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

Question 1: To ask the Taoiseach the files released recently by his Department under the National Archives Act 1986; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48394/09]

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 the year 1979; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48398/09]

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, 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 the year 1979; the number 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. [1279/10]

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

Question 4: To ask the Taoiseach the number of files from his Department released under the National Archives Act; the number withheld regarding the year 1979; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3458/10]

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 4, 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. As files are processed for release each year, it is normal that some are certified by the appropriate officials for retention on the grounds set forth in the Act. Some 805 files, or file parts, were transferred to the National Archives to be released for public inspection on 1 January 2010. Five files were withheld.

Of the five files withheld, four were withheld under sections 8(4)(b) and 8(4)(c) and one was withheld under sections 8(4)(a), 8(4)(b) and 8(4)(c). Files can be withheld under section 8(4)(a) on public interest grounds. Files can be withheld under section 8(4)(b) if they pertain to information obtained in confidence. Files can be withheld under section 8(4)(c) if their release may cause distress, danger or defamation. In the case of the Northern Ireland files, 86 files were released and no files were withheld in full. Some 56 files were released without any abstractions while 30 files contained documents which were either abstracted or had partial abstractions made on them.

In total, 119 entire documents were held from 23 files and partial abstractions were made on 26 documents from 20 files. Abstractions were made under section 8(4)(a), 8(4)(b) and 8(4)(c). The abstractions related to certain security information, reports of confidential discussions and certain personal information.

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

I remember well 27 August 1979 when the assassination of Lord Mountbatten took place and 18 British soldiers were killed by two IRA landmines at Warrenpoint, County Down. I also recall the arrest of several people involved in the Mullaghmore bomb by Garda James Lohan at Granard later that day.

The situation has moved on greatly in that time and everyone is pleased with developments over the past number of years. Is the Taoiseach concerned, however, about the resurrection of dissident republicans? The bomb in Newry yesterday was potentially catastrophic for the ongoing peace discussions on the Hillsborough Castle Agreement. I have raised this matter with the Taoiseach over the past several months. Is he happy with the level of co-operation that exists between the Garda and the PSNI, which I understand is at a very high level? Has he been briefed on the extent of recruitment of young and vulnerable males, in particular, in this jurisdiction to join the dissident republican movement? Is he in possession of information from the security and intelligence forces that will allow the Garda and the PSNI to work together to put an end to this?

I note in 1979 that the then British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, contemplated sanctions against Irish people living in Britain, such as withdrawing their opportunity to vote in British elections, if there was not greater co-operation between the security forces. In the end, they were never proceeded with but, given that this was considered over 30 years ago, does the Taoiseach have a view on the use of Irish passports in an assassination in the United Arab Emirates a week ago? Has the Taoiseach been fully briefed by the Minister for Foreign Affairs? Is the Minister happy that the Israeli Government was not involved in this? Has the Taoiseach been briefed on the ongoing security measures that can be taken for protecting passports?

I must add for the benefit of the Minister for Transport, Deputy Noel Dempsey, who is sitting next to the Taoiseach that this does arise in a question on the National Archives. We learn lessons from the past, as I am sure he does too.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A Cheann Comhairle, as the questions relate to the National Archives Act, I do not have any supplementary material on issues other than that. That said, the bomb that went off in Newry must be condemned out of hand. The security co-operation between the Garda and the PSNI is at an all-time high. I met with both the PSNI Chief Constable and the Garda Commissioner only yesterday at an aside meeting of the British Irish Parliamentary Assembly plenary session. They both reported on the level of co-operation, which I know from both of them directly is regarded as being at an optimum.

I do not have supplementary information on the other matter raised but the Minister for Foreign Affairs has made the Government's position clear on it.

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

Is the Taoiseach aware of the problem of physical storage space for the National Archives? It should not be a problem considering so much space is available which would be up to standard for housing archival material. They can be then readily available to students, historians or members of the public who are inclined to look at them. The situation is very poor and the archive needs extra space.

