Eamonn Maloney (Dublin South West, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their contributions. We would not be discussing this issue if there was not a problem within the headstone industry. Ms Hurley stated quite rightly in her contribution that the responsibility for graves, etc., in Ireland is the direct responsibility of local government. I am not blaming anyone here for the sins of Queen Victoria, Daniel O'Connell, or anyone else, but we would not be having this discussion if historically the Department had dealt with this, especially in 1970 when a Private Members' Bill came before the House.

I dare say to the people to my right and left, as legislators, that if anyone was to try to introduce a private Bill in the House in this day and age, that person would not get as far as the stairs leading up to the Dáil Chamber. Anyway, this was the sort of thing that happened in the 1970s. In this case the private Bill served to extend the protection of Glasnevin Trust and its influence and activity. It afforded protection to the trust that was not available to any other body. It is extraordinary. Despite all the good work that Glasnevin Trust has been undertaken historically, it moved into a certain position. This followed the 1970 private Act, which was passed unanimously in the House. It was not drafted by any legislator but was drafted outside the House, something that speaks for itself.

I will condense the argument. The 1970 Act bestowed on Glasnevin Trust a collection of new activities. The trust could borrow money, buy property, etc. These were functions it did not have up to that point. The Act allowed the trust to engage in commercial activity. The people on my left who have made submissions know the story of all their colleagues who had companies that have gone out of business since the 1970s. The Act bestowed a privilege on one body that was not conferred on other bodies. This has already been alluded to by one or two people. What has happened since the early 1980s is that in the greater Dublin area almost 20 companies have gone out of business. These companies employed people, paid taxes and so on. They did not have charitable status, and they no longer exist. Without being too humorous about it, they did not go out of business because people stopped dying. They went out of business because they could not compete. I cited as an example Mr. Pierce's letter in respect of the case in Swords. It showed the inequality of this situation. That is why we are before the committee today debating the matter.

The Department has failed to regulate unequal competition in the sector. A registered charity has a special tax status, something the firms represented today do not. It was a trust. Other than one or two names, I do not know who is a member of the trust. I know it is established in perpetuity as well.

We cannot compare like with like. What happened in 1970 is something that we, as legislators, have to change in the interests of fairness. It is not a simple matter for the Department or a question of blaming local authorities, although I believe it should have been rectified historically, because of what has happened since 1970. Anyway, it is up to us now to rectify the matter.

This country has gone through great change and turmoil. The word "quango" has been mentioned once or twice. My difficulty with quangos is that we have not got rid of enough of them, but that is for another day. Anyway, we have to rectify this on the basis of justice and fairness. In no sector of Irish society should bestowing special private Acts on one body be permissible. It is unfair. I will leave it at that.