Committee on Finance. - Vote 47—Defence (Resumed). – Dáil Éireann (17th Dáil) – Thursday, 17 May 1962

Committee on Finance. - Vote 47—Defence (Resumed).

General MacEoin

When I reported progress I was dealing with grants to local authorities for expenditure on Civil Defence. I notice that there has been an increase to 70 per cent. but 30 per cent. will be a very heavy burden on an already heavily burdened section of the community. The fact that it is now payable in advance may have some effect. When the local authority makes its estimate and finds out its requirements for Civil Defence for the year, I presume that immediately the 70 per cent. will be placed at its disposal. There is no doubt that that will be a great incentive because it will save interest on overdrafts.

The purchase of ambulances is very commendable. I trust that when they are secured, care will be taken of them because there is a danger that when they are brought to a district, they will not get the care which everyone expects them to get. I appeal to everyone concerned to exercise as much care of this equipment as if it were their own property, because it is their property. It may be of greater value than they think because it may be used to save their lives, if the occassion arises.

I want to join the Minister in thanking the Red Cross for its work. I am glad to know of its continued activities and success. That is a very important work and I trust it will continue to flourish, that more people will take an interest in it, and that there will be more volunteers to work in its different spheres of activity.

I should like to ask the Minister if, on the question of promotion in both officer and N.C.O. ranks, he is satisfied that there is no cause for complaint. I have heard whispers, but rumours are something to which very little attention should be paid. I am not paying any attention to them because if attention were paid to them, it might make the Army the plaything of politics. I want deliberately to avoid that. I want to ask the Minister to see to it, in the question of promotions, that fair play and justice are not only done but will appear to be done. That may not be too easy, but I appeal to the Minister to make every effort to achieve that standard. He and his staff should keep their ears to the ground so that if there is any complaint, they will know of it and the matter can be explained to those who think they have a grievance. It is as bad to think you have a grievance as to have one. If you think you have a grievance and there is no ground for it, it is worse than having a genuine grievance. I wish the Army continued success. I trust that their representatives in the Congo will continue to reflect that glory, and live up to the standard, that we all desire for our troops whether at home or abroad.

Mr. Tully

I once heard it said that a soldier was a person who during a war or a time of emergency was entitled to the highest respect that could be given to anyone, but during peace-time, he was a person who got very little respect from anyone. I am afraid that the soldiers serving in this country are no exception in that regard. I know quite a number of the serving soldiers. I had the honour of serving in the Defence Forces during the emergency and I know the type of treatment which can be given to our men.

The unfortunate affair in the Congo which resulted in Irish soldiers being sent there, and unfortunately some of them losing their lives, as the Minister rightly said in the cause of freedom, if it did nothing else, brought home to the civilian population the worth of soldiers at all times. Our soldiers, by going to the Congo and risking their lives, proved that they are as good and as brave as the soldiers of any other nation, and they gained respect not only for themselves but for their comrades who remained in Ireland. I hope that once the public conscience is awakened, our Irish soldiers will be treated with respect. I believe that the men in the Army are usually a very fine type and they should be given the best treatment.

The Minister, referring to the pay of the Defence Forces, said that the rates now were comparable with those in outside employment. I should like to congratulate the Minister on being almost mainly responsible for the last increase in rates granted to the Defence Forces. It did a lot to wipe out the slur cast on the Defence Forces by what is well known among Army personnel as the fourpence a day rise. It was a dreadful thing that that fourpence a day was ever allowed to go through, that it ever received the Government's sanction. To those who were in the Army when it was granted, it will remain as a gratuitous insult by a then Minister for Defence.

I am glad the Minister has rectified that position. I would not, however, agree it is true to say that the Defence Forces are getting rates comparable with those in outside employment. The man in outside employment is a member of a trade union and receives pay and conditions negotiated for the type of work he does. He goes home at night when his day's work is done and he knows when he is going home and he knows what he is required to do. That does not apply to members of the Defence Forces. I know that certain ill-informed people talk about the soft time the soldier has, that he has nothing to do but hang around the barracks all day and spend most of the time sleeping. Anybody with experience of Army life knows that is not true and that, in fact, the soldier from reveille which is at 6 a.m. or 6.30 a.m., until Lights-Out at night, is on duty all the time. In fact, he can be required to do whatever duty he is called on to do, not by being asked to do it but by being ordered to do it under pain of military discipline, irrespective of whether he wants to go to see his family or whether he has another appointment. He is always on call while in the Army. In fact, he is on duty for 24 hours of the day; except for the two weeks' annual holidays he is always on call. When we say the rates of pay are comparable with those in outside employment we are not comparing like with like.

I would ask the Minister to continue the good work he started and try to do something more to compensate the serving soldier for the hardships with which he has to put up. I am aware that over the years improvements have been made in the conditions of soldiers, particularly in regard to bedding accommodation and food. We know that in some units, particularly during the Emergency, when there were many people under arms, conditions in most cases were not all that were to-be desired. The Minister should aim at improving still further the serving soldier's accommodation in barracks. The day is coming when a certain amount of privacy should be given in bedding accommodation to all serving soldiers. An attempt was made at this some years ago but it did not go very far.

