Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 1: To ask the Taoiseach the files which were released recently by his Department under the National Archives Act 1986; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39764/05]

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 2: To ask the Taoiseach the number of files withheld by his Department from the National Archives in respect of 1975; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39768/05]

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 3: To ask the Taoiseach the number of files withheld by his Department in respect of the files transferred to the National Archives in respect of 1975; the numbers withheld under section 8(4)([i]a[/i]) of the National Archives Act 1986; the number withheld under section 8(4)([i]b[/i]); the number withheld under section 8(4)([i]c[/i]); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40402/05]

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 4: To ask the Taoiseach the number of files withheld by his Department from the archives for 1975; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3209/06]

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 5: To ask the Taoiseach the files which were released recently by his Department under the National Archives Act 1986; the files pertaining to 1975 which were withheld by his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3414/06]

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 6: To ask the Taoiseach the files which were released under the National Archives Act 1986 by his Department; the number of files withheld by his Department from the National Archives in respect of 1975; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5502/06]

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to answer Questions Nos. 1 to 6, inclusive, together.

The evaluation of files for release to the National Archives is carried out by designated officials in my Department. I have no role in that process. It is normal, as files are processed for release each year, that some are certified by the appropriate official for retention on the grounds set forth in the Act. Five files were certified in this way in respect of the January 2006 release. In all, a total of 727 files or file parts were transferred to the National Archives by my Department to be released for public inspection on 1 January 2006.

Of the five files retained, two were retained under section 8(4)(a) of the Act and three were retained under sections 8(4)(b) and (c) of the Act. It is also the responsibility of the statutorily designated officials to determine the particular subsection in accordance with which files are certified for retention.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I understand that approximately 6,000 files were released to the media under the 1975 archival release of which approximately 1% were retained for particular reasons. Does the Taoiseach know how many of those were retained by his Department and if so why?

The Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, Deputy O'Donoghue, said in answer to questions that he would be willing to investigate the possibility of having documents returned that were removed by the British in 1922 on the changeover of authority in the State. These matters are being made available through the digital process but is the Minister, or Minister of State, pursuing the original documents removed by the British authorities?

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, announced some time ago his willingness to consider having researchers examine files in his Department which were previously unobtainable or untouchable. Has this been followed through? Does the Taoiseach envisage this happening in all Departments including the Department of the Taoiseach?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In answer to the first question, with reference to my Department, a total of 727 files or part files were transferred in January 2006. Five files were retained, two of which were retained under section 8(4)(a) of the Act and three were retained under subsections 8(4)(b) and 8(4)(c).

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What was the subject matter of those files?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Most of these files related to Northern Ireland. A total of 49 files were released without abstractions and partial abstractions were made on five documents, all related to Northern Ireland. The abstractions related to information given in confidence, including security information and information about individuals likely to lead to defamation claims. There were abstractions in other documents but the files were released. The abstractions normally concern parts of files, such as names being crossed out.

The Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, Deputy O'Donoghue, is releasing files to co-operate with those seeking information for historical purposes. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, has established a working group in his Department to review the files required for historical purposes. The group has requested proposals from various historians. A number of historians and archivists are working with the group to see how best to release the files in an ordered fashion. The Government's policy is to co-operate whenever possible and in particular when the release of files would aid historical research. The examination being carried out in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform which involves historians and archivists could be used as a model in other Departments where necessary. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform holds a greater number of files than other Departments and the Minister was anxious to develop a way of bringing this forward.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach stated that five files were retained this year and that most of them were about Northern Ireland. Can he say what was the subject matter of the other files?

I refer to the reply given by the Taoiseach when this question was asked previously. Today's reply is word for word but with the number of files changed. One wonders about questions to the Taoiseach. Since the advent of the word processor, the reply comes back word for word the same. There used to be a time when the intelligent civil servant would rewrite the reply in a different style or come at it from a different angle but now the same chunk of text is taken from the word processor with five substituted for nine. I suggest it would be a great help in the context of the consideration of reform of the Dáil if some of the minor points about questions to the Taoiseach could be examined.