What is the position of historic Irish manuscripts held abroad in monasteries and various universities? I understand there are 1,100 authentic Irish manuscripts dating back to the Middle Ages, many of which are beginning to deteriorate in the monasteries and universities where they are held. In the interests of our country it would be appropriate that a full-scale survey is carried out by the National Archives, under the Department of the Taoiseach, so that these can be preserved and retained for future generations of Irish people. For example, the annals of Inis Fallen are held in Oxford and were sent to Kerry for a few weeks a number of years ago. My understanding is that there are 1,100 of these, some of which have been untouched for years and which are starting to disintegrate and deteriorate. In the interests of the country and those who come behind us, the Taoiseach might take an interest in this to see whether a scoping exercise, as they call it these days, can ascertain the scale of this, where the manuscripts are, their condition, and to make arrangements with the authorities in those countries to preserve if not return the manuscripts. I would like to see them in Ireland at the end of the day.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The principal National Archive storage accommodation is located at the headquarters offices at Bishop Street and the Four Courts. It is acknowledged that the National Archives suffer from a long-standing storage challenge on a constrained site. While efforts have been made to accommodate the State records within its Bishop Street premises, the accommodation currently available is unsatisfactory. Under the current economic circumstances, the planned major capital investment to redevelop the entire Bishop Street facility for the National Archives, involving the subsequent closure of its Four Courts storage, is not affordable.

Storage difficulties in the National Archives have been approached from two perspectives. At the instigation of the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism, the OPW has agreed to produce a short to medium-term solution to the storage and accommodation needs of the archive within the Bishop Street complex. The OPW will prepare proposals and has provided off-site storage for some series of records. In addition, the OPW has indicated it will move certain Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food records still in use, mainly relating to the Land Commission, out of Bishop Street and this will free up space for the National Archives proper. The administrative staffing of the National Archives, which was admittedly relatively small, has been strengthened by the Department in recent times.

The other matter raised by Deputy Kenny is an interesting point. I will ask the director if anything can be done to assess the location of manuscripts that are relevant to our archival heritage and to see if there are ways they can be repatriated and whether there are ownership issues or issues regarding their continued safekeeping. I will ask whether there is anything we can do to supplement the current owners' care for the documents.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I want to ask the Taoiseach about the 30-year rule. This seems to come from a different age. Will the Taoiseach consider whether the time has come to reduce the 30-year rule regarding the release of papers? In other jurisdictions, such as the UK, it has been reduced to 15 years. My colleague, Deputy Mary Upton, has produced a Private Members' Bill proposing its reduction to 15 years. In these days of freedom of information and electronic communication, the 30-year rule appears to be an anachronism. Considering more contemporary issues, it will be 2028 before papers relating to the Good Friday Agreement will be available and 2038 before papers relating to the Government decision to give a blanket guarantee to the banks are released. By that stage people will be living in space ships. There is a need to re-examine the 30 year rule to ensure material is released on a more contemporary basis.

What provision is being made in regard to electronic records? Given much communication now being conducted by way of e-mail and text is stored electronically, is consideration being given to ensuring electronic records will endure - we do not know whether they will - and what plans are in place to ensure the availability of hard copies of electronically stored papers which can in the course of time be obtained as part of the archives released each year?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not aware of the position on the electronic aspect of the Deputy's question but I will check it out for him. I do not have available to me supplementary information in that regard.

On the 30 year rule in respect of Cabinet records, it is important to point out that the Constitution provides that the confidentiality of discussions and meetings of Government shall be respected in all circumstances except where the High Court determines that disclosures should be made in the interests of the administration of justice by a court or by virtue of an overriding public interest on foot of an application by a tribunal. Also, the Freedom of Information Act protects without time limit records that contain whole or part of a statement made at a meeting of the Government or information that reveals, or from which may be inferred, the substance of such a statement. Other exemption grounds also exist which may apply to Cabinet records. For example, they may contain material which relates to national security, the President or which is still considered to be commercially sensitive.

In considering FOI requests for Cabinet records, decision makers in Departments must consider each record individually to establish whether it is to be released either in full or in part or not at all taking into account all the requirements and exemptions provided for in the legislation. This is what FOI decision makers have always done since the legislation was first introduced and they will continue to do so in the future.

