Michelle Mulherin (Mayo, Fine Gael)

I must disagree with Deputy O'Donovan because I really like the Spire and I am not from Dublin. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I like seeing the rain trickling down it. However, this is not pertinent to this debate as it is art as opposed to what we are discussing.

I welcome passion for remembering and commemorating our history, the people, the decisions they made and the events which epitomise our struggle for the freedom we enjoy to self-determine as a people, not that we must all agree but that we have this freedom. Using bricks and mortar is a limited means to do so but is the only way we can state what happened mattered to us as a people, that it is significant now and will continue to be significant so long as we are a nation.

To take a slightly different tack, as the Minister stated when he spoke so earnestly, this monument is a protected structure and he does not intend any destruction to it. The condition it is in is not desirable for such an important place but we have a statutory process which we should not sidestep. The Minister has been approached by people who are for and against the proposed development which has planning permission. The statutory process came about through the Parliament, which has its roots in the 1916 Rising which occurred at a time when there was a state of chaos in the country and people wanted a stable society with respect for law and order and rules and to be able to self-determine as a people in a parliament. According to the statutory process the Minister must deliberate, consult and consent or not, and he should be allowed to do so because this is what the law states. We should not sidestep this no matter how much passion we have. I have full confidence in the Minister.

With due respect to Sinn Féin which tabled the motion, in the Seanad it has tabled amendments to the Statute Law Revision Bill to abolish the Offences against the State Act which criminalises activities detrimental to the security of the State. Sinn Féin tells people to break the law by not paying the household charge. This does not fit because we are parliamentarians. We work through the system and democracy is burdensome and requires much work, but it means dialogue and I believe Sinn Féin appreciates dialogue at this point.

I do not want to go over the detail and the real significance of this, which has already been mentioned by other speakers, but I am delighted plans are afoot so we may see something done with this monument by the time we commemorate 1916. There are ways and means to commemorate. It does not mean having exactly the same as what was there before and I will give an example from a rural area close to where I live. A stone cottage from the townland of Carradoogan near Attymass near Ballina in County Mayo, which was left derelict because of mass emigration, is now part of the Irish Hunger Memorial in Battery Park, Lower Manhattan not far from where the World Trade Center stood. It was taken stone by stone and reconstructed in Battery Park. While it is not in its original place, it is nonetheless a testament to all the people who suffered during the famine and through emigration, and more people get to see it in its current location.

With regard to the buildings on Moore Street, any development should be done respectfully, taking on board advice from museums, archaeologists and other experts so the buildings have due respect and credence as the national monument we want them to be. I respect the process that must take place. The Minister is aware of the seriousness and sensitivity required for the right decision to be made with regard to having something in place by the time of the commemorations in 2016.

See this speech in context