Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 5 Mar 1941

Vol. 25 No. 5

Inquiry Into Air Raid Warden Service—Motion.

Mr. Douglas

I move:—

That a select committee, consisting of seven Senators to be nominated by the Committee of Selection, with power to send for persons, papers and records, be set up to inquire into the position of the air raid warden service in Dublin, and to report on what steps, if any, should be taken to allay the dissatisfaction which exists among members of the service;

That the quorum of the Select Committee be four.

When I raised the question of A.R.P. services on the adjournment of this House some months ago I stated that, in my opinion, the A.R.P. services were just as vital to the State and to its well-being and independence as the Army, Local Security Force, or other important services, but that I felt that the people—and, to some extent, the Government—did not fully recognise this fact. Since then there has been considerably more publicity and more recognition of the actual value of these services to us. Also, since then it has become much more evident that in this war which is raging in Europe the civilian population is too often in the front line. It seems to me that it is just as vital that the morale of the civilian population should be maintained as it is that the morale of the Army or other forces should be maintained, should we have the misfortune to find ourselves at war. This would be impossible without an efficient air raid warden service.

Therefore, it seems to me to be essential that the warden services in the cities should be placed and maintained on the highest possible level of efficiency. You cannot do this if there is a certain amount of justifiable dissatisfaction or discontent. Personally, I have met most of the area wardens in Dublin and I know personally a considerable number of the wardens who do not hold as high a rank. I feel certain that the Parliamentary Secretary, at any rate, will agree with me when I say that we have been fortunate in that we have got together a number of efficient, energetic and patriotic men who have given a great deal of time and service during the last 12 or 18 months.

As to whether a committee of the Seanad, as stated in my motion, is or is not the best method of dealing with the matter I have a somewhat open mind. When I handed the motion in, it seemed to me that that was the best way but I put that forward as one method or suggestion which need not be pressed if that is not the general view. What I do hold is that, as soon as possible, all causes of dissatisfaction should be examined and rectified, and that there should be no delay about it. I propose to place before the House a number of matters which are the kind I would place before that committee if it were appointed, or which will have to be dealt with in some other manner. First of all, I will deal with some of the matters which are very important.

I find that there is a good deal of, shall I say, disappointment, if not dissatisfaction, at the delay in the issue of full equipment. At a meeting of the area wardens of the City of Dublin on December 12th, 1940, attended by the Parliamentary Secretary, an assurance was given that helmets, identify cards, badges and armlets had been provided and that a complete issue could be made almost immediately. I have seen most of the area wardens of the City of Dublin and I am informed that this has not been fully carried out. For instance, in one area the warden asked for 180 identity cards quite recently and could only be supplied there and then with 100. That is a minor point, but surely we ought to have by now an adequate supply of identity cards. I feel that there was a blunder, that the cards must have been there. Badges and armlets have been generally supplied, but on making inquiries I find that almost every area is a few short. The number is small, but it is just the kind of thing which, if I were an area warden, would make me feel extremely aggravated. To have most of the wardens equipped and a few not equipped apparently reflects on the area warden where, in actual fact, it is not his fault at all.

In the case of helmets, the position is rather more serious. It varies, as far as my information goes, in different areas. The majority of areas are short and, from the information given to me, I would say that, approximately, 1,000 more helmets are required before all the Dublin area will be adequately equipped.

This is regarded by the area wardens as a serious matter. Immediate distribution was promised on December 12th, 1940, and area wardens so informed the wardens under them. Helmets can now be bought in Dublin shops for 12/6 each, but this is immaterial, as I am informed that helmets suitable for A.R.P. wardens are actually available in Government stores. These helmets have, it is stated, "P" or "police" or other unsuitable markings on them and, therefore, require painting before use. The Parliamentary Secretary agreed that all wardens' helmets should be painted black with a 2½ in. white "W." Area wardens obtained an estimate for the painting of helmets at a cost of 3d. each, but sanction for this expenditure was refused.

Whether it was the inability to find or approve of 3d., or whatever the reason was, I really do not know, but the fact is that a very large number of wardens are still without helmets. In one area the number of wardens on strength is 546, while the number of helmets issued is only 357. That means that, in the event of an air raid, 189 wardens in that area might have to go on duty without helmets or might have to remain inactive during a raid. A similar position, in a greater or lesser degree, will be found in all the areas, according to my information, or at any rate in most of the areas. In connection with helmets there is one matter to which my attention has been drawn and which I should like to raise now, although it is only indirectly concerned with the question of the warden service, and that is this. It seems to me that the Department concerned ought to offer a helmet to all the clergy in Dublin who may require it. If we had a serious position here the clergy would have to go out in a time of danger and, although they are not directly concerned, as I say, with this matter, I think some steps should be taken to provide them with helmets. I am told that none of the clergy have been provided with helmets. However, that is only an aside and is not strictly concerned with the subject of my motion.

In the case of boots which, rightly or wrongly, it was decided to distribute to A.R.P. wardens, I have been informed that none of the areas have been supplied with sufficient boots, and I am further informed that this deficiency has been seriously aggravated by the fact that the sizes of the boots supplied to the various areas did not correspond to the specific requirements which were sent in beforehand by the areas. Some of the areas have boots on hand which will not fit the wardens, and it is stated that the Department refused to take these boots back and change them for boots of suitable sizes. That has been stated to me, but it seems incredible. In one area, I was informed definitely, 200 wardens have not yet received boots. I do not know the position in other areas and I do not claim to have consulted all the areas concerned, but I have been in touch with most of them and I find that in most cases they are short of boots.

There is another matter to which I should like to call attention. It was decided some time ago that one stirrup pump should be provided for each warden post. Most of the warden posts have got stirrup pumps, but not all, and as far as I can ascertain there should be no difficulty whatever in supplying stirrup pumps to all of them. Something, evidently, has gone wrong and you have the rather ridiculous position of having most warden posts supplied with these pumps and others without them.

Then there are several areas in which there are sectors which have no accommodation for wardens' posts. The Parliamentary Secretary promised that these sectors would be inspected and that an effort would be made to provide accommodation if it was considered that such posts were necessary. The area wardens responsible believe accommodation in these sectors to be really important, and they are naturally puzzled and cannot understand the delay. Except in the sectors to which I have referred where there is a lack of accommodation—and that is only a comparatively small number—accommodation for wardens' posts is available, and in most areas this has been provided by the goodwill of private individuals or firms who have given this accommodation for wardens' posts free of charge. In most cases this includes free light and furniture, and in some cases, but by no means in the majority of cases, it also includes free heat.

A problem facing area wardens is to see that wardens' posts will be ready to be manned at a few hours' notice, or even at a few minutes' notice in the case of a sudden emergency. Therefore, the question of the provision of heat, light and minimum furniture, where these have not been given free of charge, was raised with the Parliamentary Secretary and he was asked if the Department would equip such posts and to what extent they would be equipped. According to my information, his answer was, yes, but that the extent to which such equipment would be furnished—quite naturally, in my opinion—would have to be settled after the inspection of the posts, and so on; but that, generally, chairs, tables, light and heat should be provided. Until an emergency occurs, wardens' posts will only be required for training purposes, and the total expenditure for light and heat could not possibly be heavy unless we were subject to periodic air raids. The area wardens to whom I have spoken are most desirous that the areas under their charge should be most efficient and should be ready for any emergency. It seems to me that it is important that at the earliest possible date there should be a definite, authoritative statement as to the extent to which expenditure will be sanctioned for the provision of heat, light, and so on, where they have not been provided already.

I am informed, for instance, that a transformer station in one area in Dublin is being used as a wardens' post. The wardens in the area themselves provided electric wiring and fixtures, but in order to complete the position and provide heat and light a further £5 was required—I think it was an Electricity Supply Board estimate. Sanction for that was refused. It may be that that was too much, but it seems to me that in a serious matter like this a wardens' post should not be left unheated because an Electricity Supply Board estimate may be considered too high. I am not suggesting that it is, because I do not know the facts, but I do know that sanction for that payment was refused. In the Group Headquarters in Buckingham Street sanction was refused for £2 3s. —which I know was an Electricity Supply Board estimate—to provide heating.

