Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yesterday at approximately 6 a.m. a house of very significant historical importance in my constituency was bulldozed to the ground. The house to which I refer is No. 40 Herbert Park in Ballsbridge, Dublin 4. The house is of significant historical importance because Michael The O'Rahilly, his wife Nancy and their six children lived there. People aware of Irish history will know that The O'Rahilly was one of the significant leaders of the 1916 Rising. In fact, he was the only leader of the Rising to be killed in battle. He died coming from the GPO heading towards a factory on what is now Parnell Street.

The act of bulldozing the building was completely against the historical interests of the people of Dublin and Ireland. Members of Dublin City Council had commenced a process to see whether this building could be put on the protected structures list kept by the council. That process had commenced but the building had not yet been put on said list. The council and councillors were in the process of conducting an appraisal of the building to see whether it merited inclusion on the list of protected structures. This was a building of such significant historical importance that it would have been added to the list. The reason it is of such historical importance is not simply because it was the house in which The O'Rahilly and his family lived but also because some of the most significant meetings leading up to the Easter Rising took place there. This was the house in which people such as Éamon de Valera, Pádraig Pearse and James Connolly met The O'Rahilly for the purpose of planning the rising which took place in Easter 1916. It is hugely regrettable that this demolition has happened. I ask the Minister of State to outline the Government's proposals to ensure that buildings such as this, which exist throughout the country, are protected because of their historical importance.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In an act of wanton vandalism on our revolutionary history, No. 40 Herbert Park, home of the 1916 leader, The O'Rahilly was demolished yesterday. The house was built in 1907 and The O'Rahilly, the only 1916 leader to die in battle, was the first occupant of the property. His widow Nancy lived here until her death in the 1960s. In 1913 The O'Rahilly became one of the founding members of the Irish Volunteers. He was in charge of the first major arming of Irish Volunteers from a consignment of German rifles and ammunition that were smuggled into Howth aboard the Asgard. He joined the garrison of the GPO and was killed on 28 April 1916 while leading a charge down Moore Street. The battlefield on Moore Street was also subject to unscrupulous developers who wanted to ignore our historical and cultural heritage. The O'Rahilly literally fought and died by Pearse's side.

While No. 40 Herbert Park is not significant in an architectural sense, it is immensely important in an historical and cultural sense. The Asgardgun-running operation was planned here and all of the signatories of the Proclamation met here. As Deputy O'Callaghan mentioned, Dublin City Council unanimously passed a Sinn Féin motion to protect this property and like many, I was shocked and saddened to see it levelled to the ground yesterday. The arrogance of the developer to completely ignore the democratic will of the people is a sad reflection on the systemic greed of some developers today. Dublin City Council has announced that it will be carrying out an investigation into the destruction of No. 40 Herbert Park. What assistance will the Department be giving to the council and what are the likely repercussions for the developer?

Peter Burke (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputies O'Callaghan and Ward for raising this very important matter. I appreciate that both Deputies have considerable concerns relating to the demolition of The O'Rahilly's house at 40 Herbert Park, Dublin 4. I understand that permission for such works was granted by An Bord Pleanála on 8 September 2020. The Deputies should be aware that under section 30 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, Ministers and Ministers of State are specifically precluded from exercising any power or control in relation to any particular case with which a planning authority or An Bord Pleanála is or may be concerned, except in very specific and extreme circumstances which do not apply in this instance. Therefore, it would be inappropriate for me as Minister of State with responsibility for planning matters to comment on the merits or otherwise of the board's decision to grant permission for the demolition works in question or to express an opinion as to whether the works should have been progressed or not. Under planning legislation the decision as to whether to grant planning permission on an application, with or without conditions, is a matter for the relevant planning authority or An Bord Pleanála on appeal. In making decisions on planning applications a planning authority, or An Bord Pleanála on appeal, is required to have regard to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area, the provisions of the development plan, any submissions or observations received and relevant ministerial or Government policies, including any guidelines issued by the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government. An Bord Pleanála, in determining an appeal, decides the matter as if the application had been made to it in the first instance.

Under section 50 of the 2000 Act, anyone may apply to the High Court seeking a judicial review of any decision made by a planning authority or An Bord Pleanála where the person believes the validity of the decision may be in question. The application must be made within eight weeks of the authority of An Bord Pleanála's decision, which in this case has not yet lapsed. It is a matter for the relevant planning authority, in this case Dublin City Council, to decide on any further action it may wish to take.

With regard to the safeguards for protected structures, Part IV of the Planning and Development Act 2000 gives primary responsibility to local authorities to identify and protect architectural heritage by including particular structures on the record of protected structures, RPS. Inclusion on the RPS places a duty of care on the owners and occupiers of protected structures and also gives planning authorities powers to deal with any development proposals affecting them. I understand the building in question was not included on the current RPS of Dublin City Council.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I appreciate he is limited in what he can do because of the decision of An Bord Pleanála. However, we need to look beyond the planning decision that lies in the background of this demolition. The more important issue is that we, as a country, need to recognise the importance of our revolutionary period and the influence that revolutionary period has, not only on this country, but on our international reputation. I think we undersell ourselves when it comes to recognising the importance of that revolutionary period. It was an inspiration to the colonial world. When we look at countries which gained their independence from colonial powers, very many of them looked to the example set by Ireland during the revolutionary period that we are at present celebrating in the decade of centenaries. We need to recognise that. We need to go around the country and ask local authorities to identify those properties within their jurisdiction that are of historical importance, so we can preserve our vital revolutionary history.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for what was a very complicated and convoluted response, although I am sure it is factually correct. However, I do not think the developer would have had a look at all that kind of stuff before he went in yesterday and bulldozed No. 40 Herbert Park. This was an act of sheer corporate greed, the like of which will destroy Irish history and heritage in this city if it is allowed to go on. The developer had blocked Dublin City Council from visiting the site despite two letters asking to visit it.

The O’Rahilly famously said, when he joined the fight for freedom from foreign occupiers in the GPO, "I have helped to wind up the clock. I might as well hear it strike." Yesterday, the developer wound up the clock of sheer wanton cultural vandalism of No. 40 Herbert Park. If the public condemnation is followed up with political will, then the developer will hear that clock strike. However, if this developer goes unpunished and is not punished in the strongest possible terms, then it will give the green light for more of our historical and cultural heritage to be destroyed. I ask the Minister of State this: for what died the sons of Róisín? Was it for greed?

Peter Burke (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank both Deputies for their responses. As I indicated earlier, it is inappropriate for me, as the Minister of State with responsibility for planning matters, to become involved in or to make any comment on this matter as the law simply precludes me from doing so. The planning authorities and the board are independent statutory bodies under the provisions of the planning Act and, as stated previously, are independent in the performance of their functions. The development works in question are a matter for the planning applicant concerned, the relevant local authority and the board, as appropriate, and I have no role in the matter.

The Deputies will also be aware that the record of protected structures is a reserved function of the local authority system and is primarily its responsibility. This matter will obviously be an enforcement issue for Dublin City Council and is wholly under its remit.