Dáil debates

Wednesday, 23 May 2012

Private Members' Business. National Monuments: Motion (resumed)

 

8:00 pm

Photo of Michael ColreavyMichael Colreavy (Sligo-North Leitrim, Sinn Fein)

Almost 100 years ago, the city of Dublin and the entire island of Ireland were in a state of desperation. There was rampant unemployment, a massive rate of child mortality and swelling slums were rife. The only option for many was to be shipped off to the killing fields of Europe to spill their blood for their imperialist oppressor. Out of all this despair, blackness and destitution arrived the men and women of 1916. They offered the people an alternative vision. They declared that: "The Republic guarantees ... equal rights and equal opportunities to all its citizens, and declares its resolve to pursue the happiness and prosperity of the whole nation and of all its parts, cherishing all the children of the nation equally". The hope and vision they offered to Ireland to strike for her freedom is as true today as it was 100 years ago.

Ireland today is searching for hope in these turbulent economic times. Similar to the conditions in which the men and women of 1916 found themselves, we today are again at the whim of foreign rulers and foreign markets. There is no finer example of courage and determination than the example the men and women of 1916 set. For the past 100 years we have drawn inspiration from their heroism. As we are now in these difficult times, I am sure we will draw further inspiration from them into the future. That is one of the reasons it is essential that the buildings at 14-17 Moore Street are protected. These are more than just bricks and mortar; they are a symbol of why we exist as a country and as a people. The buildings on Moore Street make up a very important part of the story of us as a nation. From the small rooms on that terraced block emerged this Parliament. Every Deputy who speaks in this Chamber owes an allegiance to the history of Moore Street.

I believe that every Member of this House believes that these buildings are a national monument and a treasure of the State. Moore Street is also a site of educational wealth and all children in our schools should know the history of their country. There is far more educational value in these buildings being preserved as a national monument than any shopping centre could ever provide. Similarly this country is a major tourism destination with millions of visitors every year. The value of such an important historical site cannot be compared to a high-street brand that can be found in any other city in the Western world. Ireland's deep and rich history is one of the reasons so many tourists are attracted to come here every year. Shopping centres come and go but if these historic buildings are destroyed they will be gone forever.

We should remember with pride the men and women of 1916. I think of Leitrim's Seán Mac Diarmada, who fought and died so that we could sit in this Chamber today. Seán Mac Diarmada suffered from polio but struggled through his disability to play a leading role in the 1916 Easter Rising. He was a brave soldier and an example to future generations. Many people visit his beautifully preserved cottage in Corranmore, Kiltyclogher, which is part of our wonderful history. We must take it upon ourselves not to sully the name of Seán Mac Diarmada or any of the heroes of 1916 and hand over such an important landmark to become a shopping centre.

The Minister has said the Sinn Féin motion is too narrow in its vision but I respectfully suggest otherwise. Moore Street is a central and essential fulcrum for historical tourism in the island of Ireland. If we allow these buildings to be destroyed, that essential part of 1916 tourism will be lost and gone forever.

On my local radio station, Ocean FM, I pointed out that we had tabled this motion and it got a strong reaction most of which was very positive. One person criticised it by saying that I would be better off talking about local issues rather than talking about Moore Street in Dublin. With respect I would say that person was a parochial philistine and I hope there will not be too many philistines if it comes to a vote on the motion.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.