Now, there is another matter. I am told that ever since 1939 the question of putting up notices in the streets— such as will be familiar to some of us in cities all over England and Scotland —indicating to the public where wardens' posts are, has been under discussion. A few do exist here, but they were provided at private expense. The area wardens whom I have consulted think that the time has come when these notices should be all over the city. I am told that the Parliamentary Secretary agrees with that view, but somehow or another, whatever has been happening, they simply are not there, as we know. Another matter is the question of a uniform. It was decided to supply suitable clothing or uniform for A.R.P. wardens, and a meeting was held on 9th January, 1941, at which the Parliamentary Secretary was present together with the Chief Warden for Dublin, Mr. Laurie. There were also present three officials from the General Post Office Stores Department and the nine Dublin area wardens. The question of a suitable uniform was fully discussed and it was decided unanimously that a two-piece uniform would be the most suitable. After this meeting the area wardens very naturally and, I think, properly, informed the wardens under them of this decision. Not only that, but forms were provided and sent out to all the wardens of the city and they were obliged to send in measurements immediately for this two-piece uniform in order that there should be as little delay as possible in providing the uniform and having the correct sizes. According to the information given to me, if it is correct, without any further consultation with the wardens, the uniform approved by them and which they had informed the wardens in the city was to be issued, has been rejected and some kind of one-piece boiler suit is to be substituted.

I need not go into the particular advantages of a two-piece suit, though it is more economical because if one piece gets damaged there is only one to replace; it is also very much freer in use and generally has a better appearance. But my point is that if you call a meeting of responsible men such as the area wardens, who have a very large number of men under them, and you agree on a type of uniform and put them in the position of informing the men who are working under them that that uniform is going to be provided, and then cancel it, whatever the reason may be, without a meeting and proper explanation given, which could be passed on, is just bad management and a ridiculous way of doing things.

Remember this is a voluntary service, with all classes of the community, rich and poor, working together, and working very harmoniously, with a general spirit of good fellowship. If my information is correct, and I think in this particular case it is, that and the shortage of other supplies, when they were told they could be delivered immediately, places area wardens in a rather unfair position. Either they must accept the blame themselves or must satisfy their men they are not to blame, which leaves them open to the possible accusation that they are attacking the Government or something of the kind which I am perfectly certain none of them wants to do. If I am satisfied of one thing it is that Party politics has not at all interfered with the efficiency of the warden service in Dublin.

There is another matter to which I would like to refer. The Parliamentary Secretary is stated to have agreed to, or at any rate to have himself approved of, certain badges of rank so that if area wardens, group wardens, etc., had to take over complete authority at a bombing incident their badges of rank would be such as could be easily recognised by the Gárda, the Local Security Force or others with whom they might have to deal. These badges of rank were agreed upon after considerable discussion between the Parliamentary Secretary and the area wardens but, there again, as I am told, without any reference back to the area wardens' council, they have been vetoed and I think some others are going to be substituted. The marks of rank that were agreed on, I am told, without actual knowledge of this fact beforehand, were very similar, but not identical, to the marks which are used in A.R.P. services in England.

I would like to say a word with regard to message centres. It was decided, and I have no doubt quite rightly decided—and nobody questions it—that in all areas in Dublin the message centre should be open every night from 8 p.m. to 8 a.m. That was decided on January 6th last. The principle that such message centres, where wardens might have to stay all night, should be heated when they were manned was accepted, but some area wardens state they have not had the cost of fuel refunded. I am told in one message centre they had to go without fuel for 28 days. They closed down for three days and then the fuel arrived. There is something wrong there. It can be remedied, I am perfectly certain, but it is a legitimate ground for dissatisfaction.

There is another matter which perhaps may be regarded as more debatable though I think I ought to mention it. The wardens who man these message centres come from all classes. Quite a number of them are working-class men, some of them unemployed. The Parliamentary Secretary was asked and, it is understood, gave his personal approval at any rate to the idea, that each area might receive a maximum of 3/- per night to provide a cup of tea and a sandwich for wardens working at message centres before going out into the cold in the early morning. I am told on an average there would be about six in a centre so the 6d. each does not seem very extravagant.

In a letter dated February 18th, sanction for this expenditure was refused although the message centres are still to be manned. Well-to-do wardens, of whom there are quite a number in certain districts, could quite easily bring a flask of tea and sandwiches, but it is impracticable for some working-class men and certainly for unemployed men who have very little money indeed to live on. Ordinary wardens —I am not referring to the area wardens—that I have spoken to about this have said they disliked bringing the food with them or do not want to do it because they want to be on an equality and they do not want any distinctions drawn between them. The area wardens could doubtless appeal for funds for this purpose, but they feel —and I entirely agree with them—that the A.R.P. warden service is voluntary public service and should not have to appeal for charity.

Mr. McEllin

That would not be charity, surely.

Mr. Douglas

Senator McEllin and I can look up the dictionary when we go outside. I think we would probably find there is not much difference between us. I am told, but I am not quite sure of this, that civil servants who have volunteered for fire-watching in Government buildings—that is another volunteer service—will get 3/- a night each for that particular work. The request for 3/- per night for refreshments for all wardens in a message centre seems to me a reasonable request.

There is another matter which I do think requires to be rectified and rectified speedily. There is very considerable dissatisfaction at the unaccountable—"unaccountable" is my word—delay in refunding wardens for expenditure incurred by them for purposes which have been approved by the Parliamentary Secretary. On the Parliamentary Secretary's instructions, all officers of the A.R.P. warden service kept a very close tally of money expended on A.R.P. such as phone calls, postage stamps, fares, etc., during the month of November and submitted a list of these expenses to the Defence Department, in order that they could have some figures on which to work. The November accounts have not yet been paid. Neither have the December, nor the January, nor the February accounts. Admittedly, each area received £5 imprest, but in most areas I am told the amount which was owing swallowed up the whole of the imprest at once. They now find it difficult, despite repeated requests, to obtain reimbursement of the imprest amount. The amounts owing in the different areas are not, from the public point of view, large. I am told they vary from £12 to about £26 or £27, but for an individual in a volunteer service to have that out of his pocket even for a short time seems to me unreasonable. The amount that the wardens are paying out in their area, that is an area which may have up to 700 wardens, is only £2 a week and they think, and I think, that is not excessive. The area wardens expressed to me the view: "We do not mind how much time it takes"— and I can say definitely that that is so, they do not mind how much time they give to work for the service, but they do not think it is up to them to finance it as well. It seems to me that it is only right that all moneys due to area wardens up to January 31st last should be paid at once and accounts for February should be paid before the end of March and so on. That will mean that no individual will be any substantial amount out of pocket. I think that everyone will agree that no warden or wardens should be out of pocket for expenditure properly incurred by them.

Another matter which I feel is of considerable importance is the amount of petrol allowances. One area warden wrote to me as follows:—

"The warden service is undoubtedly a vital service, yet we have been totally unable to obtain any petrol supplies for the warden service, although Mr. Laurie, the chief warden, has made application for eight gallons per month for the area warden, and six gallons per month for the group wardens. We have also put forward a scheme whereby a duty car could be available in the city and the area headquarters—this car to take the area warden and staff to the scene of any incident should it occur. A car was offered us free of all charge, this car to be licensed and taxed by the members of the warden service—all that this car would require is ten gallons of petrol approximately per month. Although this scheme was put up and approved by the chief warden, no reply has been received from the Defence Department. Grave misgiving is caused in the wardens' minds owing to the fact that no petrol is available in the area. If an incident happened at Ringsend any night, the area warden of No. 7 would have to walk from Sandymount to Ringsend, which would probably take him threequarters of an hour. A similar state of affairs exists in the other areas. Yet petrol is supplied in moderate quantities to L.S.F., A.F.S., and other services, but apparently the warden service is not considered of the same importance and nothing is to be done."

