Seanad debates

Tuesday, 12 December 2006

Genealogy and Heraldry Bill 2006: Second Stage

 

4:00 pm

Photo of John O'DonoghueJohn O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Fianna Fail)

There are not significant issues of public interest that would justify the parliamentary time and administrative resources in my Department required to process this Bill.

New legislative measures were put in place on 3 May last year regarding heraldry when sections 12 and 13 of the National Cultural Institutions Act came into effect. These set out what I and my predecessors believed were the appropriate arrangements for the promotion and delivery of heraldic services. While it will take time for those new arrangements to fully settle down I have no reason to speculate on their effectiveness.

The 1997 Act gave the board of the National Library the power to facilitate, encourage, assist and promote the granting and confirming of coats of arms. The Act also declared that the genealogical office was a branch of the National Library and provided that a member of the library's staff would be designated to perform the duty of researching, granting and confirming coats of arms and would use the appellation Chief Herald of Ireland. The board of the National Library established the committee on genealogy and heraldry, provided for in section 13 of the 1997 Act, and designated a staff member to use the appellation Chief Herald. The position had been vacant for two years.

Through the committee on genealogy and heraldry the board has been reviewing issues relating to the granting of arms, including eligibility to apply for grants of arms, the procedures for granting of arms, the wording of grants of arms, etc. The Bill attempts to legislate in considerable detail for matters such as this. Such level of detail is not appropriate to primary legislation. Having entrusted matters of genealogy and heraldry to the board of the National Library, there is no reason the board should not be allowed to deal with such matters as it has been doing since it was established.

There has been speculation in the media — humorous, petulant and otherwise — as to whether the provisions of the legislation provide an adequate basis for the granting of arms by the Chief Herald. If this were the case I would expect, as I indicated in a response to a parliamentary question on 7 November, that the board of the National Library would bring any deficiencies in the legislation to my attention. The board is the statutory body responsible for this particular area and it is best placed to advise me on the appropriateness or otherwise of its statutory framework.

Regarding genealogy, the 1997 Act assigns limited functions to the National Library. A number of statutory bodies have responsibility for the management and delivery of genealogical services. I am not clear as to why a greater role is now envisaged for the National Library in this area rather than any other public body. I do not see the justification for assigning such significant responsibilities to the National Library. It would require a considerable level of analysis to see if it would lead to any significant improvement on existing arrangements.

The Bill proposes an elaborate structure for the delivery of heraldic services. I am not convinced of the need for such a structure. There is little merit in the proposal and it is difficult to justify the additional expenditure. Heraldry is a small specialised area and I am not clear why an elaborate administrative structure might be needed to deal with it. To create a number of additional public posts in this area, particularly posts that would require a degree of expertise that may not exist, is difficult to justify. I am not in a position to sanction the creation of such posts given the current restrictions on staffing in the public service.

It is proposed that the posts of Chief Herald and Deputy Chief Herald be created within the National Library but with Civil Service status. This ignores the fact that since the establishment of the board of the National Library on 3 May 2005 professional staff ceased to be civil servants and became employees of the board. The Bill seems to suggest a dual structure where a Chief Herald, who was a civil servant, would report simultaneously to the board of the library and to a Minister of the Government. It is difficult to see how it would work in practice. Even chief heralds cannot serve two masters. Ní féidir leis an ngobadán an dá thrá a fhreastal.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.