Another attempt should be made to have more variety in the type of food given to soldiers because, after all, they are human beings and if they are getting food, even though we are told it is good, wholesome food, day in day out, of the same type and the same quantity, at the same time, it becomes a little unpalatable. The Minister should endeavour to have his cooks blossom out. While I do not expect them to produce French dishes, at the same time they might be able to produce dishes which are different from the general run. I know some dishes were produced during the Emergency which were called French names and which were never on any menu, but at the same time an effort should be made to try to improve the soldiers' menu.

I am also interested in the dress the soldiers wear. I know that a walking-out dress was provided some time ago which was some improvement, but I do not think anybody will go into ecstasies about the wonderful change. A little more imagination could have been used and the Minister might endeavour to improve it still further. The ordinary battle dress, the uniform they wear during the day, is the one I want to refer to particularly. I understand we are now the only civilised nation which has still held on to what is vulgarly known as the bull's wool uniform. The bull's wool uniform should be abolished. Perhaps the Minister would endeavour to do something about that also.

I should also like to refer to the type of boots supplied. Long ago they were supposed to be only for marching and another type was for use on parade so that the Commanding Officer could see his face in them. I do not know whether it is possible to combine the two but the footwear should be modernised and made more comfortable. That would help to keep up the morale of the soldiers. If the soldier has to walk around in old-fashioned boots of the First World War type it does not tend to make him feel any more enthusiastic about his job. The question of time off is a further matter which I would ask the Minister to look into.

I am aware that the present size of the Army, coupled with the fact that a considerable number of serving personnel are in the Congo, has resulted in extra pressure being put on those who remain, but there should be some system devised by which regular breaks could be given to those serving. The soldier has usually to work every day until 4.30 p.m. and then he is free to go out if the orderly sergeant does not catch him and give him some duty which he had forgotten about up to then, and he is free until 12 o'clock, or a little later if he has a late pass. The trouble about it is that the soldier, and I am mainly dealing with the private soldier and the junior N.C.O., cannot plan for more than a couple of hours. Granted, some are not doing too badly but at the same time some effort should be made to give more guaranteed time off even if it would mean they would have to stay in barracks on certain evenings for longer periods than at present.

I am glad to see that efforts are being revived to promote from the ranks. I know it is only from the rank of sergeant up, but the Minister might go a little lower and take on the better type of recruit, because if it reaches the stage where the man, who is thinking of joining the Army, finds that he has a chance of promotion to officer rank it will be an incentive which is not there at present. While it is all right to say that a man can become an N.C.O. and then qualify it by saying he may become an officer, I think that because of the small number of privates at the present time and because of the fact that some people say that we do not want a Chinese army, all officers and no privates, a view with which I do not agree, that is no reason why the number of officers and N.C.O.s should be kept down. If we are going to have a Defence Force which can hold its own when required to do so we will want to have the necessary numbers of officers and N.C.O.s.

I am aware that there are officers and N.C.O.s on the Reserve and that the Chief of Staff and the Minister may say that they can be called on when required, but I do not believe that is any use at all. We should have a number of young men who would be able to play their part, when called on, and the Minister would be well advised to build up to the maximum, as far as officers and senior N.C.O.s are concerned. It would provide an incentive for the enthusiastic young soldier to know that he had some promotion before him.

There is another question, that of soldiers living out of barracks. I know that the married soldier gets a fairly good marriage allowance but if that married soldier in living in a local authority house, such as here in Dublin city where he has to pay a differential rent, he has to pay an amount of money which far exceeds that which his comrade living in barracks is required to pay. Something should be done to compensate these soldiers now living out of barracks who have to pay as much as 30/- a week more than the person living in an Army house and, as a result, has 30/- a week less to live on. That is the test. The Minister might decide that it would be a good idea to level out that.

I would also ask the Minister to consider the question of providing houses for soldiers living in country districts. Meath County Council does not discriminate against soldiers although I understand that there are some local authorities that do. In Meath we consider the soldier in the same way as anybody else where accommodation is concerned but it often happens that there would be half a dozen people looking for the one house. The soldier, not being a native of the area, would be competing against five people who are natives. The conditions of the applicants may be the same or that of the soldier might be worse but if the soldier gets the house, there is a lot of talk about his getting it and local people being passed over.

In Gormanston Camp there are a number of serving personnel requiring accommodation and there is no reason why the Minister should not have houses erected on the sites available, or why he should not come to some arrangement with the local authorities in Meath or Dublin to have houses erected for these people. I am not sure if the Minister has power to do that, but he will know whether he has or not, and I should be glad if he would refer to it when replying. Not alone would that result in relief for local authority housing but it would also supply those soldiers, who may be separated from their wives and families by lack of accommodation, with much needed accommodation.

There is one matter in the Vote which is very unreal, that is, the £25 paid to the men who re-enlist. What does the Minister think the fellow is going to do with the £25? Does the Minister believe that £25 will encourage a man who has served a period in the Army and gone into civil life to re-enlist? It reminds me of the old story of the fellow who took the Queen's shilling and got a few drinks and did not know what he was doing. He was broke and had nothing to do but to re-join. It would appear that the same idea was at the back of the minds of the persons who suggested giving £25. If there is to be a re-enlistment fee, let it be related to conditions in 1962 and not to those of 1900.