I find wardens I have consulted have all expressed similar views and they are definitely uneasy. If you run your minds back a little bit to the bombings in Dublin you will remember that the one thing that impressed us all was the speed with which the wardens were on the spot. Through no fault of their own it would be practically impossible under present conditions to repeat it. We all know the difficulties of supplies of petrol, but I still feel that if it is going to be treated seriously there should be no delay at all about making it available for the service in moderate quantities. Care should be taken that it would not be wasted, and I do not think it would be wasted, but the case for a supply is, I think, unanswerable. Furthermore, the want of any petrol is making it impossible to have the collective exercises which many people think should take place to a greater extent periodically.

Another question that has come to my notice has been the distribution of respirators, or gas masks, as they are commonly called. The Department of Defence complained to the Dublin Corporation about alleged delay in the issue of respirators and the complaint was passed on to each area warden including those who had completed the work as far as possible. I understand that the position is as follows: Area No. 10 commenced this work ten weeks ago; Area No. 7 commenced a week later. Both these areas have completed distribution except for institutions and a few stragglers. Most other areas did not commence distributing respirators until after Christmas and the work was seriously held up owing to bad weather. Because petrol was unobtainable, the delivery of respirators to fitting centres was very erratic and, in several instances, the public had to be turned away because the respirators had not arrived. A further serious delay of 10 days was caused owing to instructions being issued by the Defence Department to the effect that this work was to be suspended for the three days prior to the registration for evacuation, and during the week of the registration itself.

The distribution of respirators was completely held up in three areas as there were no small size respirators available. The Department of Defence purchased respirators in the following proportions:—Large size, 35 per cent.; medium size, 55 per cent.; small size, 10 per cent. These were the percentages found suitable in Britain. Before distribution, wardens in Dublin took a census which showed these proportions to be entirely wrong, but the Department of Defence maintained that the census could not be correct, despite the fact that a little reflection would show that there are more large families of children in Dublin than in any city of the same size in Britain. It is also probable that the Department of Statistics could have given the necessary information.

There is another matter apart from the general question of supplies on which, personally, I feel rather strongly. That is the treatment of certain unemployed persons who have been and still are air-raid wardens. Since the wardens' service was established it has been joined by a number of men in all areas who were receiving unemployment assistance and felt that they could give some useful service to the State while seeking ordinary employment.

All the area wardens I have met speak highly of the assistance given by unemployed persons and there is considerable, and, I think, justifiable, resentment at the treatment many of these persons are now receiving. They have been told that, if they do not join the Construction Corps and leave the warden service, unemployment assistance will cease and in a number of cases wardens who did not join the corps have actually had payments stopped. I think the attention of the Parliamentary Secretary was called to this matter, although, strictly speaking, it is not in his Department, and he was sympathetic, but it does not seem he was able to get it stopped. I regard this as a most serious matter and I have asked a number of area wardens to give me details of unemployed wardens who have had unemployment assistance stopped.

I propose to submit these details to the Parliamentary Secretary or to whatever Minister is responsible with an appeal that it should be dealt with urgently. I have one instance, and I am aware that the experience of the man concerned applies to quite a number of cases. This man joined the warden service, right at the very beginning, in 1939. He is unemployed, he has an invalid mother and a blind father. He has been trained in the warden service and was sufficiently good to be made a post warden, and now, because he said he preferred to stay on at the work he was trained in and which he thought of national importance, his unemployment assistance was withdrawn. I call that a scandal, in plain English.

Mr. Baxter

Surely it is more than a scandal?

Mr. Douglas

I have before me details written out by one of the area wardens who has not, admittedly, been as long in the service, though I may say that the vast majority of those who have been in the service were in since 1939. The conduct of the unemployed men who are in the service has shown that they are not the type of men who could be said to be dodging looking for work. The cause of the stopping of their unemployment assistance is well known to be that they will not join the Construction Corps although it is not put in that way. It is stated that the applicant is "not genuinely seeking and unable to obtain suitable employment."

This particular man appealed against the decision to stop his assistance and, according to his statement—and I am informed by the warden concerned that he is a responsible type of man—when he came before the Court of Referees the chairman said to him: "You know you are receiving money from the Government"—I object to that phrase anyway—"and that you are receiving it for nothing and you should surely do something in return for it." He told the chairman he belonged to the A.R.P. service, and the reply he got was that that was useful, but not good enough, and that he should join the Construction Corps. He stated that there was no mention that he was not looking for work. Afterwards, he received notice that his unemployment allowance had ceased. I do not want to take up the time of the House with other cases, but I propose to give the Parliamentary Secretary the names of a number of others, because this is a matter of very real importance.

I am not saying a word against the Construction Corps. I certainly do not want to prevent men joining it, but men, long before there was a word of a Construction Corps, finding themselves want to prevent men joining it, but with time on their hands because they had nothing to do, voluntarily allowed themselves to be trained for public service. That those men should now be penalised, is a matter about which I find it difficult to find Parliamentary words in which to express my feelings.

There are a number of small matters which I have noted, but I do not propose to take up the time of the House in discussing them at length. It has been suggested to me from one source that the shelters should be opened regularly, to see that they are properly aired and have proper equipment. I am told that that is not being done in some districts. I also understand that it is the duty of the nearest air warden to have a key and, in the case of danger, to open the shelter immediately. Once that is done it is Division B of the Local Security Force which takes charge. I think there should be some practice or exercise to see how long that would take and exactly how the co-operation between the two forces would work.

That is a suggestion that has been made to me and I pass it on for what it is worth. One of the wardens to whom I have spoken or who has written to me. —I am not referring to the area wardens—mentioned the fact that in some areas recruitment had not reached the approved full strength and in some other cases it exceeded it. In the areas where it exceeded it, the men who were recruited feel that they should not be asked to resign, now that they know their posts, have done their work and have been trained. Another suggestion was that the chief warden of Dun Laoghaire and perhaps of Dublin have duties sufficiently important to justify their giving full time to the job. There again I have not discussed the matter fully, but I pass the suggestion along as something which should be considered.

In conclusion I should like to emphasise that I do not believe that any of the things which I have mentioned would by itself be the full cause of the discontent which I have found to exist. I am quite satisfied that that discontent is not confined to area or group wardens, but that it exists to a greater or a lesser degree amongst wardens all over Dublin. From various letters and suggestions that have reached me, I am satisfied that this discontent is due, not only to the matters to which I refer, but also to the fact that a great many wardens feel that the service has not received the public recognition that it deserves. As I have already stated, in war as we know it to-day, the civilian population is often in the front line, and in a small State like ours, where defence against air attack cannot possibly be equal to that of large and wealthy countries, the danger to the civilian population would probably be greater than elsewhere, should we have the misfortune to be drawn into the war. The air raid wardens feel that their work is of first-class national importance and, while I am sure that they do not want individual praise, they do feel that there should be some recognition. I personally feel certain that the Parliamentary Secretary, the Taoiseach and the Government do recognise the value of the warden services, but I do not think they have succeeded in conveying this view to a public, which is still unfortunately somewhat apathetic.

