Frank Feighan (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister to the House and I welcome the Bill, which is designed to regularise the delivery of heraldic services by the State. Up to the point of passing the National Cultural Institutions Act 1997, these functions were performed by the Office of the Chief Herald of Ireland. When the 1997 Bill was passed, the genealogical office was referred to as a branch of the National Library, although the legislation did not explicitly establish such an office or provide for its functions.

The Council of Irish Genealogical Organisations welcomes the publication of the Bill and acknowledges that it would never have reached this stage without the hard work of Michael Merrigan of the Genealogical Society of Ireland. The Bill proposes some far-reaching changes which, to use the Bill's own wording, would "regularise the delivery of heraldic services by the State".

We have read in the press over the past few weeks about the issue of heraldry in Ireland and the State's role in it through the Office of the Chief Herald, attached to the National Library. While some of the coverage was informative, other stories unfortunately did little to make the case for change and seemed only framed at embarrassing the authorities. I hope the Government's decision not to accept the Bill is not a knee-jerk reaction to unfavourable press statements.

There appears to be differing views on whether the Office of the Chief Herald, also known as the genealogical office — which I am finding difficult to pronounce — was established in such a way as to allow it to grant arms after it was transferred by the British to the State in 1943. Those who question its status to grant arms rely upon the ambiguity surrounding the royal prerogative in Ireland during the years between 1943 and the establishment of the Republic in 1949. However, the whole issue is so complicated that whatever is decided through legislation is unlikely to find favour with all.

Another argument is that there can only be one legitimate authority able to grant arms in Ireland, the State, of which we are all part. Thus, whether legislatively or not, this responsibility is currently exercised on behalf of the State through the Office of the Chief Herald. If it should be that the Chief Herald has no responsibility in this area, does it indicate the Chief Herald is currently presiding over what I may term an "illegal armed operation"?

To again quote the Bill, it also provides for "proper management and co-ordination of the delivery of genealogical services in the State". There has been growth since the early 1980s of the various county-based genealogical indexing centres across both this State and Northern Ireland, and I saw it as part of the tourism infrastructure in Strokestown, County Roscommon, in the lean 1980s when we had no significant tourism infrastructure. It was welcome for so many Canadians, Americans and Australians coming to our county to look up genealogical services. It has been a recognised part of our tourism through the years.

Very recently the Government has reorganised how it operates Irish Genealogy Limited, the company through which it funds the various indexing centres. Senators will recall, for instance, that reference to genealogy, in the guise of the General Register Office, has many times over the years been raised on behalf of those annoyed at the lack of proper access to the historical records held by that office. If this Bill was allowed to progress to the Statute Book, perhaps issues such as the General Register Office might be more adequately addressed.

The most clear improvement the Bill would make to accessing State records would be to suggest an amendment to the Statistics Act 1993, which would have the effect of opening the 1926 census returns to researchers. Currently, the returns for this census are held by the National Archives. Some might baulk at the idea of opening census data before the completion of a hundred-year period since the taking of the census, but neither the Genealogical Society of Ireland nor the Council of Irish Genealogical Organisations is suggesting that census returns should routinely be opened early. The issue could be considered.

In this case the argument relies upon the fact that Ireland's earlier 19th century census records were destroyed in the fire which consumed the Irish public records during the civil war in 1922. Contrary to popular belief, the 1926 census returns do not include anything like the detail required in modern census returns. The information recorded is little different to the minimal amount of detail recorded in the surviving 1901 and 1911 census returns.

Interestingly, those returns were first opened to researchers, without any public objection or demonstration then or since, as early as 1961 on foot of a warrant made by the Minister with responsibility for Justice under the Public Records (Ireland) Act 1867. This was only 50 years after the 1911 census was compiled. It is the general view that this Bill, if not ultimately accepted by the Government, should at least stimulate the various authorities to look in greater detail at the State's delivery of heraldic services and access to the State's genealogical records.

The Bill will provide for the registration and protection of the arms of Ireland such as the presidential standard, flags and the emblems of the Irish Defence Forces and the Garda Síochána. It reminds me that a few years ago, the GAA had to change its emblem which was not protected. The Bill provides a template which the State or recognised vendors could work with for marketing.

The scheme was designed to recognise the enormous contribution made by the Irish diaspora. We are discussing family names. For hundreds of years people were called Malone or O'Fiachain. However, they were so engrossed in scraping out a livelihood during difficult times, they did not have time to research their families' traditions or ancestors.

We must welcome the fact that the Irish diaspora got on very well. For far too long we thought about the people in New York, London, Glasgow and Liverpool. Through good fortune, some did better financially than others. However, they are all part of the Irish diaspora and I remind people of that.

On St. Patrick's Day we spend our time travelling to places deemed to be more successful, such as New York, Chicago and Washington. Ministers go to Singapore and Sidney. I do not want to take away from this. I was very proud to be in Chicago this year. However, it would be nice to see Irish Ministers recognising the diaspora in Glasgow, Liverpool and other places which are not as colourful as Sydney or Washington. We must recognise that people left Ireland in difficult times. They went to the shipyards on the Clyde and the Tyne and worked in coalmines in Nottingham.

We consider the Irish diaspora with great pride and recount how well Irish people did in New York and consider those who are presidents of corporations. I am equally as proud of the people who stand on the terraces in Celtic Park, also known as Paradise, who espouse their love for Ireland. They may not have the finances to examine their ancestry and the Government should recognise that.

The Irish diaspora has millions of people throughout the world, all of whom we should recognise and not only the President of the United States. We should be equally proud of the people who left Ireland during the 1950s and fell on hard times in London and Cricklewood and cherish them as much as those we espouse from platforms on St. Patrick's Day.

President McAleese was involved in the design of her coat of arms. The motto of her coat of arms is "Come to the Edge", from a poem by Christopher Logue which the President quoted in her inaugural address in November 1997. Above the shield is a helmet and the crest on top is an oak tree complete with acorns. It is stated the oak is a reference to the President's association with my county, County Roscommon.

I commend this Bill to the House and support it. It aims to make services more accessible to the ordinary citizens of Ireland by creating a new and less expensive procedure for obtaining a coat of arms for individuals, institutions, clubs and corporate bodies. It will mean sports clubs, schools, societies and others will be able to register a coat of arms and obtain legal protection for their unique heraldic symbols.

I commend Senator Ryan on promoting the Bill. It has created a debate in this House. On many occasions I stated that politicians do not act, they react. I hope the Minister accepts the Bill. If he does not, I hope he reacts favourably by ensuring the provisions in the Bill are provided by the State body or otherwise. I thank all those who helped in this. We can discuss crests and emblems. However, on this occasion we should not forget the diaspora, those who left this country and show great interest in our past. As a State we now show interest in our past.