I was sorry to hear the Minister's reference to the Naval Service and to the failure to get recruits for that service. It is a service that we should do everything possible to keep up. I have a certain connection with the fishing industry and one of the things that fishing people are always looking for is protection. We know the depredations committed by foreign trawlers at the mouths of our main salmon fishing rivers. They can make a clean sweep with their nylon nets and take more fish in one day than our own fishermen would take in a year. We are told that there is a fishery protection service and, while I do not know how the Minister would arrange it, he should try to encourage energetic young men to join the Naval Service even if it means training them for a life as inshore fishermen later on. I think this effort should be made.

We call ourselves an island nation but we have only three small vessels which are supposed to cater for all our needs. That is too ridiculous for words. I am not blaming the Minister for it. This condition of things has been handed down from year to year and from Government to Government. But if the matter were properly tackled the Minister should be able to get enough men who would take an interest in becoming the future inshore fishermen of this country as well as being the future protection service personnel. I suppose the Minister is aware of what happens in the towns and villages along the sea coast where groups of young men aged between 17 and 20 go away to serve on sea-going vessels as their fathers went before them. After a few years, they come back and settle down to continue fishing or whatever is their families' line.

I feel confident the Minister, if he puts the right energy into it, can persuade these people that it would be far better they should join the Irish Naval Service rather than go abroad on some tramp steamer. The question of the type of discipline they would have to put up with might be discouraging, and while I believe you cannot run any service without discipline, at the same time, I suggest that in order to encourage these young people we should not have any martinets, people who are prepared to keep up the old spit and polish from reveille in the morning until lights out. There should be an effort made to ease the restrictions somewhat in an effort to get the right type of young people into the service.

I was glad to hear reference to the fact that modern weapons are being bought. We still see soldiers training in this country, in this year, with the old Lee-Enfield and while it did serve this country and, I suppose, a number of armies in two world wars, it would be too bad if it had to be produced again, should a third world war unfortunately start. The modern light weapons available now, no matter what the cost, should be used here. This question of trying to train soldiers with out-of-date weapons is something which is only playing at the game and should be discontinued.

I know the Minister has said the integration of the FCA into the Regular Army is proceeding well. I was glad to hear that. We in the Labour Party suggested that some years ago, but it was not at all popular. However, I am glad the Minister has found it is working out well but I should like to warn him that he should not rely too much on appearances. It would be wrong for the Minister to say that, because he has on paper a certain number training in the FCA who hold periodic camps and inspections, everything is grand and that if ever we had another emergency, which, I trust, will not arise, we had the hard core of a Defence Force. It is important the Minister should realise there will have to be some effort made to keep a certain number in the FCA in this country. Under the present position where there is a hard core remaining there is still a very big shrinkage. Throughout the country certain young people join the FCA and carry on with enthusiasm for six to 12 months, but then disappear. It simply means that you have not got the continuing trained personnel which on paper you might appear to have.

Another thing I should like the Minister to remember is that during the last Emergency, there was an idea in the country that the FCA and the Regular Army were two units which could be closely knitted together in case of necessity. I know there was a deep distrust between the Regular Army and the LDF as it was then known. There was an idea in the Regular Army that, after all, the LDF were only civilians who could not be trusted. That was a great mistake. People who have been in the LDF will remember that those in that force were, perhaps, better trained than some of our regular soldiers and that they should be entrusted with little more responsibility. Consequently, when the Minister refers to integration, I would ask him to see that it is real integration, not something which breaks down when the test comes along.

One other question I should like to refer to is that of Army pensions. The Minister must do something about Army pensions. We are still very mean in our approach to it. If somebody serves in the Army for a number of years he should get a decent pension, not just a small sum which is of very little use to him. At the moment, we have numerous people completing their 21 years' service and preparing to retire at a relatively young age. Many of them may be only 37 or 38 years of age, and, unfortunately, at the moment there is an idea in the minds of certain employers, regrettably in some instances, in the minds of State employers, that when a person reaches that age, he is a bit over the top, as far as work is concerned. Directives have been sent to certain State or semi-State employers that they are not to employ a man of over 40 years of age and, consequently, a person leaving the Army at, say, 38, may find it extremely difficult to get any kind of employment. I would ask the Department which such a person has served for 21 years to see that he gets a decent pension. I feel sure the people of the country would not impede the Minister in any effort he might make to improve Army pensions.

I should like to refer in this connection to Army officers with pre-True service. The retirement age for such officers was reduced in 1957. This appears to have been an injustice to those men who came into the service of the State at its establishment. They were people, many of whom fought during the Civil War against the present administration. Despite that, they served the present Government loyally through the years and many of them were, in fact, responsible for the training of the present Army. They turned out to be excellent soldiers, excellent officers. There was once a suggestion that those older men were holding up promotions of younger men by being retained and an order was made that they should be retired forthwith. In July, 1949, the Minister for Defence amended the regulations and provided one year's additional service for any officer who had pre-Truce service. In November, 1954, the Minister gave a further year——

Mr. Bartley

This matter will come up on the Pensions Estimate.