The Minister for the Co-ordination of Defence, to whom I wish a safe and speedy journey to the other side of the world, made a speech recently on the radio in order to express thanks to persons who had assisted in the registration scheme with a view to possible evacuation in Dublin. I did not hear the speech, but I am informed by a number of persons who did hear it, that he praised civil servants, teachers and others, mainly people in paid positions in the State service, for the work which they had done in connection with the scheme of registration. Through what seems to me a very unfortunate oversight—I do not suggest it was intentional for a moment, but it was an unfortunate, almost culpable oversight—he omitted any reference to the wardens in spite of the fact that it was the wardens who distributed the leaflets to the houses in Dublin. They got only 12 hours' notice that they had to distribute at once 110,000 leaflets to all the houses in Dublin. That meant that the wardens had to give up the whole of the following Saturday and Sunday and also had to be on duty, night after night, at registration centres to help in the work there. I think it rather unfortunate that there was no reference to the very important work which they carried out in connection with the registration scheme. I do not want to over-emphasise what was an obvious error, but I think the public ought to know, because they do not know up to the present, the amount of work that was done by the warden service.

I should like to say that I have talked to a large number of wardens. Quite a number of them have come to me and written to me. I know almost all area wardens, and I have found nothing amongst them but praise for the work done by the Parliamentary Secretary. It is not my job in the Seanad to "butter" him up, but I would not be doing my duty if I did not say that this was the view which I found almost everywhere amongst the wardens. They say that he is most ready to come to their meetings and that he will listen to the points put forward in their discussions in the most amicable way. I think it is only right I should say that the warden service does not believe that he is in any way to blame for the state of affairs which exists, at any rate in respect of the matters which I have mentioned.

There is, however, a general impression which may be right or wrong—I cannot, of course, deal fully with it— that he does not get the assistance from other Departments to which he is entitled and that he is not adequately backed by other members of the Government. That that was true some time ago we know, because the Minister for Finance told us quite openly that, for a considerable time, he did not approve of the service but that he had changed his mind. There is no conceivable reason why that should be the position. However, I am not fully competent to deal with that matter at this stage.

There is one other matter to which I should like to refer in conclusion though, perhaps, it is outside the scope of the motion. I am rather inclined to think that in the Air Raid Precautions Act a mistake was made, and that it would have been far better to have given the Parliamentary Secretary and the Department of Defence complete and absolute control of warden services all over the country. This is not said by way of criticism of the officials of local authorities who have been doing their best in difficult circumstances but, as I said at the beginning, I consider that the welfare of the civilian population in war time is a matter of the first importance.

If somebody were to propose that you should have the Department of Defence not in charge of the Army but only partially in charge, as a kind of go-between, you would have a ridiculous state of affairs. I regard the warden service as somewhat in the same light. And, while I do not consider that any of the matters I have dealt with should have special attention from the Government as a whole, I do think it would not be waste of time to consider them, seeing that we are dealing with an emergency. Should a crisis develop it will afford very little time, if any at all, for special consideration. I believe if the Parliamentary Secretary had full control of these matters, and they were removed from the local authorities, it would be far better.

Mr. M. Hayes

I beg formally to second the motion.

Mr. O'Donovan

If the Parliamentary Secretary wishes to intervene now I will give way to enable him to do so.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence (Mr. Seán Moylan)

I will take all the knocks first.

Mr. O'Donovan

Very well. I shall begin by dealing with the last note sounded by Senator Douglas. As a corporation official I am quite satisfied that this system of dual control is the main cause of the difficulty in the administration of the A.R.P. service. As Senator Douglas has said the cause of all the trouble is not one individual but the joint and several control of two Departments. The corporation says one thing, the Department of Defence approves, or it may approve, and then the matter goes to the Department of Finance and is turned down. Meantime the warden service is left to carry on without any leadership and do the best it can in its own area. I think the statement put before the Seanad by Senator Douglas is a mild statement having regard to the actual facts as far as Dublin City is concerned. If I, as an air warden, had time to prepare all the facts in order to put my case before the Seanad I would put it, I do not say more effectively, but certainly more forcibly, in regard to some of the matters mentioned by Senator Douglas. I have had personally to bear the burden of these things and like other air wardens put a great deal of time and energy into the work.

Now, the warden service in this city is in a very different position from any other A.R.P. branch of the Defence services. It first began by bringing together nine citizens and asking them to train and to organise that service. We did that to the best of our ability and with very little direction from the Ministry or other Departments. We found that in regard to things that we put forward, and that were sanctioned, we were afterwards badly rapped on the knuckles. The City Manager appointed nine citizens to try to organise this service among the citizens and to get the co-operation and support of the citizens. It was a big burden to place on nine individuals. Each air-raid warden has a difficulty in dealing with his personnel and on the whole it is simply marvellous that we succeeded in retaining the services of many of these wardens. Each individual difficulty may be small but taken collectively they are overwhelming in connection with a voluntary organisation.

There is a very great difference between supervising these services and supervising the fire-fighting services and the rescue services. In the fire-fighting services you have the superintendents of the fire brigade chiefs, but as far as the warden services are concerned you had nine individuals trying to get support and co-operation of all other citizens. It must be remembered that in some cases the citizens are practically hostile and in many cases they give very little effective support.

I wish to stress the fact that I am perfectly satisfied it is the system of dual control embodied in the Act passed by the Oireachtas that is responsible. If the direction were left to one body, such as the corporation, I think it would be a much better system. If the Ministry for Defence, through the Parliamentary Secretary, were left to do the work it would be better, but to have two separate authorities with the over-all influence of the Department of Finance is anything but satisfactory.

I do not wish to deal in detail with all the points so completely, and may I say, so mildly put forward by Senator Douglas. I wish to refer to one point the Senator mentioned towards the end of his speech relating to surplus wardens. When I was appointed a warden I set out to get in to each section as many people as possible. I now find I have to solve the question of the increase in the establishment. I did not think about having more wardens than would be sanctioned by the Department of Finance. The first establishment was 108, and we had as many wardens then as we have now.

We started recruiting and got something in the region of 250. We were told that our establishment was 108. The rest should get out then, but we did not get out. Then the establishment was increased from 108 to 208. We still have more wardens than the establishment figure. Even if we could get equipment for the authorised establishment it would not be so bad, but everything is doled out in bits and scraps, which makes it exasperating for any person giving his time voluntarily. This is spare time which we could easily devote to something else. It is very hard to distribute in any sort of equitable manner this partial amount of equipment.

In the Clontarf area we have 30 sectors and, on the instructions of the Parliamentary Secretary himself, a stirrup pump was to be delivered for each sector, or to each post which is the centre of the sector. We got 20 stirrup pumps to distribute and they are still in headquarters because I could not distribute 20 stirrup-pumps amongst 30 posts and give two-thirds of a pump to each post. Therefore, the 20 are still lying at headquarters. I do not know why the remaining ten could not be delivered to us. If we had got them, we could have distributed the whole 30 together in five minutes, but we could not divide 20 amongst them and leave ten posts hankering after them and asking why they did not get a pump. I do not want to claim that wardens are superior beings or that they are doing anything wonderful. They are giving voluntary service, however, and I cannot see why these things should occur and equipment should be issued in bits and scraps.

The same thing has arisen in connection with the question of distribution of boots. We have measurements in for approximately 220 male wardens. That is above the establishment allowed to us of 208 and that includes entirely the lady wardens. I have that on my conscience and have these people to pull my ears because I have not the measurements of about 30 ladies for uniforms. All I could do was to get the measurements of people who I expected would have the greater danger and who would be giving greater service in case of actual emergency. Anyone would say that we should not have recruited more than the establishment figure, but we recruited them in our enthusiasm and on the authority of the Parliamentary Secretary himself. We are not going to tell them now that they have to get out, that the corporation or the State does not want them there. They are waiting for equipment and the sooner the matter is rectified the better for all of us, and the better for the working of the service and for the citizens as a whole.

In connection with boots, even if we were allowed the figure of 208 it would not be so bad, but we got only 154 pairs and these were distributed at a time when none of us—no matter who—would like to go outside in the snow and frost without something like these rubber boots to keep our feet from getting soaked with mud and slush. These boots were used at the time of the distribution of respirators and were a Godsend to those who got them. However, we got 154 pairs for the establishment figure of 208, not taking into account the fact that we had 250 members and approximately 30 lady wardens. We got short rations in everything. These figures will leave us short, but they are also the cause of jealousy amongst individuals. A pair may happen to fit one man and not another, and the latter cannot understand why he does not get a pair. If we could only get our requirements, we would have less bickering in the warden service. The inequality of the distribution puts an individual in contact with the wardens in a constant state of uneasiness.

