Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)

In his last letter before his execution in Kilmainham Jail on 8 May 1916, Eamonn Ceannt wrote, "In the years to come Ireland will honour those who risked all for her honour at Easter in 1916". How do we honour those who risked and gave all in 1916? We do so primarily by seeking to fulfil in our own time the promise of the Proclamation of the Irish Republic, which asserts Irish sovereignty and seeks real equality. As political parties and Independent Deputies with differing political outlooks we frequently disagree about how the promise of the Proclamation is being fulfilled but we should be at one in ensuring that our people and future generations have full access to the heritage of the Easter Rising of 1916 not only in the written word and the physical legacy of the buildings and the streets where our history was made but also in the realisation of the dream of those who wrote the Proclamation, our charter for freedom.

Kilmainham Gaol stands today as one of the best preserved and most visited historical buildings in Europe. If not for the dedication of a group of citizens this sacred place would have fallen into ruin and been erased from our capital city. A group of volunteers, many of whom had fought for Irish freedom, banded together and through voluntary work and campaigning ensured that the prison was saved and turned into a museum. Only then did the State step in. There is an exact parallel with the national monument on Moore Street. The dedication of the relatives of the 1916 leaders and those who supported them in their campaign over many years has ensured that 14-17 Moore Street has been saved thus far from the bulldozers. Unfortunately, however, the last headquarters of the 1916 leaders has come far closer to demolition than their place of execution in Kilmainham. It should not be necessary to stress the importance of this site. The layout of the streets and lanes around the GPO, Moore Street and Parnell Street which witnessed the events of Easter 1916 remain largely as they were at the time, even though most of the buildings have been demolished in the intervening period.

Remarkably, Nos. 14 to 17 Moore Street and the terrace of which they form a part remain intact, albeit only just. They have survived the fires and bombardments of the Rising and the Civil War. Ironically, they were under greater threat during the era of the so-called Celtic tiger. What a disgrace it would be now, as we prepare to mark the centenary of the 1916 Rising, if these buildings were to be undermined, encroached on and engulfed in a shopping centre. The motion before the Dail has the support of 50 Deputies. I thank them for their support and urge all Deputies to put aside party differences and support this motion.

The motion has two inextricably linked elements. First, it resolves to ensure that the 1916 national monument at 14-17 Moore Street is fully protected and preserved in its entirety and as designated. Second, it resolves that the surrounding buildings, streets and laneways are retained in such a manner that the potential to develop this area into a 1916 historic and cultural quarter can be fulfilled. The motion is addressed to the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Deputy Deenihan. It is up to the Minister and the Government to decide whether the developer can go ahead with his plan because any development affecting the national monument at 14-17 Moore St. requires the Minister's formal consent under the National Monument Acts.

I regret to say that in responding to this motion, and in the amendment tabled in the name of the Minister, the Government has taken a narrow, minimalist approach which gives no real assurance that the national monument will be fully protected and preserved in its entirety and as designated. Our justifiable fear is that the Minister and his Department are inclined to the false view that the developer's proposal would preserve the national monument. In a letter of today's date the Minister's adviser states that the plan would retain what he describes as all structurally viable elements of the existing buildings. The developer intends to build upon 60% of the site covered by the national monument. The buildings as they stand will be gutted, there will be excavations beneath them and the terrace on either side will be demolished, all in the context of a giant shopping mall. So much for the alleged plan of the developer to develop a commemorative centre at the national monument. Clearly, the first element of the motion, the preservation in full of the national monument cannot be fulfilled if the Minister approves the developer's proposed work on and around the site. Equally clearly, ministerial approval of the plan would be inconsistent with the second part of the motion, the retention of the surrounding buildings, streets and laneways in such a manner that the potential to develop an historic quarter can be fulfilled. For these reasons, we cannot accept the Government amendment. It represents a minimalist approach and a lousy position as we approach the centenary of the Easter Rising 1916.

It may be argued by some voices in Government that refusal to give the go-ahead to the developer risks the State being sued. However, the Planning and Development Act 2000 states that any development that would materially affect a protected structure or proposed protected structure is a development in respect of which a refusal of permission will not attract compensation. The same Act gives as a reason for the refusal of permission, which excludes compensation, "the proposed development would injure or interfere with a historic monument which stands registered in the Register of Historic Monuments under section 5 of the National Monuments (Amendment) Act". The developer in question is insolvent and in NAMA, a State agency with a direct responsibility to the people of this State. Does the Government seriously hold out the prospect of a busted developer on a NAMA life support machine suing the Minister for fully protecting a national monument? I think it most unlikely.

The likelihood is that the current developer may never build the proposed shopping mall but, with full planning permission and ministerial consent to get his way with the national monument, he may - with the approval of NAMA - sell on the site to some other developer who would do so. This would be the worst possible outcome.

The Minister and the Government need to get a grip. They need to take control of the situation. The planning saga has been going on since August 1999. Through that time there has been a massive and unsightly void on the main street of our capital city. One of our most important national monuments has been decaying and under threat and an historic quarter of Dublin, with massive potential to enhance our heritage, has been allowed to deteriorate as it languishes in a planning limbo.

larraim ar gach Teachta tacú leis an run seo. larraim ar an Rialtas an leasú a aistharraingt. An bhfuilimid chun a rá leis an bPiarsach: "Mo chlann féin do dhiol a máthair"?

The Government should withdraw its amendment. It should support the substantive motion tabled by Sinn Féin, with the support of other political parties and Independent Members. The Minister should refuse his consent. He should enter dialogue with all stakeholders - the 1916 relatives, all property owners in the area and not just the developer, the local authority Dublin City Council, the National Museum and other relevant State agencies. The aim should be to come up with a new plan to fully preserve the national monument and to develop the historic 1916 quarter in time for the centenary of the 1916 Rising. Let us hope we all live to see that achievement and celebrate the tremendous legacy of the brave men and women who fought and asserted the right of the Irish people to their freedom and national rights but who also lit a beacon that many nations the world over have since emulated.

See this speech in context