An Ceann Comhairle

Are we not discussing the two together—Pensions and the Army?

It is not indicated here that Votes 47 and 48 would be taken together.

Mr. Sherwin

Deputy MacEoin made no mention of pensions because he assumed we were only dealing with Defence. I had not intended speaking about pensions either.

Except that it interrupts the arrangements I have made. However, I bow to your ruling.

There is a reference here to Civil Defence. In that reference, it is assumed that wonderful progress has been made in regard to Civil Defence and bouquets are thrown around to various people for the wonderful efforts they have made. I am afraid I cannot agree with the Minister that Civil Defence is being dealt with seriously at all. In a number of areas, some people have taken it up enthusiastically, but I think there was a lot more interest in it two years ago than now. The ordinary person does not know what it is all about. If you expect people to take an active interest in it, an effort should be made to explain it to them. I know that Civil Defence officers have been appointed in certain areas, that meetings have been held with public representatives and that there have been film shows and so on to show what the effect would be if an atomic bomb were dropped, but the ordinary man-in-the-street does not appear to know what Civil Defence is all about. This is not true not alone of the country districts but also of the towns and cities. It is suggested that cellars under local authority buildings be used for training, but there is no suggestion as to what should be done, if they are not available. If Civil Defence is as necessary as the Minister says, it should be brought to the notice of every citizen by all possible means. It is the Minister's responsibility to do that.

I should like to refer briefly to the question of civilian employees, to which reference is made here. Here again the State has been dragging its feet. We have the case of a group of very humble people, the civilian pioneers attached to the military camps. Their rate of wages is tied to the local county council rate, which is pretty low, and their hours of work are the same as the local council workers. It has been that way for years. When wage rates are negotiated for the local authority workers, the civilian employees get the same increase.

This year, however, something different has happened. This year, for local authority workers, there has been a reduction in working hours from 48 to 45 and the introduction of a five-day week. But while the Department of Defence always said they kept in line with the county councils, they have not done so on this occasion. Instead, they kept their employees on a five-and-a-half day week of 48 hours. Eventually, when pressure was put on them, they agreed to reduce the number of hours to 45, but even then they would not grant a five-day week. To make matters worse, the maintenance workers in the camp I am referring to, who were on the same rate as building trade operatives, now have a five-day week of 45 hours, while these unfortunate people, paid less than anybody else, will not be allowed to work a five-day week.

I do not know what big brain decided this should be done. While, perhaps, this is a task the Minister should not have, I think he will have to do something about it. We did everything we could, but all we got were very polite answers from the Department of Defence. The Department are always very polite, but they have not done anything further about it. I should like the Minister to have that matter investigated. I do not want the Minister to make any comment on it because it is a matter that should not have to be brought to his notice at all. In regard to the service medal, does the Minister want to deal with that under Pensions?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That would arise on the next Estimate.

Mr. Tully

If that is so, that is all I wish to say at this stage.

Mr. Dolan

Is mian liom comhgáirdeachas a dhéanamh leis an Aire as ucht an méid atá déanta aige don Arm i rith na bliana agus an méid atá beartaithe aige a dhéanamh san am atá le teacht. Is ceart go mbeadh meas ag gach duine san tír seo ar na daoine a théann isteach san Arm mar óglaigh isea iad agus téann siad isteach go toilteanach. Caitheann siad blianta ag obair ó mhaidin go hoíche agus caileann siad na seansanna a bhíonn ag daoine eile a fhanann amuigh chun postanna níos fearr a ghnóthú dhóibh féin.

Ní minic a fheiceann na gná dhaoine an tArm. Léann siad ins na páipéirí go bhfuil mór-shiúl i mBaile Átha Cliath ach is annamh a thagann an tArm ar cuaird go háiteacha eile ar fuaid na tíre. Ba cheart réiteach a dhéanamh ar sin.

Ní dhéanfadh sé aon dochair daoine a ligint isteach san Arm níos óige, cuir i gcás, sé bliana déag d'aois. Sin í an aois is fearr chun iad a choimead ó dochar a dhéanamh. Á is mhór isea í dóibh siúd staidéar a dhéanamh ar na gná ábhair scoile mar atá caoi aca a dhéanamh anois. Dá bharr sin beidh seans aca na postanna is aoirde san Arm a bhain amach. Má chuirtear an méid sin in iúl do na daoine ar fuaid na tíre beidh meas níos mó aca ar an Arm agus ní bheidh laghdú níos mó ar na daoine atá ag dul isteach ann. Is breá an rud é go bhfuil an scéal amhlaidh agus nach bhfuil an scéal mar a bhí sé fadó in Airm ar fuaid an domhain, ach go mór mhór i Sasana, inar toghadh na hoifigigh ó na daoine go raibh a lán airgid aca agus gurab iad na gnáshaighdiúirí na daoine bochta. Bhí sean-fhocal ann dá bharr sin i dtaobh an Airm gurbé an rud ba thábhachtaí an méid daoine móra a bhí ar aithne agat in ionad an méid eolais a bhí agat. Ní mar sin atá an scéal anso. Cuirtear muintir an Airm ar aghaidh de bharr an méid eolais atá acu má bhíonn siad oiriúnach agus is iad sin na daoine is fearr a chuirtear ar aghaidh anois.