Every year the Taoiseach answers questions on this subject and he states that X number of files have been retained under section 8(4)(b) and another number of other files retained under section 8(4)(a), for varying reasons. Are those files which are held over ever revisited? I presume some of them are held over because some person is still alive or whatever. I am not suggesting there should be somebody in the Taoiseach's office monitoring the obituary notices, although I bet there is such a person.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is the job of the Department with responsibility for communications.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Are such files put into the public domain as the years pass? They will have been retained for what seemed good and sensible reasons at the time of the 30-year rule. Are they then retained for ever more or do they come into the public domain?

I will not say I was amused as it is not a suitable word. If my colleague in Howth hears me use the word "amused", he will not be amused. I thought it amazing that as recently as 30 years ago, military intelligence was keeping files on Cabinet Ministers. Does the Taoiseach think this is still happening? Military intelligence was keeping files on Conor Cruise O'Brien, probably the most trenchant critic of terrorism in politics at that time. Does the Taoiseach think military intelligence is keeping an eye on Deputy Cullen when he goes abroad or on whatever he is doing about road tolling? Could this be happening today and is it justifiable?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In reply to Deputy Kenny's question about the departmental group, its remit is to examine the historical value of the archive records held by the Department which are 30 years old. Its members include a number of prominent academics including Professor Mary Daly, principal of the college of arts and Celtic studies, UCD; Professor Ronan Fanning, professor of modern history; Professor Dermot Keogh, professor of history, UCC; Professor Eunan O'Halpin, professor of contemporary history; Gerard Hogan, lecturer in law, TCD; Margaret O'Callaghan, lecturer in politics; Thomas Quinlan, senior archivist and head of acquisitions at the National Archives. Val O'Donnell, former assistant secretary, Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, will also be part of the working group which has been asked to report within 12 months. This model can be used for other areas.

In reply to Deputy Rabbitte's question, I will pass on his comments regarding the use of the word processor.

With reference to replies to questions, many files from the 1970s related to Northern Ireland. I have not examined the files but I spoke to people who were involved in their examination. At that stage there was a large flow of information coming in about events and activities but those numbers have decreased in recent years. Only five files were retained this year and there have been some abstractions from the files. For example, out of 2,012 files in 2001, only 13 files were retained. Sections 8(4)(a), (b) and (c), govern the release of files. Section 8(4)(a) states that a file may not be released for reasons of the public interest. Section 8(4)(b) refers to information obtained in confidence and many files from the 1970 to 1971 period are in this category. Other files are not released if they pose a threat of distress or danger of defamation but there have not been many in this category. Information relating to security is the main reason. Deputy Rabbitte asked an interesting question but I am doubtful that the files are revisited but I will inquire whether files are held back forever. I made inquiries in the past as to the reason names cited in files cannot be released even if the information is not released. I was informed that in most of these cases, the file name used would be an individual's name and this would disclose the information. I made this inquiry a few years ago. I will ask whether any of these files are revisited or whether such a question could be dealt with by the review group in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. There is widespread interest in the archives from historians and academics, particularly in our universities. Not too many more people may be interested but the aforementioned groups certainly are.

Even though I have been in this job quite a long time, I must be careful what I say. I would love to be able to give Deputy Rabbitte a straight answer about what information is held in military and security records but I am not in a position to do so. It is still an area that intrigues me. Rather than being on the record in 30 years' time as having said I am sure nobody had a file on me or my colleagues, I will decline to do so because I would not be certain.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I hope they are not still monitoring the Cruiser.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They do monitor but what I am not sure.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wonder with what certainty I could answer the same question.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy might know a lot about it.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Taoiseach clarify his Department's role under the Archives Act 1986? Does he or his Department have an oversight role on the release of files or even the decision not to release files by any other Department? As regards files that have not been released by the Department of the Taoiseach pertaining to 1975, will the Taoiseach advise us if any of those relate in any way to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of the previous year, 1974? If so, why have they been retained? Can the Taoiseach be specific regarding that area?

