Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Acting Chairman for the opportunity to contribute to this debate. I will start by paying tribute to Deputy Ó Snodaigh for introducing this important Bill. Interestingly, the Government is using the usual tactic of accepting the Bill on Second Stage and sending it towards Committee Stage where it will probably stay and die a death. Instead of doing that or voting down the Bill, the Government could have the strength of its convictions and tell us how it will deal with the problem. In reality, though, it will not deal with the problem.

What happened on Moore Street and Moore Lane in 1916 was important for everyone nationally, not only Dubliners. It is important we remember the struggle to gain our freedom. This debate shows how far we have regressed since then in terms of how the Government responds to Bills and how much the preservation of our history, including a battle site, is developer led. That is disappointing.

The Minister of State, Deputy Noonan, outlined what would be done and what the Government intended to do. It sounded good. He spoke about negotiations with the developer on an underground station to tie into the line from the airport and on 100 residential units on the site. He also spoke about how 9,000 jobs would be created. Behind it all, though, we must wait for the developer. To preserve Moore Street and the rest of the site, which was important in the development and foundation of our State and in the Irish people asserting themselves, we are waiting for the developer to come up with a plan.

This situation has been going on for many years. The first developer went bust, so a plan never materialised. The House just heard that the current developer, Hammerson, will appear before the courts in coming weeks because it is also going bust. This means the plan will be put back again and we will have to wait for another developer to come along. The State should take in the historical sites, make preservation orders and tell any future developer that wants to develop around them that it must work to our development plan, not the other way around. Doing this would be important in standing up for and preserving our sites.

The Minister of State mentioned that funding had been earmarked for the site. Of course it has been earmarked. It is earmarked because it depends on whether the current developer survives and puts forward its plans, gets planning permission and is willing to do this work. Everything depends on the developer. That is the crux of the problem and is the reason the Government does not want to accept this Bill. It does not want what must be done laid down in legislation. Instead, it wants to hold off and facilitate the developer in developing the site and making as much money as it can. This shows where our State has come to, in that we have given over our rights and wishes concerning our national identity to developers. Everything is development led. That is the sad reality of the situation.

We should propose what we want to do and make it happen. This Bill shows that we can do so. In the Seanad in 2015, the Minister stated it was his intention to introduce such legislation. It is another sign of how things work in the State that, as usual, he forgot all about doing so as soon as he entered government and went along with the Government's plans, whatever they were, to ensure developers were protected. This shows how the State has developed. We can say and do one thing in opposition and, as soon as we move across into the comfortable seats, we forget it all and continue the process that has been under way. I hope people will see the cynicism in that, that it needs to change and that such change will be delivered. I hope it will be a salutary message to anyone who in future takes the Government members' positions that this has to change.

Deputies stand on this side of the House and propose ideas. When they move over to the Government side, their role is to ensure those ideas are fulfilled. If something is worthwhile when they are standing here, it is still worthwhile when they are standing on the Government side. That should not change just because civil servants, Deputies' partners in government or developers tell them it is not worthwhile. Developers should not be treated as gods. We must ensure there is continuity and that, when something is said in the House, people try to deliver on it when they get the chance. We will then have a State that is worthwhile for everyone.

What is happening around the commemoration of this 1916 site is symbolic of everything that is wrong in the State. Developers are leading on it and politicians are saying one thing but doing another when they get into power. This has to change. If it did change, for example, through this Bill, it would be a good legacy. Unfortunately, the Government has not changed it.

See this speech in context