Ba mhaith liom focal molta a rá i dtaobh na n-oifigeach agus na saighdiúirí atá ag obair ar son na Gaeilge. Tá a fhios agam go bhfuil spéis ag an Aire sa Ghaeilge ach níor leor sin marach an sár-obair atá á déanamh ag muintir an Airm féin. Is breá an rud é nuair a chloiseann na gná dhaoine, i rith mór-shiúil, oifigigh ag tabhairt na hordaithe dona saighdiúirí as Gaeilge.

Tá muintir na tire brodúil as na saighdiúirí a d'imigh thar lear go dtí an Congo as ucht a ndea-iompair ins na deacrachtaí a bhí le fulaing aca.

Maidir leis na gléasanna cogaidh atá á n-úsáid san Arm fé láthair, is cosúil go bhfuil siad ro-shean anois. Feicim go bhfuil beartaithe ag an Aire cuid dena na gléasanna sin a dhíol agus gléasanna nua a thabhairt isteach. Is maith an rud gur féidir leis na saighdiúirí tréineáil a dhéanamh leis na gléasanna is fearr atá le fáil.

Maidir leis an saighdiúir é féin, is oth liom a rá nach bhfuil an meas ceart air i measc na daoine nuair a théann sé go dtí áiteacha poiblí, cuir i gcás, rince nó céilí. Is minic a chuirtear in iúl dóibh nach bhfuil fáilte rómpa. Ba mhaith an rud é dá mbeadh meas níos mó ag na daoine ar an Arm, agus ar an FCA agus ba cheart gach cabhair a thabhairt dóibh postanna a fháil nuair a fhágann siad an seirbhís.

Molaim Cumann Croise Deirge na hÉireann de bharr an sár-obair atá á déanamh aca agus ba chóir focal molta a rá mar gheall ar na daoine ins na scoileanna ins na bailte beaga ar fuaid na tíre atá ag cabhrú leis an gCumann.

Deirtear gur beag an gá a bhéas le hArm san am atá le teacht de bharr na n-eiteallán atá ag dul amach sa spás agus mar sin de, ach in ainneoin sin, is dócha go mbeidh gá i gcómhnaí leis an Arm agus go mbeidh obair thábhachtach le déanamh aca de shíor. Dá bhrí sin, táim lán-tsásta leis an méid airgid atá an tAire ag cur ar fáil don Arm chun an obair atá le déanamh aca a chur i gcrích níos sásúla, chun tuarastal níos aoirde a thabhairt dona saighdiúirí, agus rudaí eile den tsaghas sin. Molaim an Meastachán so.

Mr. Sherwin

Deputy MacEoin commenced his contribution to this debate by referring to allegations made against our troops in the Congo. I read a great many papers and I know that allegations were made against other troops. According to what I have read, there was some truth in these allegations. But it was admitted that there were absolutely no grounds for the allegations made against our Irish troops. Any charges arising in relation to our troops in the Congo were in regard to ordinary disciplinary matters.

Deputy MacEoin also asked about some inquiry in Kilkenny barracks. He said that the Minister might not like to comment publicly on it, but he would like to know privately. If the matter is to be raised here publicly, then I am afraid the Minister will have to make any comment he has to make on it publicly. I do not know what is happening in Kilkenny barracks.

With regard to our forces in the Congo, may I say that this Congo adventure has provided our troops with an opportunity of gaining experience? When the Army was first set up, we were in the happy position of being able to recruit people who had taken part in the Great War. During the last emergency, we had a great many trained people. It is so long since there was a war that there are now no first-class trained personnel. In other words, our Army has no real experience of war. The experience gained in the Congo will be a great asset. We have discovered, for instance, that our weapons were not up to standard. The Congo is somewhat primitive and trouble met there would be nothing like the kind of trouble one might meet up with in a more modern country, but we have at least had some experience. Our troops did some fighting. There were casualties. We had the opportunity of comparing ourselves and our equipment with the troops and equipment of other nations.

As a result of the experience gained there, we now know that we need a lighter automatic weapon with a greater firepower. The intention now is to equip our Army at home with similar weapons, although these weapons are expensive. So long as we make a start in the right direction and keep moving, there is some chance that we will bring our home forces up to date.

Criticism was made that some of our vehicles are very poor and were rejected by the G.O.C. That was stated in English newspapers. I notice that the Minister stated today that £300,000 was provided for the purchase of automatic weapons and armoured vehicles. That is all to the good.

I see one danger. With the old Lee-Enfield rifle, there was always the possibility of getting ammunition because Britain was close at hand. If necessary, we could ourselves manufacture the ammunition. Indeed, there was always plenty around. I am concerned about these Belgian weapons. It would be a bad thing to equip our Army with these and later find ourselves with weapons but no ammunition. Belgium is one of those countries that seems to be overrun very quickly when hostilities arise, or else she surrenders. She is not a very strong country. If we are dependent on Belgium for supplies of ammunition, we may find our Army equipped with weapons rendered useless because there is no ammunition for them. It is not a question of just one round; it is a question of 100,000,000 rounds. There must be no danger of the supply being cut off. I impress that on the Minister.

