been accepted but I have given him the responsibility for administering the camp and I certainly concurred with his decision in view of the fact that this objection was there.

Why did the Minister suggest that the internee could see this particular solicitor when he was allowed out on parole?

I suggested no such thing.

The Minister did, in a letter to the Roscommon County Council.

In Deputy McQuillan's speech here he said the opposite to that. He said that the letter mentioned that the man had been on parole and stopped at that. These are Deputy McQuillan's words.

The Minister inferred that the internee could see his solicitor when he was on parole but the Minister could not allow him to see him when he was interned.

And that is the position. I could not at the time, because there was a security objection, allow this particular man into the internment camp.

Why did the Minister change his mind since?

I stand over that and have no intention of being influenced in any way by anything Deputy McQuillan has to say.

Why did the Minister change his mind since and allow this particular internee to see his solicitor, if there was a security objection? The Minister changed his mind, not on account of my intervention, but on account of the appeal to the Convention on Human Rights.

The Deputy had an opportunity of raising the point in the debate.

I shall be dealling with Deputy McQuillan in a few moments. As I say, at that time this security objection was there. It was subsequently withdrawn and later this man was allowed in but if at any other time similar circumstances should prevail I shall take the same action. Generally speaking, the solicitor of the person's choice is allwoed in. There is no attempt on my part to force any particular solicitor on anybody there.

I should like to say to the Minister that it is only for very grave reasons that there should be a refusal.

These were grave reasons.

I accept that.

That was the reason I had to refuse.

Would the Minister say why he changed his mind since?

Deputy MacEoin also referred to the importance of ensuring the confidential nature of the documents that were contributed to the Bureau of Military History. The decision that was taken by Deputy MacEoin while in office was that these would be lodged in the strong room in Government Buildings and kept there for a period of 25 years. That decision has not been changed and the bigger part of these has already been transferred there. The work of preparing the others and transferring them is proceeding. If there is any change, I can assure Deputy MacEoin that it is more likely to be to extend the period rather than to shorten it.

Twenty-five years will do rightly.

I now come to the contribution to the debate made by Deputy McQuillan. This was largely the same type of contribution as Deputy McQuillan has been making for a number of years. It consisted of the usual mixture of bluff and abuse —bluff intended for those people who do not realise that it is Deputy McQuillan's attitude on every question to try to be on both sides at the same time and abuse for all those who have at any time had the misfortune to incur Deputy McQuillan's displeasure. Showing his usual contempt for accuracy, his usual disregard for facts, he started off by saying that this Estimate showed that the officer personnel was up to full strength. In actual fact, of course, the Estimate shows nothing of the kind. Basing his remarks on that incorrect statement, he said the idea should be to reduce the officer strength or bring up the N.C.O. and private strength. He was maintaining throughout the whole course of his speech——

On a point of order. If the Minister purports to quote me, I suggest that he give the relevant part of the debate and do it properly. I will not be misquoted.

The Minister is paraphrasing.

I am paraphrasing the Deputy's remarks.

He suggested that Deputy McQuillan said this and Deputy McQuillan said that and Deputy McQuillan said the other. I should like the Minister to quote exactly what I did say.

I say that the burden of the first portion of Deputy McQuillan's speech was that what I should set out to do was to reduce the officer strength or to bring up the strength of the N.C.O.s and men. He insinuated that the opposite was being done, that the opposite was the policy. If he had any desire to be fair, he should have taken the trouble to examine the Estimate and he would have seen that the Estimates this year do, in fact, show a slight tendency in that direction.

The Estimates this year provide for a smaller number of officers and for an increase in the number of other ranks, but Deputy McQuillan, as usual, chooses to ignore these facts. But the fact that I am doing this at the moment and have taken some steps to reduce the number of officers does not mean that I am accepting the peculiar views in that regard frequently expressed by Deputy McQuillan. I have decided on a slight reduction in the strength of the officers because I am influenced by the fact that, due to circusmstances outside my control, the strength of other ranks is low at present and also by the stringent financial situation. I felt that, purely as a temporary measure, we could manage with fewer officers but I hope in more favourable circumstances I shall be able to correct that situation and get back to full establishment strength.