Senator Douglas spoke of the equipment for posts and for group headquarters. The bare fact of the matter is that we never got sanction for anything but area headquarters. Where group headquarters are maintained they are maintained entirely by the wardens themselves.

Mr. M. Hayes

Or the householders.

Mr. O'Donovan

I do not think so; not in the group cases now. As far as the sectors are concerned, the posts are in residential areas like Clontarf No. 7 or No. 11. The posts are houses of citizens placed at our disposal on the guarantee by us that we would interfere with them as little as possible until the actual emergency occurs, when everybody's house would be at our command. That is operated up to the present, but, in a few cases where we had to get outhouses and other sheds as posts, we could not get sanction for any system of heating or lighting. We might say that, in the old days, they subscribed for their own rifles and uniform, but those days are gone.

Although I do not claim anything extra for wardens over some of the other voluntary defence forces who have been subscribing, actually in Killester, which is A Group in my area, the wardens have had to subscribe for heat and light, and the light is only a candle or a lamp in their building, which is only a hut lent or handed over to us through the good graces of the Ex-Servicemen's Association. We have got the building there, but there is no heat or light except what the wardens themselves have subscribed to provide. During the distribution of respirators there, I visited that sector and found men working in candle-light in this small, little house. I asked long ago for electrical connection and the wardens decided also to have a coal fire and that they would provide the coal.

I believe that it was my area to which Senator Douglas referred, where we had to close down the message centre for two nights through lack of heating. There was no coal supplied. We tried to buy coal ourselves, but we could not get it. The authority to which we appealed was the Corporation but we failed to get it there. Ultimately, I issued an ultimatum and informed the control centre that we were closing down, that we could not ask people to maintain the message centre during the night without heat. We closed the centre for two nights in succession until the coke arrived. It was coke that we asked for, as coal would be too smoky in those slow-combustion stoves with bad ventilation. After two nights the coke was supplied to us by the corporation. I do not know why there should be these delays between two authorities.

I am not going to delay further over the question of refunds of expenses. I do not want to put in any personal case of my own, but I know that every area warden has had to pay out of his own pocket in most cases. Up to the end of the year we have got that money refunded, but that was only after having received replies that such and such a payment would not be sanctioned and we had explained how the expenditure had been incurred. As a matter of fact, if the area wardens had not paid for things themselves, there would have been no services.

Mr. M. Hayes

Hear, hear.

Mr. O'Donovan

About five or six months after the expenditure had been incurred, and after looking for sanction for two or three months, we had got the money back all right, but every area warden is out of pocket. I think the final straw which went very near to breaking our backs was the refusal of sanction for refreshments. Refreshments simply mean a cup of tea and a bit of bread and butter for wardens on duty from 10.30 p.m. until 8 a.m. Mind you, these men have gone out and done that duty at night and have had to go off to work straight away the next morning, and I think it is ridiculous that the State would not provide them with some facility for refreshments to enable them to go straight to their work as they have to do. As a matter of fact, we have provided them, all the time they were there, with tea and bread and butter, and that has been entirely out of, not my pocket, but out of the Deputy Warden's pocket at present.

Mr. M. Hayes

Well, that is certainly wrong.

Mr. O'Donovan

There are other things that I have had to pay for—I do not wish to mention myself particularly—and there has not been any refund for months. These are the cold facts, and I think it is absolutely ridiculous to be hedging about giving these men who are on duty a cup of tea or a bit of bread and butter during the night. I believe that we should be provided with some facilities also for getting the tea and the butter, because these things cannot be got in the shops for a service like this.

For instance, when my deputy goes to a shop to get these provisions, since they are not for his own household, he finds it very difficult to get tea, and it is very difficult to get butter. We are told now that it cannot be allowed. Certainly, you do not want one warden bringing in, perhaps, a flagon of whiskey or something of that nature, and another just bringing in a little bit of bread, without butter, because he cannot afford anything else. It must be remembered that many of these wardens are unemployed men. In connection with any rationing system I think some way should be found to enable wardens on duty to get a cup of tea and a bit of bread and butter. I do not know what explanation there is for all this confusion, except, perhaps, bungling and confusion between two authorities or two departments, and I shall leave it at that.

Mr. M. Hayes

I have very little to say, except that I think that Senator O'Donovan entirely understates the position when he says that there are two authorities. There are, in fact, a great many more than two authorities. It has been emphasised that this air warden service is free service given by citizens in an emergency. Like many others of that type of service it was thought at first that it would only mean one night a week, but actually it means a great deal more. For certain periods, such as when they were giving out gas-masks or making arrangements for the evacuation of the children, some of these people were working every night in the week. Many of them had to do duty for a good part of Saturday and Sunday, as well as the other nights in the week. Although I am not directly concerned, I have some knowledge of that because my house is used as a post. There are certainly more than two authorities concerned, and I think that that is a great cause of the difficulty. The Parliamentary Secretary, who is here present, is known officially, I think, as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence, but the Minister who speaks on these matters is not the Minister for Defence but the Minister for Co-ordination of Defensive Measures— now happily removed to America, which may, of course, make a substantial improvement in this service. Now, apart from these authorities, there is the Dublin Corporation. So that, in effect, you have the Dublin Corporation working through the City Manager, you have the Minister for Defence, you have the Minister for Co-ordination of Defensive Measures. and you have the Parliamentary Secretary, and over all these there falls constantly, of course, the black shadow of the Minister for Finance. In effect, then, you have five authorities, and it is difficult for anybody who wants to get anything done to know to which of these authorities he ought to go or which of them he ought to blame. In that connection, I am inclined to agree with those who say that the Parliamentary Secretary, who is in immediate contact with this matter and who has contacts of a good and sound nature with the people who are doing the work, is not to blame, but I think it would be no harm for him to tell us whether he requires Ministerial sanction for these things and, if so, what Minister it would be better to go to in order to get things done. I understand that a Parliamentary Secretary is not in the position of a Minister and therefore I presume that any promise he may make is subject to consultation with and sanction by the Minister, but in this case it is not clear what Minister's sanction is required.

It is said that these wardens work without fee or reward. A point that was put to me by certain air-raid wardens is this. If one of them is killed or injured on his way to or coming from his duty, is there any compensation for his dependents? Some suggestion was made that something could be done on the basis of the Workmen's Compensation Act, but quite clearly, in certain cases, that would be entirely insufficient. I think it is right that some definite declaration should be made in regard to that particular matter. A warden is carrying out a national duty just like a policeman or a soldier, and if he is killed or injured in the course of his duty, I think there should be some arrangement with regard to compensation.

Mr. MacDermot

Does the Senator mean killed or injured by warlike action or through accident?

Mr. M. Hayes

Well, accident, I think.

Mr. Douglas

Accidents could be easily insured at a small cost.

Mr. M. Hayes

Yes, but, as Senator O'Donovan said, I think it is unfair to ask people, who are giving their time and service free, to insure themselves. As we all know, the type of person whose dependents would most need money will be the type of person who will not be insured. That is one point. The other point that I should like to make is that the area wardens were told at one time—I was certainly informed by one of them—that the posts which they had selected would be subject to military inspection by the Department of Defence, that they would be told where a post could be suitably situated and that it would be put into a suitable state for service. I was told that myself when I was proceeding to take certain steps in connection with the basement of my house with a view to making it into an air-raid shelter, but nothing of that kind has been done, and I should like to know if it is intended to do that kind of thing.