The Lee-Enfield rifle has become somewhat obsolete. I have always held the view that any defence we are likely to put up here will be a guerilla defence. In that case, the Lee-Enfield rifle will not be so obsolete at all. I believe they are good for another 50 years. We should not depend on them; we should not make them the Army's weapon, but we should keep them in reserve. In the event of hostilities here, the Army as such will disappear. The civilian army will take over then and that army will depend largely on what it can get its hands on.

Mention was made of Civil Defence. It was said no one takes any interest in it. Naturally—the only thing about it is that there is a certain glamour about the uniform and the social activities. If that were not there, no one would join. Civil Defence is like flogging a dead horse. People are either not interested in war or they hold up their hands in horror at the prospect of war. We must pay tribute to those who are prepared to serve in these Civil Defence groups. They form the nucleus of a much larger organisation, should it become necessary to expand. There should be a group in every city and town upon which to build, if the necessity arises

With regard to recruiting, recruiting is never a success in peacetime. In the old days, the officer class was manned largely by dud sons who failed in business. The rank and file were for the most part pressed into service. They were people who had no hope of ever obtaining employment or making a living on their own. They were the derelicts of humanity. We know all about the press-gangs. That was the old army. We have to depend now on voluntary service. That does not seem to simplify matters. There is one bright star on the horizon now for N.C.O.s——they can in future become officers. If men have no outlet for promotion, they lose interest. They become mechanical. If one wants the right type, the intelligent and the ambitious, standards must be such that they can obtain promotion. The fact that N.C.O.s can in future become officers should help recruiting. The possibility is that this will have the effect of inducing a better type to join the Army and these better types will hold on rather than resign. There should always be hope. That is the one thing everyone should have. We want to keep people interested.

I was always against this business of picking people out to wear the braid. It is very strange that in times of revolution the gentlemen with the braid do not count very much. It is the people who have "it" who forge their way to the front. It is the sergeants, the corporals the privates and the people who were never in any organisation who often come to the front.

It is good to know that non-commissioned officers can now become officers. I hope the examination will not be made too difficult for them. I hope their standard of education will not have to be too high. We expect a certain standard but not perhaps the standard previously demanded that would bar many of them. Allowances should be made for the fact that war is not just a game of being able to synchronise certain words and certain big words. It is a question of courage, of sense and of grit. War is where the animal instinct in the highest degree comes into operation, as well as just academic knowledge.

I know that certain Parties here have a habit of picking their men for nomination to the Dáil and that, for that very reason, their organisation is a flop. I know other organisations who allow their rank and file to do the picking and who are a great success. I know that from experience. There is the answer to interest in the army. Let the men feel they can get to the top, that there are no bars, and you will have a greater interest and a better type coming in and, furthermore, a better type will remain there.

Mr. Booth

Like other speakers before me, I should like to pay a tribute initially to the troops who have served in the Congo. It is very right that we should try to understand the task which these officers, non-commissioned officers and men have been trying to carry out and, in fact, are carrying out brilliantly. It is often felt, quite wrongly, that these troops were sent out as combat troops to fight a war. In actual fact, in the initial stages, at least, they were sent out purely for police duties and were therefore, very correctly, very lightly armed. Eventually, the situation did deteriorate in the Congo and more and more of our troops became involved in military operations. In one of these operations, I think our troops have been very consistently misunderstood and in particular, the commanding officer of those troops. I refer to the company which was engaged very heavily at Jadotville. This company was sent to that area purely to protect the European population against an alleged threat from the local tribesmen. They were sent to protect human life and to preserve the peace.

In actual fact, they had hardly arrived there before they were set upon by Congolese troops led by Europeans. In those circumstances, I think the company distinguished itself. I think the commanding officer deserves the very highest credit for the skill with which he selected an advance position, for the skill with which he disposed his troops and for the fighting spirit which he infused into them. They fought extremely well. They suffered negligible casualties—mercifully, none was killed. They did show they were good fighting men by inflicting very heavy casualties indeed on those who were attacking them, in spite of the fact that they were exposed to heavy attack from the air, as well as from the ground.

An opportunity arose to negotiate a cease-fire and, in the circumstances, the commanding officer very properly, took that opportunity. It must be remembered he was not there to win a military victory. As he said himself, though he was grossly misinterpreted, if he had been fighting for Ireland, he would never have surrendered. At Jadotville, he was not fighting for anything except self-preservation. I think his action, in agreeing to a cease-fire, even at the risk of being tricked into a surrender, was absolutely correct and I think he took an extremely difficult decision. He took it extremely courageously and well—and thereby saved the lives not only of his own men but of the Congolese who had been incited to attack.

