I suppose we only have one hour to discuss this Estimate— this evening at any rate—and I would not have been surprised if I had heard that the Minister was again suggesting its postponement in view of that fact. The Estimate is to complete the sum of £10,664,500. Unfortunately the Deputies are not able to judge what is desirable in discussing estimates of this kind because of the lack of information. Explanation is given that the Army is in a state of re-organisation and that it is not possible to give details. I venture to suggest that that is a very good reason for postponing to a very much later date in the year the consideration of this Estimate, so that when the re-organisation is completed it would be possible to give us details. We ought at least to be told on this Estimate how many men we are to provide for. We have not been told. We have had a number of figures given to us occasionally of what the establishment is—never very definitely and generally in a casual way, ranging from 30,000 to 50,000 men. The Dáil does not know officially—I do not know whether any member of the Dáil knows—how many men are to be provided for in this estimate, but a more substantial reason I suggest for a postponement of this Vote is that we ought to know now what the legal position of the Army is.
What is this institution we are asked to vote £10,000,000 for? Presumably, it is for the up-keep of a body of men who have been called together at the initiative of the Executive to defend the State. That is not an Army. We have adopted, in these matters, the legal and constitutional procedure of the British legislature, and there it is essential that there should be an Army Annual Act, which is the means whereby the authority of the legislature is maintained over the Army. Now, an Army Act has been promised us for quite a long time. That is one of the many Acts that have been in preparation. Presumably, for purposes of economy, the Ministry thought it wise to limit the number of skilled men at the preparation of Bills for presentation, and the amount of necessary work that the small number of men have to do in preparing Bills is too great. Consequently, so exceptionally important a Bill as the Army Bill has not yet seen the light. I presume it is coming. How soon I dare not presume to say. I think the estimates ought, strictly, to be deferred until the Army Bill has been presented, at any rate, so that we should know what the intentions of the Ministry are in regard to the Army —the numbers we are asked to provide for and general establishment, and what strictly legal relations there are between the Army and the remainder of State institutions. I do not want to pursue that line of argument very far, but it is desirable, I think, that we should lay emphasis upon the necessity for having some legislation passed to put the Army into a proper position in the State. My main purpose in rising now, is to avoid the confusion that might arise by a simple discussion of details, ranging from one matter to another in the wide field of activities covered by the Army, for the purpose of confining the discussion at this stage to broader questions of policy, I am proposing to reduce the amount of this Estimate by £3,152,500, that is, the amount of the increase that is asked for this year over the amount that was estimated to be necessary last year. Incidentally, one might say, in respect of these Estimates, that we find ourselves in a difficulty in discussing them by not having anything to compare them with, and by not knowing to any extent whatever how much of the last year's Estimate was unspent. I think it is called for that the Minister shall justify their requests that we should vote over £10,000,000 for this year. I take it that military policy is dependent upon political policy. I take it that the policy in regard to the Army, the size of the Army, the activities of the Army and the expenditure upon the Army are all dependent upon the political policy of the Government and the general system of administration. We are in the first day of June, and this Estimate is from the end of March. April and May have passed and we find ourselves in what everybody hopes to be the beginning of a more or less peaceful condition of affairs as compared with what has been the experience of the last year. If it is the intention of the Ministry to maintain the present establishment through the year I have no doubt that £10,664,500 will be required. But is it the intention of the Ministry to maintain the present establishment? Is it the intention to maintain the present Army, no matter what the conditions may be? I presume the answer to that question is in the negative. In such a case so large a sum as £10,000,000 will not be required. I do not think that the Dáil should be asked to vote any increase upon last year's Estimate. £7,512,000 ought to cover expenditure on the Army, provided no military activity is required, and consequently we are entitled to ask the Ministry to give us some indication of policy which would require so large an expenditure, or to answer the suggestion that I make that a very much smaller establishment, and consequently a very much smaller expenditure, is necessary in the face of the conditions of the country to-day. I, therefore, am moving the reduction of this Vote by three million odd pounds on its merits, because the money will not be required, and, secondarily, with the object of inducing the Government to express their thoughts and intentions in regard to general policy touching defence and all that is or has been connoted by that term within the last year. In a supplementary question to-day I suggested that the policy of the Ministry, and the Government generally, in the past has been defended on the only ground on which it could be defended, that of military necessity, and I am going to ask whether it is still necessary, from a military point of view, that prisoners should be tried by special military courts. I want the Government to state that henceforth the power that has been given to them shall no longer be exercised by military Courts, and certainly not by Military Courts sitting in secret. I wish to urge that the necessity which was urged in the earlier debates on this question no longer exists for trials by Military Courts in secret. While I am on that point I want to draw attention to a document which reached me to-day, and which has been circulated by what the messenger, who delivered the parcel of these papers, described as the "Publicity Department." I take it that it is the Army Publicity Department. It is a document headed "A Painful Necessity." It is, of course, a defence of Government policy, and probably is intended to be a Party propagandist leaflet, issued at the expense of the State. In the course of this defence there is a paragraph which reads as follows. Speaking of the difficulties which faced the Government some time ago, and the patience with which they withstood the attacks, they say:—"Forced to act, the Government was still patient. It sought the approval of An Dáil, one of the most representative institutions in the world, in which Labour is strongly represented, before proceeding to inflict the capital punishment. When the approval was given the Government proclaimed a general amnesty," and so on.