The only other point with which I wish to deal is in connection with incendiary bombs. Eye-shields are required in connection with that service and if they are not worn the work cannot be done and the warden concerned is in danger of being blinded. These shields have not been supplied, and one wonders whether or not they will be supplied. I think it is a great tribute to us nationally, that the spirit of voluntary service should be so widespread amongst the people and that there should be such an excellent response from the people; but I suggest that there is no analogy between the present circumstances and those that obtained when certain people gave their time and service and bought their rifles and uniforms in other days. The men who are giving these services now are paying their rates and taxes as well as giving their time and service, and I think that the most that a native Parliament or Government should require these people to give is their time and service and that all necessary equipment should be supplied to them. As I have said, I have no connection with this particular service and I do not think anybody should enter into these absurd arguments about whether the Local Security Force or the A.R.P. is the more important service. What is important is that we should have these services and that we should have them as highly efficient as possible. What seems to be happening now between all the authorities is that men who are giving their services freely, who are very enthusiastic, have been given so many difficulties to overcome that they are becoming disheartened.

On the other point of withdrawing the dole or benefits from unemployed men who are air-raid-wardens, that I think is an example of lack of co-ordination between Departments and I am sure if it is taken up by the Parliamentary Secretary it can be remedied. But it seems quite clear from what one knows about it that an unemployed man who has been a year in the air-raid-warden service, and is a skilled man at that work, is much better left in Dublin to do air raid service than to be put into the Construction Corps to dig trenches on the Curragh or anywhere else.

It is all to the credit of any unemployed man who has joined that service and who in the miserable circumstances which must surround that type of man has continued and persisted in it. I can see no justification whatever for asking these people to join a construction crops. It is really like asking a skilled man who has a skilled job to do to turn round and do an unskilled job. It is contrary to commonsense and contrary to justice, but I feel it is simply one of those examples of the machine working and that when proper steps are taken it will be adjusted. It is very difficult to adjust these things, and I think we should assure the Parliamentary Secretary that, as far as we are concerned here, anything we can say and do will be devoted to helping him to remedy these difficulties of which, I am sure, he is extremely well aware.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence (Mr. Moylan)

I think I have got off very lightly. Senator O'Donovan said that Senator Douglas had altogether understated the case and Senator Hayes said that Senator O'Donovan also had understated the case. I thought that other members of the Seanad would continue along this line and that eventually we would have a pyramid of understatement to which it would be impossible to reply. It is right that every Department of State should have its deeds and its misdeeds discussed in public now and again and that they should be subject to approval or condemnation, and I welcome this debate on the question of A.R.P. and particularly on the wardens' service, particularly again, the manner in which Senator Douglas dealt with it. If he belonged to another religious persuasion I would say that he was praising me with faint damns, but I do think there is a little bit of damning in what he did say. The trend of the attack on the A.R.P. position seems to be that, while I am the best of good fellows, the people who work with me in my Department, other State Departments and members of the Government are really the black sheep hiding behind my virgin innocence. Senator Hayes put the point that there were at least half a dozen trenches and lines of barbed wire to overcome before the person who is really responsible can be found. I am not a Minister. I would like to be. There are advantages in being a Minister—and disadvantages, but for the purposes of the functioning of the Air Raid Precautions Act I want it to be quite clear that I am wholly responsible and that there has been an Emergency Power Order which gives me full Ministerial control in regard to A.R.P.

If anything has happened that is wrong and if there is any blame to be attached to anybody then I am blameworthy. I am rather a forthright, definite character, I think. I have been bred to the illusion, perhaps, that civil servants are people who carry out the orders of the political heads of their departments. I have never allowed anybody to tell me what I should do, and if any decision has been made at any time then I am wholly and finally responsible for that decision. While I say that I am very thankful to Senator Douglas for the manner in which he has dealt with the matter and for the opportunity that has been given for discussing the question, I do not know that I quite approve of the methods by which this position was reached. You cannot have inordinate or Army discipline in a civilian organisation, but I do think that we have got this organisation into such a position that there is machinery within the organisation for expressing opinion in regard to any grievances that arise or any difficulties that exist and for rectification of any possible wrong. I think, from that point of view, there really was no necessity for having such a debate as we have had at the instance of the wardens, whether they were the area wardens or whether they were, as Senator Douglas says, belonging to the rank and file.

The first thing that Senator Douglas has raised is the question of equipment. The number of service respirators which was necessary for the warden service was 2,644. The number of respirators issued was 2,466. Those are service respirators. The number of civilian duty respirators required was 5,750, and the number issued, 4,994. I am talking of issues by the Department of Defence. The number of armlets needed was 4,630 and the number issued was 4,630. The warden strength is supposed to be 4,500. The number of badges needed for all services in Dublin was 10,400 and the number issued was 10,400. The number of pairs of rubber boots necessary was 8,150 and the number issued by the Department of Defence was 8,150 pairs. There is quite a lot of other material issued by the Department of Defence. I think eye-shades were mentioned by Senator Hayes as being necessary. Eye-shades, as well as quantities of protective clothing, sleeves, aprons, gloves, and so on, have not been issued to the wardens for the reason that a good deal of that material is easily damaged and would do better in store as long as we can keep it there. In regard to helmets, the number of helmets demanded for all services in Dublin was 8,850 and the number issued was 8,320. About 500 have been retained in store for the purpose of certain assembly work that has to be done with them.

Mr. O'Donovan

These are for all services?

Mr. Moylan

That is the number issued for all services in Dublin.

Mr. MacDermot

What does the Parliamentary Secretary mean by "all services"?

Mr. Moylan

The Fire Service, the Rescue and Demolition Service and the Communication Service. There is quite enough to cover everybody recruited to the full quota of each service. I think that reasonably disposes of a lot of the claims made by Senator Douglas and Senator O'Donovan.

Mr. MacDermot

What has happened to all these things? Why have they not reached the people?

Mr. Moylan

Well, somebody said we had a dual monarchy! Wardens and everybody will understand that while you have in the Department of Defence a magnificent organiser, such as I am, it is not always possible to get the type of man who is his duplicate, and this whole question of building up such an organisation is a very difficult one and has many kinks. We have not been able to secure all this material without tears. I cannot very well explain why these things have not been issued immediately. I have no doubt that we can have a good explanation from the City Hall, if the wardens are anxious to attend their usual meeting to discuss the matter. As I say, when I heard of the "Mutiny on the Bounty," the "bounty" being in this case the rather insignificant sum of 3/-, it was rather a shock to me, because, immediately before I left Dublin a few weeks ago, everything was calm and everyone was reasonably satisfied, but it came as a bolt from the blue to find that we had terrible trouble in the warden service over a few minor matters. I do agree that if all these charges were exactly as they appeared when put by Senator Douglas, the cumulative effect would have been very bad on the warden service, but it is not quite as black as it has been painted.

Mr. Douglas

It has not been painted black yet. That is one of the troubles.

Mr. Moylan

With regard to boots, I mentioned the number that had been issued by the Department of Defence. A great deal of dissatisfaction has been expressed by the wardens because the correct sizes were not given to each particular area. Some people claimed that they had too many sizes 9 and 10 and other areas claimed that they had not enough 9's and 10's, but too many 7's and 8's. I think that would be a matter of easy adjustment in this magnificent organisation which Senator O'Donovan and his colleagues have built up, without bringing it into discussion in the Seanad.

Surely 4,000 or 5,000 wardens, when they have so many pairs of boots, could make a general effort to get the sizes re-distributed. I can talk at length about these particular matters, but I do not propose to do so, because the facts are as I stated, and if there is any difficulty about adjusting the matter, the easiest way to solve the problem is by discussing it inside the wardens' council. I suggested at a meeting of area wardens that they should look on themselves as a sort of cabinet, or headquarters staff of the wardens, regarding themselves not as concerned merely with their own particular area, but informing themselves of conditions outside their areas, and being helpful to each other all over the city. If that were done it would be easy to settle this matter.

