Before the Bill is passed through its Final Stage I desire to say a word on it. I regret that on the last day I was not present for the whole of the Minister's reply, and because of that there are just a few things I want to deal with. The first is a quotation from a leading article that appeared in the Irish Press on July 20th under the heading “False Criticism” in which this statement was made: “On Tuesday Senator Staines described as an aid to Communism the reduction in Gárda pay which his own Party initiated in 1931.” On the face of it that looks true, but I would remind Senators of the old saying: “That a lie which is half the truth is ever the worst of lies.” It is true that the Minister's predecessor, Mr. Blythe, in trying to fill the gap in his Budget explored the Gárda Síochána avenue if I may put it so. He was entitled to do that. I am sure the people on the Government Benches will concede that. I concede the same to the present Minister. He is perfectly entitled to explore every possible avenue when it comes to a question of economies so that he may be enabled to fill the gap in his Budget. But as to the reference to “Senator Staines's Party,” what are the facts? The moment it was announced in the Press that the then Minister for Finance was about to make a reduction in the pay of the Gárda, I went to Mr. Blythe and to the then Minister for Justice, Deputy Fitzgerald-Kenney, and protested against any cut being made. I said that they had been badly treated in the case of the two previous cuts, and that they were not going to stand any further cuts. So far as I could, I insisted that there should be no further cuts. Other members of this House, who are also members of our Party, also protested to Mr. Blythe. As a matter of fact, when I was away in the country I believe our Party decided on sending a deputation to Mr. Blythe in connection with the matter. There were other protests as well. The result was that the proposal to cut the pay of the Gárda was not put into force. In other words, Mr. Blythe's proposal in its stark nakedness was killed.
The present Minister for Finance now brings this same proposal before us, clothed in the form of a Bill. Although the Bill has gone through the Dáil I want to renew here the protest I made to Mr. Blythe when he proposed to cut the pay of the Gárda. I want to say, too, that I will forgive the present Minister everything if he follows, even at the eleventh hour, the example that was given by Mr. Blythe, and says that he will not cut the pay of the Gárda. I understand that on the last day during my absence, the Minister, in referring to my speech, said that I did not tell exactly the circumstances under which the Gárda got the Desborough scheme in 1922. He made the claim, too, that the pay of the Gárda was only legal from 1924, and said that the memorandum referred to was sent to the Gárda in 1924. I have employed a good many men during my life, shop assistants and others. I had very few agreements with any of them. In fact any agreement I had with them was a verbal one that I would pay them so much a week or so much a month. So far as I was concerned, I always felt it was morally binding on me to pay them the salary or wages agreed upon. In the case of travellers and others paid on a commission basis, of course there was always a legal agreement. But, so far as I was concerned, I felt that I was as much bound to pay those with whom I had a verbal agreement as I was to pay the people with whom I had legal agreements.
So far as the Gárda are concerned, the facts of the case are that I went to the Provisional Government at the time and fought for the Desborough scheme for them. I met with opposition from the Provisional Government, but eventually, so far as the rank and file of the Gárda were concerned, it was agreed to put the Desborough scheme into operation. It is not fair to say now, that because that scheme was not embodied in an Act before 1924 that it was not a binding agreement. I acted as a sort of go-between at the time between the Gárda and Provisional Government, and I want to say that the agreement then arrived at was, in my opinion, just as binding as if it had been enshrined in an Act of the Oireachtas. I am not blaming the present Minister. He has told the House what was supposed to have happened then. I am telling him and telling the House what actually did happen. With regard to the statement of the Minister in reference to the memorandum supposed to have been sent to the Gárda in 1924, I can find no trace of it, and so far as I know no one connected with the Gárda knows anything at all about it.
The Minister made a reference to community living in the case of the Gárda. Now I know a little about community living and about family life. Take the average country station in which you have two unmarried Gárda. They decide to live in the barrack. They have to employ a barrack servant to cook their meals and to pay her. Incidentally they are paying her also for cleaning the barrack which is Government property. I do not think with that sort of community living that these two men could save very much. I know for a fact that the Gárda themselves would be delighted if they were ordered to live outside the barracks. Another point made by the Minister was that the Gárda had not made any demand for increased pay. The fact is that they have been demanding an increase in pay for the last eight or nine years. Their request for an increase of rent allowance has been before the Government for the last 18 months.
I would make an earnest appeal to the Minister that, even at the last moment, he should forget about this cut in the pay of the Gárda and do for them what Mr. Blythe did in 1932. I am making that appeal to the Minister not for the purposes of political propaganda but for the good of the country, and I hope he will respond to it.