Will the Taoiseach advise us if any files — I am advised that "none" is the answer — in the Six Counties section of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform for the year 1975 have been released? Is the Taoiseach in a position to advise whether that is that case?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The decision on how files are given out is a statutory function of nominated senior officials in the Department. I have no input whatsoever, nor have I ever been consulted on any file. It is a statutory position of senior civil servants and I think it is the same in every Department. As far as I know, such decisions must be undertaken at principal officer level or higher, as in my Department. I do not know what is in the files, although many issues in that period were examined. All the files were made fully available to Mr. Justice Barron so he had any information he required, even if it was not in the public domain. Mr. Justice Barron covered a number of issues. The Miami showband killings, which occurred in 1975, and a lot of other major incidents including the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, have been examined by Mr. Justice Barron who had access to the full files. They were in his possession.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What about the Six Counties section of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform?

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The questions refer specifically to the Taoiseach's Department.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I appreciate that but I referred to the Six Counties aspect of it, which is the Taoiseach's focus.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Today's question time is repetitive. Not only is this almost entirely the same answer as before to these questions on the National Archives but, similarly, questions on freedom of information legislation yesterday elicited almost identical replies, as do questions on disability issues. One must ask whether the limitation on questions here is making question time ridiculous. While they are all interesting issues, it is as interesting as asking about the exhibits in the Natural History Museum next door — they do not change very often but there is no harm in asking the question.

Questions regarding the National Archives afford us an opportunity to query the complaint from the National Archives Office about a lack of space for archival material. Is there any firm delivery date for providing that space? The current Bishop Street premises is inadequate and the number of archives is increasing. According to the National Archives, the number of State papers is set to double over the next 20 years, yet there is nowhere to keep them. With the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, sitting next to him, the Taoiseach may be able to get more details on that question than he might otherwise obtain.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is correct that the volume of files and other retrieval material being made available is increasing. The extension of the Act over the years has led to increased pressure on space. The National Archives have been involved with the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon's, Department with a view to getting additional space. I do not know if they have located a new premises but discussions are ongoing with the Commissioners of Public Works concerning premises. Under the law, we have to release these files each year so we must make space available for them. However, much progress has been made in recent years in access, retrieval and viewing of files. The issue of providing extra space in future is under discussion.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I support the suggestion that additional space is required, as well as extra staff. When I was a Minister I had responsibility for this area. There is a scholarly interest in the early part of the last century, from 1900 onwards and through the 1920s. Would the Taoiseach agree that the archives for this period should be revisited? Questions have been raised before on this matter. Records on the civil war are not assembled in such as way as to answer scholarly questions either about individuals, groups or parts of the country. That is a great pity. Even though I was a Minister with responsibility for such archives, my attempts to recover records on my father's activities in north Cork, both during the war of independence and the civil war, were only partially successful. I have a feeling there has been a movement away from this period.

If we are to have good social and constitutional histories covering the period to 2016, we will need to examine the state of such records. Some records held in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform cover a 15 or 20-year period during which people applied for pensions from which they were excluded in the early years of the State. The lives of a whole series of people are effectively being wiped out because such files are inaccessible. Since there is nobody now alive from that period, it is worth revisiting the era in view of the forthcoming anniversaries.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have no difficulty with the Deputy's suggestion which is a good one. The sensitivities of the past are over. As other Members have said, some records are held in the military archives. They are not complete because many people at the time for one reason or another declined to take medals or pensions. They did that out of their sense of honour.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Their reasons are interesting.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes. There may be other files in the archives or in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I will raise the issue, particularly as we have just finished work on the pre Act of Union laws and will rescind about 2,000 such laws under the new Bill. It has been an interesting project, relating to laws before 1800. Deputy Michael Higgins is asking for a more current appraisal. I will examine it and see what is possible. I take the point the Deputy has made with regard to the records possibly being taken together from whatever source.