Joanna Tuffy (Labour)

I thank the Irish Genealogical Society for providing information to the Labour Party to help us draft this Bill. My contribution relies on much of that information. The legislative basis of this issue was last debated here in 1996-97. The problem that confronted Members then was whether the Genealogical Office was already established in law and needed to be abolished in its old form before being included in the new legislation or whether the new legislation had to establish the office in law.

During the debate a suggestion was made that a formula be found to get over these sometimes absurd arguments and notions that the Office of the Chief Herald of Ireland is "the oldest office of State" and that the "Chief Herald of Ireland held his prerogative powers personally like his predecessors the Ulster Kings of Arms since 1552", without any basis in fact. The wording adopted by the then Minister, Deputy Michael D. Higgins, and his officials was that "for the avoidance of doubt, the Genealogical Office is a branch of the National Library". This was to incorporate the status quo in section 13 (1).

The Genealogical Society of Ireland strongly holds the view that it was understood when the legislation was adopted that it would be necessary to revisit the issue. The implementation of section 13 in May 2005 was not the way to proceed.

There are problems about the legislative basis for the office before the transfer of various functions to the Irish Republic and the payment of grants to it. The Ministers and Secretaries (Amendment) Act 1939 had, as the principal Act, the Ministers and Secretaries Act 1924, which was enacted by Dáil Éireann to facilitate the allocation of various statutory bodies established by either the UK Parliament, or the earlier Irish Parliament, to the new Departments established by Dáil Éireann. One can well ask whether this was the appropriate legislation to use in 1943. The issue arises as to whether the bodies established by royal charter or letters patent which, for the purposes of the Ministers and Secretaries Act 1924, were deemed to be statutory bodies, covered the office of Ulster King of Arms. There is a strong argument to the effect that it did not.

The functions of the office of Ulster King of Arms were conferred by letters patent to an individual, usually for life, and not to an institution. Nowhere in the 1924 or 1926 Act is the position of the royal prerogative in respect of personal letters patent mentioned for the purposes of including same in the legislative or constitutional framework of the Irish Free State. It is clear, therefore, that the functions and powers of the office of Ulster King of Arms were not capable of being transferred under the 1924 Act and, therefore, likewise under the Ministers and Secretaries (Amendment) Act 1939.

It has been argued extensively that the concept of the royal prerogative did not survive the enactment of the 1922 Constitution and its various amendments and, therefore, because it did not exist it was not possible for it to be transferred or inherited by the 1937 Constitution. There are many more arguments in this regard. The Government of the Irish Free State could have given itself the power to grant arms through the enactment of legislation but that did not happen.

The legislative instruments employed in 1943 to give effect to the transfer of the records and treasures of the office of Ulster King of Arms and the subsequent decision to commence the delivery of heraldic services by the State through the issuance of letters patent claiming various rights, etc., were inappropriately applied by the Government of the day. If that was the case, then legislation should have been enacted.

Some other matters are also covered by the Bill. We should get our house in order in terms of the legislation. Much work is ongoing in regard to a British-Irish protocol on armorial bearings in respect of the mutual recognition of heraldic jurisdiction and the special position of Northern Ireland. If we get this legislation in place we can work on such issues.

In addition, the Bill deals extensively with related issues such as genealogy and vexillology — I hope I have pronounced that correctly — which, as Senator Ryan indicated, is a constituent discipline of heraldry given to the study of flags and emblems. This Bill is breaking new ground by incorporating these important aspects of our heritage in legislation, thereby providing for their protection and structured development.

One of the most important genealogical matters dealt with in the Bill is the proposal for a special heritage category for the first census of population of the Irish Free State. I looked up some census information this year. We all get to the stage where we want to find out about our identity and from where we come, etc. During the summer I did some research on the occurrence of the name "Tuffy" in counties Sligo, Mayo, etc. I realised that much documentation is unavailable, although a great deal of information is available on the Internet. Various bodies do good work in terms of the provision of this information for people who wish to research their Irish heritage.

The 1926 census returns are an invaluable source for genealogy and social history covering the most turbulent period in modern Irish history. The new Irish Free State held its first census in 1926 at the height of economic depression and emigration. This is a most important period of our history. The 1926 census was closed to public view for 100 years by the Statistics Act 1993, in line with all other census returns taken since 1926. An amendment to the legislation reduced the period of closure to 70 years. The Bill aims to keep the 100 year rule for census returns generally, but to make an exception for the 1926 census. The proposal is to afford the 1926 census a special heritage category and reduce its closure period to 80 years for research purposes to bridge this gap in our records covering this most important period in our nation's history, from 1911 to 1926.

The United States of America has its 1930 census returns available for research on-line and, similarly, the Canadian province of Newfoundland, which is possibly the most Irish place outside Ireland, has its 1949 census returns open to research. It is most important that this measure would be taken on board by the Government. I commend the Bill to the House.