Now, one would imagine from that that the approval of the Dáil was given without any protest, without any opposition. Apart from the claim that the Dáil is one of the most representative institutions in the world, which would be true if things were normal and all representatives attended, which, of course is not true, there is a suggestion that the powers that were given were given unanimously, and that there was general acquiescence in the proposals that were brought forward, and carried by a majority of the Dáil. I only just refer to that in passing, because it decidedly creates a false impression, because we who opposed the proposals at the beginning have never yet regretted our decision, and have never yet been satisfied that the powers given them were justified. That by the way. I have asked, therefore, that the Government should state their views on the question of maintaining in being these military courts, when there can be no claim put forward with success that a military necessity still compels their existence, I ask also whether it is necessary to continue the policy of searchings, arrests and imprisonments without trial, and whether the time has not yet arrived for a cessation of that policy. Men are still being arrested on suspicion and for purposes of prevention. They are being detained, and not tried and not charged with any offence. I would urge that it is in the interests of the State that that course of proceeding should stop, that the critical stage which existed, and which was said to justify the extraordinary acts and extra legal acts has now passed, and that there is no longer a necessity for continuing the procedure which we have been accustomed to for the last few months.
Then in regard to the detention of prisoners, this question is embodied in the question of the finances required, because a very great proportion of the money that is asked for is required for the payment of officers, and men and various other items in this A to Z list. The number of prisoners still in the control of the Army is said to be round about 12,000. A number, large or small I do not know, probably very large, possibly a majority, have been arrested for sympathy with the Irregular activity, there being, perhaps, reasonable ground for believing that that sympathy might develop into active support. There are 12,000 men and women under arrest, and I ask the Ministry to tell the Dáil whether they have come to any conclusion as to the length of time that it would be necessary to hold these prisoners, whether the intention is to hold them all until they are satisfied that every gun, every rifle, every round of ammunition, and every pound of explosive material has been raked up, and whether they have made any estimate, any calculation, as to how long it will take to make that general rounding up.
Further, I would like to ask the Minister to tell us whether, in considering the period of detention, they have also considered the effect upon the country of that detention, provided there is, as we hope, a cessation of armed activities. Can we take it that if the promise of that cessation is fulfilled there will be a steady release of prisoners and a general stoppage of the military activities, the searches, the arrests, and such-like on the part of the Army authorities?
One can forsee if there is no limit except the limit I have hinted at, of absolute surrender of all arms, ammunition and explosives, the detention of those prisoners going on for a very long time, and the effect upon the public of such detention, while there is no fighting going on, will be very bad indeed. It will be disastrous to the character of the State and to the Government which is responsible for the administration of State affairs. There must be, I submit, and there ought to be, a very early release of prisoners so long as the excuse of military necessity has gone by the board. I press upon the Ministers to give the Dáil some indication of their minds in this respect. I do not want to raise questions of detailed administration at this stage. We shall have to raise many questions, and, no doubt, they will be met one way or another. In the absence of more detailed explanation of what is covered by those allowances, the Dáil is somewhat handicapped in a proper examination of the estimates.
At this stage I would suggest we should discuss the general question of policy which is bound up with the Defence Department, and the policy upon which the Defence Department is to base its estimate. While I am moving for a decrease in the vote by £3,500,000, I am not for a moment suggesting that that can be saved in money. I am afraid it is impossible to satisfy the economists that any such cutting down of the estimates that I desire for Army purposes can be saved to the Exchequer. All that we can hope for is that we can divert the sum of money so saved to other public purposes, and that the men who would be demobilised, and who, we hope, shall be demobilised in very large numbers within the next few months will be utilised either in the ordinary industries from which they have been taken, or in some other constructional activities. I do not expect there is going to be any real saving of expenditure, but, I desire that expenditure should be in civil activities and not under the head of the Army. I know the Minister has occasionally made suggestions about using the Army on work of civil construction. I give credit to the full to the idea that is behind that suggestion. I want to urge again that it is not desirable in a time of peace, nor in a time of transition from warfare to peace that these works of civil construction outside the necessary military works should be carried through by attested men working under the discipline of an Army. In that respect I want to draw the attention of the Minister—this is one of the detailed matters which we will have to deal with later, but it touches the general policy— to information which has reached me regarding army officers approaching County Councils and asking for information as to what public works are required in the county, not work on repairs to breaches in roads, which might well be continued to be the work for the time being of the Army Works Department as it has been for a few months past, but on new roads and other works of a public character which the County Council in the normal course of its operations, would be carrying through by civilian labour. If my information is correct the County Council has been so pleased with the prospect that they have actually deferred doing this work in the expectation that the Army was going to do it for them. They have deferred taking on men because the Army was going to do the work for nothing. Some control from Headquarters should be exercised on local officers who are engaged in making suggestions of that kind. I think that in the course of replying to those questions I am puting to the Minister he should elaborate what is in his mind with regard to the work of the Army in those matters, and state whether he has not been convinced that it should be demobilised men by whom any such work as has been judged desirable should be carried through rather than by attested men still in the ranks of the Army, and subject to military discipline.
I think, apart from any of the specific questions I have put, that we should ask the Ministers to give us in some detail their views upon the present position, the prospect of the release of prisoners, the prospect of a general legalising of the procedure in connection with prisoners and arrested persons, and the going back or, shall I say, the going forward to normality in respect to the Law Courts, the Army, and citizens. Perhaps, also, the Minister would tell us when he is dealing with the numbers within the Army, the numbers to-day, the numbers he intends to keep, and how soon he proposes to demobilise, etc., whether he has any fixed policy in regard to existing military establishments or establishments which did exist and have now been destroyed; whether there is any policy yet decided upon in regard to the rebuilding of such barracks as did exist and have been destroyed; where it is intended that the army that is to be shall be billeted; and, generally, to give us some outline of the policy of the Ministry regarding the future army, the numbers they expect to keep as a normal force, and how soon they intend to reduce the establishment to that normal force. I beg to move that the Estimates be reduced by the sum of £3,152,500, that is to say, the amount which is named as the increase over the Estimate of 1922-23.