David Norris (Independent)

History does not reveal which part of the globe he originated from, but he ended up in Tangier.

In his speech, the Minister is certainly right about the question of the Gaelic chieftains. This is a very interesting area because it is so full of contradiction and paradox. I have a cousin of some kind who is, or styles himself, theMacGiolla Phádraig. He is certainly the descendent of the last one that was duly elected as chief of that clan. It was done by election. There was a kind of central family stem and from within that, the leader of the family was, more or less, elected. They were pretty grim in the way they did it. There are records in my mother's family of people putting out their own brother's eyes because one could not be an Irish chieftain if one was blind. They made bloody sure they were blind so they could not be elected.

If one looks at the chiefs that are recognised, many of them belonged to the Church of Ireland. I find this fascinating. The MacGiolla Phádraig obviously belonged to the Church of Ireland, while the O'Hara, the O'Grady in Killballyowen and the MacGillycuddy of the Reeks from the Minister's constituency were also members. Interestingly, the two most wonderful and romantic titles, and, essentially, it is all about romance, are the O'Conor Don and the MacDermott, Prince of Coolavin. Since it is now said that one can make oneself an Irish chief, I think I might do so. Senator Ross made himself an auctioneer on "The Late Late Show". I propose to award myself a title, which I hope will be recognised and observed by my colleagues in Seanad Éireann.

There is, however, a certain seriousness about the matter, even though it is full of fantasy, fun, vexillology and what not. There is a legal problem about the granting of coats of arms. If, as a republic, we decided to abolish the whole thing, this would have been one situation, but we did not. We then purported to grant arms to people such as President Kennedy, a former President of the US, for the younger members of the House who do not recall that period of history. President Robinson and the current President McAleese have also been granted coats of arms.

If one looks inside the Oak Room in the Mansion House in Dublin, one can see all kinds of coats of arms, some of which are the real coats of arms of the ancient Irish or Norman families. Some of them are completely concocted. It is very interesting to see them. It may well be that many of these, especially the grants made to distinguished visiting persons, are challengeable internationally. We can call them what we like. The biggest pedants on this matter are the British. We inherited the system from them in 1943 — the Ulster King of Arms and so on. Nobody was appointed for quite a long time, which creates a gap. One is in a situation where one must abolish and then recreate. This Bill would be a very good point.

I thought the Minister was very dismissive about the need for these kinds of records. I do not think it is appropriate just to have it as a kind of appendage in the National Library that can be dismissed. I am not denigrating the National Library in this. Serious historical and scholarly work can be done on coats of arms which reveals interesting things.

Even though my surname is English, my mother was a descendant of a very old Gaelic Irish family. I was unearthed because of a more distinguished uncle, who is deceased, by people who asked if there were any relatives and asked to go to the Fitzpatrick Clan rally. I love and adore any kind of hokum like that. I attended the rally and poor old Denys in Key West in Florida, who was aged 101 at that stage, sent over a message as the MacGiolla Phádraig.

There were a couple of very interesting lectures, one of which was about the crest which features a green dragon and a lion rampant. The lecturer on this subject indicated that at various times, the positions and dimensions of these two animals changed. One could tell the temperature of Irish political life as far as the Gaelic nation was concerned by the relative size and aggressiveness of the two animals, which is very interesting. The items featured in the coats of arms are often indicators of the family business and connections. I suppose trade would have been more or less excluded. I think we in Ireland were much less coy about accepting trade.

There is a great deal of interest in this and for this reason and no other, it would be very important to consider something such as Senator Ryan's Bill. Having reprimanded the Minister in a jocose way, I would like to say that was the printed script. Senator Ryan would, however, be well advised to accept the generous offer the Minister made when he spoke off the cuff and stated that he would, if the Bill were withdrawn, refer the matter back to the people in the National Library who are genuinely interested in it to see what legislative proposals might come about as a result.

Another matter to which I wish to refer is that of recognition of excellence. Most societies like to recognise excellence and there is nothing very much on offer in Ireland in that regard. Perhaps we should consider reviving the Knights of St. Patrick, among whose number were a number of the old Irish families, including mine. I was pleased, when attending a recent concert at St. Patrick's Hall, to see the flag of my family on display. Reviving the Knights of St. Patrick would be worthwhile. One could not refer to a member of the Most Illustrious Order of St. Patrick as "Sir". In any event, courtesy titles are not supposed to be used — I do not believe Mr. O'Reilly is aware of this fact — in a republic.

I am happy to await the revival of the Gaelic monarchy, if the O'Conor Don can be located. As far as I am aware, such an individual still exists. I am comfortable enough with the Republic but some recognition of merit would be a useful and decent development, and the taking of action in this regard should be considered.

I wish to spar with Senator Ryan regarding the term "vexillogical". Information regarding this could easily have been included in the explanatory memorandum to the Bill. The latter should explain things. Most people do not know what vexillogical means and the majority cannot even pronounce it. I am going to be blazingly honest and state that if the word "vexillogical" had been presented to me on an otherwise blank sheet of paper, I would have been hard put to guess at its meaning. However, I worked out what it means from the context in which it is used. As a member of the universal and infallible church which he claims as his own, I have no doubt that Senator Ryan is, as he informed the House, again correct with regard to his definition of "vexillogical". However, that excludes the matter of courtesy. One would have thought that the latter would have been appropriate in a Bill that deals with heraldry. As a courtesy to plain, honest, decent, ordinary citizens not yet ennobled by the State, it might have been useful to provide us with a definition of the term.

I wish Senator Ryan well with the Bill. Outside of the fun we are having, there is something to be said for regularising the position. Even if one does not believe in it or is not interested in the romance — I described it as hokum — or the history and the important historical elements involved, one must consider the tourism aspect. The Yanks are obsessed with their ancestry and we can fleece them for the privilege of discovering it, if we have at our disposal the correct machinery. I am all in favour of the latter. It is important that we do not make prats of ourselves by handing out coats of arms that could, in the absence of a proper legislative basis, be challenged by our cousins across the water.

I exaggerated the amount of time the Minister spent discussing the Bill. I estimate that less than 25% of his contribution was devoted to the legislation, which he dismissed. The Minster spent his time, as usual, engaging in dreary self-congratulation regarding what has been done for the National Library — I accept his bona fides in this regard — and other cultural institutions. He also highlighted his interest in the Abbey Theatre. We will spend another day debating that matter because I have tabled a motion in respect of the Abbey. We should move the theatre not to the docklands but to O'Connell Street, where it belongs. It is appalling that a small cabal of business people and property speculators can sit on the Carlton site and blow a raspberry at the Government and the people.

Everybody knows that if, sadly, the Abbey Theatre cannot remain on its historic site at Abbey Street, where it should be located, it most certainly not act as an anchor in a commercial development and as a little piece of the jigsaw that is the financial services centre. The Abbey should be for the people of Ireland and it should be located on the main thoroughfare of the capital city. As a national cultural institution, the theatre should be used to lift the northern axis of our principal thoroughfare out of the oblivion and mire of chip shops and knicker sale rooms into which it has sunk.

Since the Minister opened the debate on this matter, I am glad to state that I have a motion in respect of it on the Order Paper. I will be seeking that he come before the House to explain why the Abbey Theatre should not be located in O'Connell Street. While we are at it, perhaps we could arrange some small but significant tribute to Daniel O'Connell. I heard a radio interview the other day in which the Minister, or one of his colleagues in Government, referred to digging up the Manchester Martyrs. Why is it only the violent tradition of Ireland that is celebrated?