The passage of ten years since FOI became operational is simply an additional consideration which FOI decision makers must factor into the equation when making their decisions. Legislatively, we have provided a means through which certain information can be provided. However, the question of whether the general principle should be revisited in total would require careful consideration.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I understand that the Government is preparing legislation relating to the National Archives. There is a proposal to merge the National Archives of Ireland, the National Library of Ireland and the Irish Manuscripts Commission. Leaving aside whether that is a good or bad idea, or whether Government attention and resources should be devoted to such an extent on the amalgamation of bodies like that, the introduction of that legislation would provide an opportunity to address the issue of the time limit. The Taoiseach has outlined the exemptions in respect of national security, protection of individuals and so on, which obviously could still apply and which, as he indicated in his first reply, were observed in respect of five files and a number of documents abstracted. It would seem there is no good reason there should be a blanket 30 year rule.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As I stated, the FOI legislation takes into account the constitutional position while at the same time providing for a differentiated approach which remains with the FOI decision-makers who, while independent, seek to comply with the legislation. The legislation envisages a differentiated approach in respect of certain if not all information being provided. It is not a question of all information being blanketed for 30 years or one having to wait 30 years in respect of all information.

On the amalgamation of the various cultural institutions, the Government intends to introduce such a Bill. I understand it may well be the end of the year before that legislation will be before the Houses. Obviously, it will present an opportunity to discuss the detail of the Bill. We have indicated that the National Archives of Ireland, the Irish Manuscripts Commission and the National Library of Ireland of Ireland shall be merged into a new national library and archives of Ireland. This merger will require the amendment of the National Archives Act 1986 and the National Cultural Institutions Act 1997.

The Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism proposes to update the relevant archival legislation as part of this process. The new draft legislation deals with three separate existing bodies, abolishes these bodies and establishes a new body. The initial draft of the legislation has been completed and transmitted to the directors of the National Archives of Ireland and the National Library of Ireland, and to the chairman of the Irish Manuscripts Commission for their observation. The matter is in hand and a more detailed debate might best take place in the context of the Bill that is to be brought before the House for consideration.

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

If the release of new material under the 30-year rule was curtailed this year because there was inadequate space to accommodate that fresh material, what is the extent of the withholding? Does it apply to specific Departments? Does it apply as a percentage of material from all Departments or across the various archive field sources? How much material was withheld this year? Has the proposal to create new space now effectively been abandoned because of the issue of affordability? Where will that leave us in ten months' time when another year's tranche of material will be due for release? What measures is the Government taking to address the situation as pointed up by the experience in January of this year?

At present, there is no National Archives Advisory Council, whose term of office concluded in 2007, and no new council was appointed. Is it the responsibility of the Taoiseach or of another Minister to appoint a new National Archives Advisory Council or where stands the Government on such a body? The National Archives of Ireland website, which is still extant, states:

The National Archives Act, 1986 assigned ministerial responsibility for the National Archives to the Taoiseach. However, on 20 January 1993, the National Archives was transferred from the Department of the Taoiseach to the new Department of Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht, which in 1997 was re-named the Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands. On 18 June 2002, the National Archives was transferred to the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism.

That Department would have continued with a substantive area of the previous Departments' designation. However, the website continues to state:

Consequently, most of the functions conferred on the Taoiseach by the National Archives Act are now performed by the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, but the Taoiseach continues to perform certain functions relating to the retention by Departments of Departmental records which are more than 30 years old and the withholding of such records from public inspection.

What are those certain functions? Can the Taoiseach give us a snapshot of his experience in this area in his years as Taoiseach since 2008? Is it his intention to appoint a new National Archives Advisory Council and when does he propose to do so?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Deputy said, the functions retained by the Taoiseach relate to those records older than 30 years, which are retained for public interest or other purposes. That is rightly in the domain of the Taoiseach because these are matters of major public interest with serious issues attaching to them. That is a function retained by the Taoiseach. I have never had reason to use it. I do not recall seeing any papers asking me to publish that which had previously been withheld under the relevant section 8(4)(a ),(b) and(c), or all three paragraphs, in respect of documentation I have. The Deputy has just outlined a statement of fact and I have no recollection of having to execute any functions under that particular remit or responsibility.