When he and his men were prisoners, they co-operated with their captors to the very limit, to such an extent that some of them even became the godfathers of the children of those who had taken them prisoner. That, in itself, shows that, even as prisoners, our men were working for peace and co-operation and they did it extremely well. I hope that, in due course, if it has not already happened, suitable recognition will be paid to this officer, and the officers and non-commissioned officers and men who served under him. I think they have been grossly maligned in the Press of other countries and some times unintentionally misunderstood by ourselves. It is all very well to say that an officer has done brilliantly by taking and securing very difficult positions. The commanding officer at Jadotville had a very much more difficult job to do and, in my view, he did it supremely well.

Coming to the Estimate itself, I would start with Subhead A.1 which refers to the pay of officers. It is noticeable that in this Subhead a deduction is made in respect of numbers being below strength and a further deduction is made in respect of possible resignations. To my mind, it is an absolute tragedy that a provision such as this should have to be made at all.

It seems that it is accepted as inevitable that we shall never get up to our proper peacetime establishment, so far as officers are concerned. One of the main reasons why our officer strength is below establishment is undoubtedly the question of pay. This is a matter to which I referred when the Supplementary Estimate was introduced earlier this year. In his reply, the Minister suggested that perhaps I was not quite fair in stressing the disparity between the pay, say, of a commandant and that of a higher executive officer in the civil service. He suggested that there are other advantages and perquisites for officers which, if taken into consideration, would lead to a fairly general equalisation. I question that: in fact, I deny it. The only advantages and perquisites which an Army officer may be said to have are uniform allowances, free medical attention and widows' and orphans' pensions.

What is the value of the perquisites? First, the uniform allowance at the moment amounts to £39 per annum and nobody could say that is excessive or an amount which would give any great incentive to an officer to be too lavish with his expenditure. It must be remembered that an officer must still provide himself with proper civilian clothing and consequently all he gets in respect of his uniform allowance is his working clothes and no more.

Medical attention is provided for the officer only; it does not extend to his wife or children. Its value can easily be assessed by comparing it with the facilities granted by Voluntary Health Insurance and nothing the very low premium payable to that organisation. To attempt to use this as a set-off against parity with the Civil Service is an inaccuracy.

I want to stress the fact that whereas a man or woman may enter the Civil Service by passing an examination at the initial stage, or possibly by selection by the Civil Service Commission, an officer has a much harder job before he can secure his commission. He must first pass all the necessary preliminary examinations which refer both to his mental capacity and his physical health which must be excellent. He must then undergo long and arduous training in a military college, something that could never, and never does, happen in the Civil Service. Conditions of service in the military college are severe and probably rightly so, but the hardship which is endured there and the intensive study are without parallel in the Government service.

Further, having received his commission and having served for a considerable period before he can receive any worthwhile promotion, he must again submit himself to further training in the Military College. That course also is arduous: it is exhaustive and exhausting and anybody who can undergo it and succeed deserves every promotion he can subsequently secure.

We come next to the perquisite of widows' and orphans' pensions. That pension is granted only because Army service is apt to be dangerous. A civil servant is not accustomed to handling live ammunition or explosives or undergoing arduous training in the field which is dangerous. Every officer is exposed to these risks. Consequently, it is anticipated that the death rate from accidents alone is bound to be higher in the Army than in the Civil Service and provision must be made for widows and orphans accordingly. But it is entirely incorrect and unfair to suggest that by having widows' and orphans' pensions available to them, officers have an unfair advantage over civil servants.

It is only fair to make some reference to the perquisites of civil servants themselves. When civil servants are transferred to areas where it is difficult to secure accommodation, they are paid substantial disturbance allowances, but in the Army where transfers are much more the rule than the exception, the officer is fortunate when he avoids being penalised by being made to pay for single quarters when married quarters are not available. Again, on the very day that a Civil Servant gets married, he receives a substantial gratuity; the Army officer does not. Certainly, it is not anything like as immediate and may not in fact be granted for some time. That applies to the marriage allowance—he certainly gets no marriage gratuity.

This leads to the question of children's allowances. The Minister has been advised that the reason for the discrepancy between the allowances paid to the Army officer and those paid to the civil servant is these alleged perquisites and privileges. I wish the Minister would pay more attention to the serving officers, especially those in G.H.Q. than to his civilian advisers because I think if he were more closely in touch with serving Army officers, he would know better than to accept such an explanation.

It is grossly unfair and quite intolerable that serving officers should suffer this discrimination. Even at this stage, I hope the Minister will reconsider the whole matter and say that it costs as much for an Army officer to rear a child as it does a civil servant and that in the future there will be no longer stupid discrimination of this sort.

It is not right that it should be left to Deputies to raise these arguments. In the old days, long before this State was founded, the Army was not only referred to but accepted as "the brutal and licentious soldiery" who, more or less, had to be kept down lest they might run amok and ravage the civilian population. Now there is no danger of the Army running amok; consequently, the situation should be altered by the creation of some proper negotiating machinery whereby the grievances of officers, N.C.O.s and men could properly be brought to the notice of the Minister direct.

These are matters which affect morale tremendously. We have seen trouble with other branches of the State service where representative bodies have not won the complete confidence of those whom they are supposed to represent. I hope the Minister will not be discouraged by that and that he will seriously consider providing some negotiating machinery whereby officers, N.C.O.s and men can elect some body to represent them and make their views known.

