Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Yesterday we discussed how our Statute Book lay and everybody in the House, as I noted yesterday, was in favour of making it much cleaner and more accessible. The Bill deals with legislation from the founding of the State to the 1950s. Most of the Bills are definitely superfluous, although some are of major interest. I raised a question yesterday about the Garda Síochána legislation, particularly the Act initiating the Garda Síochána that is being repealed with this Bill. I hope the Minister of State will be able to reassure us on Committee Stage that this will have no effect on subsequent legislation that firmed up An Garda Síochána. I presume that is the case. It was originally known as a civic guard Bill until the final moments when Cathal O'Shannon proposed "An Garda Síochána" as the title.

There are other pieces of legislation, such as that relating to emergency powers. We only just had the debate in the Dáil about rent control and when there is an emergency, the State can move emergency legislation. It is not that I would like anything like the Public Safety (Emergency Powers) Act to be passed in this House ever again. We have the Offences against the State Act, which superseded that legislation in 1939. It is still on the Statute Book and has been enhanced. The emergency powers Act of that time led to the execution by this State of what were known historically as the 77, although there were 83, I believe, official State executions, not to mind the 110 who were executed upon arrest without any recourse to any semblance of a trial or military tribunal. That legislation is being eliminated and it also gave effect to internment without trial during the Civil War. Some of the legislation being repealed is Civil War legislation.

There are other interesting examples from an historical and nerdy perspective. When I looked through the list I laughed at the Eucharistic Congress (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1932. I hope it will not be repeated the year after next when the Pope comes to Ireland. That legislation allowed people to drive public buses or vehicles without a licence. There does not seem to have been enough licenceholders in the country and sufficient people were coming that they needed people to drive the buses. It also allowed licensed premises to open extended hours at certain times and be restricted at other times, I presume for some of the masses in the afternoon etc. It is interesting that although I presume some of the debate was around the Eucharistic Congress, the Dáil spent most of its time discussing the driving of buses to and from the venues and the effects on the delegates attending. It was a major event and, in some ways, looking back at the legislation, it seems very simple seen through our modern eyes. It was very practical legislation and it was an example of something much shorter than some of the legislation we produce today.

One of the longer pieces of legislation I looked at that has been repealed is the Spanish Civil War (Non-Intervention) Act 1937. It was interesting for the time and if we look at the debate, it was quite far-ranging and different to what we would have today. There are some comments one might not believe, such as Eamon de Valera being accused of being a supporter of the reds. I do not think anybody would have felt that. It was a different era. Last week we discussed neutrality and it is in that context that we might look at it. The context was different, nonetheless, as the State allowed General Eoin O'Duffy to leave the country under much fanfare with his volunteers in the Blueshirts. They were blessed on their way to attack the forces of the republic in Spain and supposedly to defend Christianity but they spent most of their time in the pub, coming back disgraced in ignominy. Nothing was heard of the Blueshirts, in many ways, afterwards because they did not assert themselves well. Those who took the side of the republic, standing by the revolution in Spain, did so quietly and left the country without fanfare. They suffered the consequences of taking that side before coming back to Ireland and suffered further consequences from a religiously run State. They were frowned upon, ignored and ostracised in many ways. It is a pity, but many of their memoirs have come to the fore in recent years. Those people were open, energetic and focused in their community. It is a pity they were ostracised but that was not the intention of the Act at the time. It was enacted so the State would not take sides or encourage anybody one way or the other. It would not facilitate the movement of armaments or soldiers through Ireland on the way to war, so it is a pity the same kind of legislation is not there today to deal with Shannon Airport's issues. There are often similarities and differences between today and what happened in the past.

This Bill is a good piece of work. I was critical in the past that JobBridge was used in formulating the Bill as there was no guaranteed work at the end of the process. That criticism was answered and I am not making a complaint at this stage. We have dealt with that and JobBridge is over. How many more pieces of legislation will need to be eliminated? At least we are up to the 1950s at this stage and I cannot see many more pieces of statute law revision coming forward. It is interesting to see that one of the pieces of legislation we repealed is being reinstated, which demonstrates that we can make mistakes in this House.

This has been a useful piece of work. Yesterday, my colleague, Deputy Cullinane, referred to my request that there would a searchable archive of legislation. I understand the information is available but there should be a single source for the available material when the process is finished. The process will be beneficial but when it is completed I ask that the Government set aside whatever sum of money is required for that objective. I assume it would not be that much because the work has been done and the documents have been found and assessed. Somebody should have ready access to the information and that job can produce something worthwhile for future historians. I wish the Minister of State well with the legislation. If he does not get to answer all those questions I may contribute again on Committee Stage in order to further elaborate on them.

See this speech in context