As regards the question of the National Archives Advisory Council, that was established to advise the Minister on matters of archives under the 1986 Act. As I said in a previous reply, we now have an amalgamation process involving three different institutions. That legislation is proceeding, and therefore I take it that when this Bill is brought forward we shall have an opportunity to see what type of advisory council for all three composite institutions will emerge in the future. Basically, we are in transition towards a new entity.

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

The Taoiseach did not indicate to me the extent to which material was withheld, consequent on the absence of sufficient space to accommodate the release of material this year. At least this has been reported and I do not note any contradiction in that regard in the Taoiseach's earlier replies. Can he indicate the extent of the withholding, where it applies and whether steps are being taken in the current year to bring forward the release of that material for public access and scrutiny? What steps is the Government taking, having been exposed to the difficulties this year in terms of inadequate space? Could the Taoiseach reconfirm new building arrangements that had previously been signalled are not now to be proceeded with? What is the Government undertaking to do in the coming months to avoid a building heaping up a mound of material year on year into the future?

Finally, in reply to an earlier question, I noted the Taoiseach had indicated that he was not aware of the situation as regards electronic documentation. I have noted that recently in the Seanad, the Minister of State, Deputy Martin Mansergh stated that documents held electronically will not be preserved. I urge the Taoiseach to view electronic documentation as being of equal importance to paper in the current age. It is incumbent on the Taoiseach and the Government to make the required arrangements in order to preserve both. If the Taoiseach is not in a position to comment this afternoon, will he please undertake to come back to each of the party leaders on this particular matter as soon as he has had an opportunity to inform himself?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On the first matter, as I have said I only have information for my Department. Some 805 files were transferred and five were withheld. I have given the details as to why they were withheld. I have indicated in a previous reply that a short to medium-term solution was being provided by the OPW to the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism by way of way of Irish Land Commission records being located out of Bishop Street, which will obviously free up space that was not previously available there for the National Archives people. That is a practical solution without the need for a brand new capital programme to relocate all the records. I have already addressed the physical accommodation issue, that has been acknowledged as being unsatisfactory and about which some short-term proposals have been made by the OPW to alleviate the situation, given that the original proposals are now unaffordable.

In terms of electronic records, I do not have the information the Deputy seeks. However, knowing Deputy Martin Mansergh, I am confident that what he said in the Seanad is correct. If the Deputy wants to table a question to me on that, beyond what the policy issues are, I shall be happy to address it.

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

The Taoiseach is now the acting Minister for Defence. Some 30 years ago, legislation was introduced to allow women to enlist in the Defence Forces. Is there any intention to commemorate the anniversary of the introduction of the Bill to allow women to enlist in the Defence Forces? Can the Taoiseach offer an up-to-date briefing on the numbers in the Defence Forces now and are there plans to increase that number?

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Kenny should submit a parliamentary question.

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

I am simply asking if there is any intention of marking that event. At the time the Government held the view that the EEC should not be enlarged. Things have changed since then and we are pleased about that.

In 1979, the Minister for Economic Planning and Development, Dr. O'Donoghue, proposed that jobs could be provided, as he termed it, to lure women of marriageable age to work on some small Irish islands to prevent the local population dying out. Does the Taoiseach have any comment to make on that proposed policy from a predecessor in the area of economic planning and development?

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are straying somewhat from the issue of the National Archives.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Did he say what they would be working at?

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

The plan was to lure women of marriageable age to work on some small Irish islands to prevent the local population dying out. I realise they have weekends on Clare Island and Turk and Boffin, but is this Government policy at the moment?

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy will definitely have to table a parliamentary question on that matter.

Olwyn Enright (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

To which Department?

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

I am asking because the records were found in the National Archives.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We have found a more sustainable means of maintaining the population on our island communities now, thankfully, and it is as a result of some excellent work by the present incumbent and others who may take credit for it in the intervening period.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Has the Minister, Deputy Ó Cuív, solved the problem himself?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would not go that far. I do not think he would claim such profligacy.

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

I assume it is not Government policy now.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He has been more of an enabler in this area than an active participant. The Deputy should note there will be Department of Defence questions tomorrow.

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We will move on.

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

Will the Taoiseach take the questions or will there be someone new?