This is not merely a question of voicing grievances. Very often, helpful suggestions could be made through such a representative body, if it were formed. So, while I do not think that the lack of officers is entirely due to pay—I think it is very largely due to it—I hope the Minister will deal with the pay question and also with the other matters to which I have referred.

The actual discrepancy between the peace time establishment and the expected number of officers is 7.7 per cent. To that must be added a further 2 per cent. for resignations. Resignations disturb me because we should not have officers resigning as they are doing. Officers should be so wrapped up in their job that they stay there as long as they conceivably can. In fact, for various reasons which it is sometimes difficult to identify, far too many officers are retiring at a comparatively early age. If there were greater expenditure I would think there would also be much greater economy because at the moment a tremendous amount of money is spent in enlisting a cadet, training him and bringing him to senior officer rank, or even up to junior officer rank, for that matter, and if that officer retires just after he is coming to his prime, a tremendous proportion of the cost of his training has gone down the drain. It has always been a fault of the Department of Defence particularly to be penny wise and pound foolish, to be scrimping here and scrimping there, forgetting that they are thereby causing a tremendous amount of unnecessary expenditure elsewhere. If the officers were treated much more fairly they would still not be treated unduly generously but the country would get a far better return on its money.

Now we come to N.C.O.s and men. The Minister referred to the peace time establishment and admitted that there had to be a substantial allowance because it was not expected the peace time establishment would be achieved. It looks as if the actual strength will be 32 per cent. below the peace time establishment. That, to me, is a very frightening figure. There are various reasons for it. One is, quite certainly, bad recruiting propaganda. When one sees the sort of advertising which is carried out by State companies, particularly Aer Lingus, at the moment and also by large industrial concerns in this country one realises that publicity is a highly specialised business. The recruiting posters and Press advertisements show an appalling lack of imagination. They certainly would not make me interested in even considering joining the Army. One of them, a very big advertisement, which must cost a great deal of money, showed a number of men in ordinary drill order, peak caps, sitting motionless on a Bofor anti-aircraft gun on the parade ground. Very small boys may like playing with a machine which has handles which you can turn, but it is a pastime which rapidly palls, and how anybody can be expected to get passionately excited about joining the Army by seeing these men sitting on an anti-aircraft gun holding on to handles, just beats me. Quite apart from anything else, this was the gun which was turned down by the United Nations military staff for duty in the Congo against, not offensive jet aircraft, but merely training aircraft. The gun itself, possibly, was all right but the gun controls were not sufficient even for duty in the Congo. There was extraordinarily bad publicity and extraordinarily bad psychology.

Possibly somebody thought that was a bad idea and the next advertisement was equally large with some very small photographs, very badly reproduced, of soldiers in rather odd positions with equipment in their hands which was quite unidentifiable. There was one soldier who appeared to have an overgrown drainpipe pointing in a certain direction; others who were using equipment which I could not identify. The only thing which was perfectly clear was a nice picture of a private soldier in walking-out dress. The walking-out dress is not too bad but it is not all that glamorous as to make a fellow feel "Would it not be gorgeous to be dressed like that fellow?"

Mr. Sweetman

It is now how he feels; it is how his girl friend feels.

Mr. Booth

Exactly. It could very probably be put that way. Nobody's girl friend would feel all that "fetched" by that photograph either. I would ask the Minister to reconsider this question of publicity and do as has been done in Armies all over the world, that is, employ a professional publicity firm to do a good job. I do not know who has done the job so far. I only hope they were not professionals. If they were professionals the only explanation possible is that they were told to do it at an absolutely cut price. That is possible. No decent publicity agency would ever produce such rot, such unexciting, boring nonsense as has been published in the name of Army recruiting.

Quite apart from that, the general public relations system of the Army is practically negligible. The Army is never brought to the notice of the public. It is kept very much in secret. Even our troops going to the Congo and coming back are hardly seen at all by the public. They are assembled almost in secret in various places, whipped out to the airport and everybody is held well back while they board the planes and disappear. When they come back, they are spread around the country as quickly as possible.

I can quite understand that troops coming back from the Congo do not wish, first of all, to be faced with long ceremonial parades, and so on but it should be possible when a battalion returns from the Congo to have it broken up into its constituent companies which are organised on a command basis and let those companies come back again after their period of leave has expired and parade through the towns and cities of their command area. Let their officers and N.C.O.s give lectures to the public, demonstrate the equipment they have been using, show some of the colourful mementoes and souvenirs they have brought back with them, describe the situation in the Congo, why the troops are being sent out there, and so forth. I know some of the officers have done a superb job of lecturing to civilian organisations on their operations and experiences in the Congo. They are well able to do it. With a bit more imagination the message of the modern vocation of an Irish Army could be got across to the civilian population, with tremendous effect.

When this House decided unanimously to send troops to the Congo, I felt this would be the Army's finest hour. The Army has done superbly well but it has not received the recognition it deserves; it has not received the support it should have received and, particularly, it has not had the influx of new recruits which undoubtedly it deserves.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.

The Dáil adjourned at 5 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 22nd May, 1962.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht - Thursday, 17 May 1962

Committee on Finance. - Vote 47—Defence (Resumed).

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 17 May 1962