Regarding stirrup pumps, that matter was raised also. There are 571 wardens' posts in Dublin and we have issued 500 pumps. I think that is the exact number that has been issued so far to the wardens. I can quite realise that there is a certain amount of jealousy, but, surely that can be got over, and, in the meantime, more pumps can be procured.

With regard to wardens' posts—this organisation must be regarded for what it is, a volunteer organisation, and it would lose the real utility it has if it became anything other than a voluntary organisation, because its greatest effect for good seems to me to lie in the fact that it is an expression of that civic spirit which it is most desirable to cultivate.

In regard to wardens' posts, if we have to provide, build or rent. 571 posts throughout this city, it will mean a tremendous cost, particularly because, if we do that one thing, we shall have to do others along the same lines. We have tried to get, as wardens' posts everywhere, rooms in the citizens' houses all over the areas, where possible, and we think that we are not expecting too much of the citizens and householders in Dublin when we ask them to provide for the men who are in the local warden service a room which they can utilise if and when the need arises for its use.

I pointed out that these things are not in any sense to be regarded as fixed and permanent posts provided definitely by the Government. We have tried to get them as far as possible from the citizens as their contribution to the whole effort, and, where there is a real necessity for a post, and where it is not possible to provide the post by the ordinary means then the Department of Defence will do that through the action of the corporation. But, sometimes it has seemed to me that some of the wardens would like to run the organisation on a perfectly regimented and de luxe basis. When I was a very small boy I had a very ordered mind, and I thought it would be a brilliant idea to knock down all the fences and dig up all the hedges along the country roads and put nice stone walls with copings and nice regular concrete pathways in their place. I was often thankful in after years that no person with such a view of order got the opportunity of carrying out my juvenile ideas. Some of our wardens would like to have everything spick and span at all times and everything all correct. We cannot have that and I am afraid it would be bad for the warden service if everything was regimented into that position. I will admit, in regard to the point made about uniforms, that there is something to be said in favour of the wardens' point of view. But, again, the wardens should really remember that one of the difficulties about the provision of a uniform was the fact that they found it impossible to make up their own minds about it.

Mr. O'Donovan

We did make up our minds.

Mr. Moylan

They were made up for you. First of all we had a uniform which was apparently of the type that is used in another country by air-raid wardens. It was a boiler suit, an ordinary boiler suit. That was regarded as very good by many of the wardens. Then somebody else got a brain wave that, instead of supplying that particular suit, the Department of Defence should supply a waterproof coat. We departed from that, however, by deciding that instead of a waterproof coat we would waterproof the overalls. Then somebody said that it would be impossible to waterproof the overalls.

Mr. O'Donovan

See how careful we were.

Mr. Moylan

The case is like that of the Circumlocution Office which was so careful that it never did anything. We had a discussion finally about these uniforms and the wardens made up their minds to have a particular type of uniform. It is said here that I agreed. I have taken on myself the job of going along to wardens' meetings for the purpose of keeping as close to the organisation as possible and for the purpose of resolving any difficulties as quickly as possible for the wardens. That does not mean to say that I can convey, at these meetings, an immediate and definite sanction to every proposal but I can offer an opinion, which opinion is generally the one which finds favour. A certain type of uniform was decided upon. The military advisers of the Department of Defence raised certain objections to the particular type of uniform issued because they said:

"This is a civilian organisation and we do not want non-combatants to be mistaken by an enemy for members of the combatant forces. Therefore, the uniform should be so distinct and different in marking from Army markings that there will be no possibility of mistake."

I do not think, however, that in this matter the wardens' demand is unreasonable. However, a few weeks ago I was ill for some days and had to leave Dublin. Meanwhile it was decided that in accordance with the views of the Army, the boiler suit would be the best type to issue. I did not agree with that. I do think that the two-piece uniform should be provided with markings altogether different from those on the uniform of the Army. The markings on the uniforms of the combatant forces must of course be distinct from those of other forces.

Mr. O'Donovan

We were quite satisfied with that.

Mr. Moylan

Something also has to be said in regard to message centres and the provision of food to wardens on duty during particular hours. When the question of manning these centres first came up, the wardens demanded, as far as I know, an electric fire, a kettle and other equipment. I was told that if they got these cooking facilities, they would provide food themselves. It did not seem that they wanted much food—a cup of tea or something like that. Afterwards a demand was made for a certain amount of money—3/-. It is said that I immediately agreed to the 3/-. I was present at the meeting as far as I remember when the decision was made by the wardens to ask for the 3/-. I have a minute of the particular meeting which states that the city manager was to forward proposals in regard to the matter to the Department of Defence. There were two mistakes made in that matter. One was that the demand for the amount asked did not come from the city manager. The other was that somebody in my office pointed out that this could not be agreed to, as it had too many ramifications and that if we were to consider the question of the provision of food for men in the mess centres, the Department of Justice would be concerned for the provision of food for the members of Local Defence Forces throughout the country. We could not do one without the other. It has been stated that certain civil servants are getting 3/- a night as fire watchers in some Government buildings. That is quite a different thing altogether because these men cannot go home at all. They are obliged to have their tea at night and their breakfast in the morning in the offices in which they are on duty and they have to go to work in the morning immediately they finish their watch. A certain allowance is made in these cases, but I do not know how much it is. In regard to the message centres I think something should be done.

In regard to the payment of accounts, here is where I am on perfectly safe ground. In building up the organisation from scratch, as the nine area wardens did in the case of this organisation, the operations at the beginning were altogether divorced from the Department of Defence. They were carried out on the instructions of the City Manager. It was only some time after, in September, 1939, that the wardens came along to see me. They put up certain proposals and indicated certain difficulties. We got on fairly well, but there was a further meeting early in 1940 where complaints were made again about payments. My memory is that after certain difficulties had been ironed out, the payment of outstanding accounts was made up to the 31st March. In regard to the payment of these accounts, the wardens were not wholly free from blame because an account cannot be paid until it is rendered.

Sometimes members of the warden services simply made statements that this money was owing but never sent in the bills. The main difficulty of payment arises after March 31st. I set out in every possible fashion to find a way out of the difficulty. Everyone knows that in connection with the expenditure of any public money there must be accountancy; and there was a very keen edge in connection with these matters because there was the Corporation Finance Department and the State Finance Department to be got over. However, up to the 31st October, 1940, every item of the air wardens was paid. It was decided that for the month of November that each area warden should keep a definite account of the money expended so that a comparison of expenditure might be made and that any avoidable expenditure should be eliminated. In order to avoid the difficulty that had arisen about the payment of such things as heating, lighting, caretaking and cleaning, we decided to put an imprest of £20 in the hands of the Dublin Air Raid Precautions Officer, giving him authority to make immediate refunds to any area warden for expended money on these matters. We went further, acting on the same principle. In order to cover every item of expenditure, we put into the hands of each area warden an imprest of £5. This money was meant to cover any expenditure which the area warden was likely to incur in running his organisation. It was intended that each area warden should have £5 always in hands for his running expenses and, in order to secure this position, all he had to do was to submit the accounts of any money expended in order to secure a refund of the £5 imprest or of any amount of it that was expended.

Now, with regard to the November payment, I really wanted to get the November payments from every area, in order to make a comparison of the costs, and to see how the money was being expended. Money is not easily got and it has all to be accounted for. I got a certain number of accounts from some of the area wardens in December and some in January and repeated applications were made to those who had not sent in their accounts to send them in. Finally, I got the last of these accounts on February 22nd of this year.

It will be understood that while I make no criticism of any man without a thorough examination of the position, there was need for examination of the accounts where one area warden had no expenditure and another had £20 expenditure. I do not suggest, for a moment, that the £20 was not justifiable expenditure, but when one man ran his area for nothing it was well to examine the expenditure of all areas. I do not absolutely deny that, from December onwards, there was a need for any complaints by the area wardens with regard to money, but I submit, Sir, that only those accounts which had been submitted could have been paid and where there was a need for comparison, as in this case, no account could be paid until all were submitted.