It is completely wrong to compare the number of officers with the number of other ranks and to divide the number of other ranks by the total number of officers and then say that proves that we have one officer looking after every six or seven men. That gives a completely false picture because many of the officers are engaged in other activities. A number of them look after the F.C.A. and a number are always on courses for different purposes. I hope to get back to the position of more or less full strength in accordance with the peace-time establishement at some future date.

Deputy McQuillan further demanded that we should give increased pay to the other ranks. I could certainly sympathise with that, if Deputy McQuillan in the next breath had not demanded a substantial reduction in the Estimate. These conflicting demands show taht the Deputy had no real interest in the problem. I find that pay increases are given to the Army in accordance with a pattern applicable to all public servants and if the Army is to get further pay increases it can only be done as part of the scheme for the entire public service, Of course that is not a matter for me alone; it is a matter that has to be decided by the Minister for Finance and the Government. But if anybody advocates increased pay surely, if they are to be consistent, they must be prepared to face the responsibility of raising the extra money.

Deputy McQuillan referred to his recent Private Members' motion. I suspected he intended to give us a re-hash of the arguments put forward on that occasion and I do not think it necessary to go into these again. All I shall say in regard to the suggestion that I should set up a committee to advise me on defence policy and expenditure is that I already have at my disposal the advice of two committees which I consider satisfactory. I have the Defence Council and the Government, and I am quite satisfied with the advice I get from these two bodies.

They are the committees that have the responsibility.

They have the responsibility in accordance with law and I do not see any need to have another committee of the type suggested by Deputy McQuillan.

Could they not deal with television also?

In dealing with his motion regarding defence policy and expenditure, Deputy McQuillan elaborated on the attack he made in that motion on the civilian employees employed in conjunction with the Corps of Engineers in the Army. He said that was one of the main ways in which money could be saved—by dispensing with the services of those who are employed on works connected with the maintenance of barracks and in the execution of new works.

For years since Deputy McQuillan left the Army he has been conducting a ceaseless campaign against his former comrades and superior officers——

That is unfair.

——and I intend, while I am in this position, to do my best to defend these people from his venomous attacks. Year after year Deputy McQuillan in speaking on the Estimate for this Department has attempted to represent the average Army officer as a lazy good-for-nothing who spends the best part of his day in bed, with private soldiers running up and down stairs attending on him. Time after time that was the picture Deputy McQuillan painted and I want to refute his allegations; I find the officers of the Army generally are very efficient and enthusiastic and I find that they pay every possible attention to the performance of their duties.

Successive Ministers for Defence have refused to accept Deputy McQuillan's picture of some of the senior Army officers whom he has described, saying: "Underneath the brass hats are brass heads." I also refuse to accept that definition of Deputy McQuillan's——

There is a lot more brass in the Minister's head than in theirs, although brass is fairly valuable.

When Deputy McQuillan on other occasions was attacking senior Army officers he concluded by saying he did not care whose heads would roll. But the heads have not rolled and as far as I am concerned I do not think they should roll. While I am here I shall certainly see that they do not roll on the basis of anything Deputy McQuillan has brought to light since I assumed office.

Having failed in his attack on Army officers, Deputy McQuillan has apparently decided to transfer his attentions to civilian employees and the attempt he is making now is to deprive them of their livelihood. He is now attacking the carpenters, plumbers, painters and other tradesmen employed on works in connection with barracks and on new works for the improvement of Army facilities. That was one of the main points he made in his Private Members' motion and I had hoped that during the debate on this Estimate the Labour Party would explain to the Dáil why it was they supported Deputy McQuillan's motion to throw these people out of employement and have the work carried out instead by serving personnel of the Army.

That is nonsense.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.
Barr
Roinn