Mary Hanafin (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)

One could have a debate on that issue for a long time. I believe the freedom of information legislation probably has changed thinking in that regard because that Act allows one to have immediate access to decisions, policies and the backgrounds thereto. It then means that under the 30-year rule, one is holding for the fullness of time. While this is the first time I have considered this proposal, even thinking out loud I would have thought that all the papers on Northern Ireland, for example, probably were best kept for 30 years, rather than 15 years, because while we were in the middle of peacekeeping talks and discussions, it might not have been helpful for people to have read into them. However, such papers now can be considered retrospectively from the perspective of the historian. Consequently, I believe freedom of information legislation should be used for an immediate understanding of government and governance, while the 30-year rule is for historians. These are my initial thoughts on the subject but I have not really thought it through. I would be interested to hear the opinions of my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Mansergh, because I am sure he has live views in this regard.

I accept fully that the National Archives and the National Library are two different creatures, both of which are highly valuable. However, that does not preclude co-operation to make best use of what we have. Members have just been talking about capital expenditure for the National Archives, which has not taken place for a number of years. However, I do not want either me or someone else to state in this Chamber in a few years' time that although the money was available for the technology for one institution, it was not available for the other. One must take advantage of changing times and changing technology and must use it to the benefit but not to the detriment of both.

See this speech in context