With regard to petrol we had arranged to secure certain quantities of petrol for wardens up to a particular period. But the situation with regard to petrol became so acute that the Department of Supplies shut down upon us and refused to give us petrol for any purpose. We have of course earmarked, or put away, a certain amount of petrol that we will use in an emergency but we have been refused further supplies from the Department of Supplies. With regard to the suggestion that there was an offer of a car——

Senator Douglas

It would make no difference if there was no petrol.

Mr. Moylan

Now with regard to the distribution of respirators I think what Senator Douglas said was that there had been a good deal of criticism made by the Department of Defence with regard to their distribution by the wardens. The distribution of respirators left a good deal to be desired. The officials of the corporation were responsible for their distribution. Men were employed to control their distribution and to oversee the work. We found it necessary to administer a rebuke to the Dublin Corporation for the manner in which their officials had handled the work. How word of that rebuke was conveyed to the wardens and how the suggestion was made to them that my dissatisfaction with the work of certain city officials was really a complaint in regard to the wardens is something I cannot understand, but I make no apology for the rebuke administered to certain officers employed by the Dublin Corporation and want to emphasise that at no time was any criticism directed by me or my Department to the efforts of the wardens.

There are certain regulations which have passed through the Dáil and, I assume, through the Seanad, if it was in existence at the time, which controlled the question of U.A. payments, and, for good or ill, we will have to accept the fact that that legislation is in operation. It is quite conceivable to me that unemployed men in the warden service were affected by that legislation but, again, if area wardens were concerned for unemployed members, not only was I in control of the A.R.P. services but, as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry and Commerce, the question of unemployment assistance and benefit was my particular concern. Only one area warden ever made any representations to me in regard to unemployed wardens affected by the U.A. legislation and I think, in all but one case, we were able to put the thing right.

I am not suggesting that we were able to evade the legislation, but we were able to make such a case as did straighten out the difficulties. Very often—Senators, not being in politics, would not know, of course—Deputies who take the trouble to examine this question of their constituents who are affected by the legislation are able to put it straight by representation. If Senator Douglas or the area wardens will put up the case of any particular warden who is so affected, I, in my Pooh-Bah-like position as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence, can say to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry and Commerce: "What about this poor devil; what will we do about it?"

The Minister for the Co-ordination of Defensive Measures has been referred to as having been translated to another sphere. He has been, since my connection with the A.R.P. service, my immediate superior, and he has for many years been my very good friend. Like Senator Douglas, I, too, wish him the best of luck in his journey, but the charge has been made that he neglected in a radio address to praise the wardens. If I remember rightly, Senator Douglas's co-religionists, when they went to Massachusetts in the 17th century were met by the members of another sect with cries of: "Praise the Lord and a hangman's rope." Praise is a peculiar thing. I have praised the wardens so often——

Mr. O'Donovan

And hanged them then.

Mr. Moylan

——and deservedly praised them so often that, if I expressed any further praise of the area wardens, I am afraid they would begin to doubt the fact that I was really in earnest. However, there is no word of praise too high to give to the wardens. They have really built up a first-class organisation, and I know that they are wholly in earnest.

We cannot have perfection. We cannot get enough money for any service in the country to make it perfect but, after what Senator O'Donovan said in regard to the candle in the shed in Clontarf, people who may possibly read the Seanad Debates in a couple of hundred years' time may have forgotten about Brian Ború, and may believe, as a result of Senator O'Donovan's statement, that Clontarf was in 1940 the Valley Forge of another heroic nation. I think it is not as bad as that. I believe we have done as much as is humanly possible with the amount of money we have been able to get. Again, a question was raised about the difficulty of carrying out exercises. I have urged the wardens time and again, as I have said in another capacity to the Local Security Force: "Parades are useless, but exercises are of tremendous training value." I have told the wardens that there is a sum of money available for the carrying out of those exercises and the wardens know that.

I am very thankful that the matter was raised, as I am anxious to keep this warden organisation in being and as successful in working as it has been. The wardens do believe that I am really interested in every concern of theirs and I would like to assure them, through Senator Douglas, that we can adjust most of the difficulties under which they labour. They will have to remember that I have many difficulties, too; so has the Dublin Corporation; and there is necessity for a little "give and take" on the part of everybody concerned with the warden services. Again, I would like to express thanks to Senator Douglas for the manner in which he has raised this question, and assure him that I am not unmindful at any point of the wardens' good services.

Mr. Douglas

I am very glad that this matter was brought forward. I do not think it would be wise for me to follow the Parliamentary Secretary in a critical manner and to dispute, as one might do, and perhaps try to reply logically to some of his statements. One thing that is outstanding in my mind is that the majority of these matters are adjustable. That is clear: it is equally clear that some things have become lost, stolen or strayed and that we need a sort of war transit insurance in order to be sure that supplies sent out arrive quickly.

There is another matter on which I do not think he has got the right angle and on which I would like to make myself very clear. He seemed to be under the impression that a number of area wardens and others had asked me to bring this matter forward in the Seanad. That is not true: I wish to emphasise that. The matter came to my notice: I do not mind being called a busybody if necessary. I realised, from conversations with ordinary wardens whom I met, that a good many matters, some of which I raised before, were not all that they should be. I then had a conversation with one or two wardens and took action without consulting any single warden in putting down the motion. After the motion had been put down I received a number of letters mostly not from area wardens in which a good many matters were raised. I then asked a number of the area wardens to meet me, as I was not at all sure whether I could fully reply on information which came from some various sources, and I asked them a good many questions.

I admit that a few of the things I mentioned to-day would not have come to my mind had they not been mentioned to me by some of the wardens. On the other hand, the information I obtained was entirely on my own initiative, through my taking this matter up and I am very convinced of its importance. I would like to make that clear. Furthermore, I was not quite sure whether this would be the best way to deal with it but, after a good deal of consultation and considering all aspects of it, I came to the conclusion that there was not really anything which could not usefully be ventilated in public. While I am quite sure that if I had gone privately to the Parliamentary Secretary and asked him to deal with this simply by having a meeting of wardens he could have made the same speech to the area wardens, it would not have had anything like the same effect or the same usefulness as by being made in public, because this is a large and a very important service.

Now, there was more than one disappointing thing from my point of view in the Parliamentary Secretary's statement. There are several matters into which I am not going, such as into the theory of why 8,250 boots were required and 8,150 were issued, except just to say that I was a buyer of boots of the ordinary kinds, and I would say that it is utterly impossible to adjust sizes if you simply have the exact number, and that no matter what you do it is essential to have a somewhat larger stock than those that are immediately required. In the same way I cannot help feeling that this issuing of the exact number of armlets, even to the margin of error of not one getting lost, may be a very correct method, but it is not what I would regard as good business. However, I do not consider that these things are very important, but I am particularly interested in the Parliamentary Secretary's statement with regard to petrol. A certain amount of petrol is now available for deliveries of goods to shops and so on, and I am very glad that it is so, but I do feel that the statement that there can be none at all for the ordinary purposes of A.R.P. in Dublin is most disappointing. I do not think a large quantity would be required, and I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will use his influence in every way that he can with the Department of Supplies to see at any rate that enough is available to maintain the exercises which he regards as necessary and which I regard as necessary. I need not go into further detailed criticism now.

I was very much interested in the Parliamentary Secretary's knowledge of the history of the particular denomination to which I belong, but it might interest him to know that after three of my co-religionists had been willing to be executed for their Faith in Massachusetts, the persecutors got tired of it and did not execute any more. There may possibly be some analogy, but I shall leave it at that.

Leas-Chathaoirleach

Is the Senator pressing the motion?

Mr. Douglas

Having regard to the statement made by the Parliamentary Secretary, Sir, I do not think that I should press the motion.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.