Ivana Bacik (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister, Deputy Deenihan, to the House. He is as welcome as always, and he is particularly welcome today on this auspicious date, the 750th anniversary of the first recorded sitting of a Parliament in Ireland, on 18 June 1264. That date is particularly auspicious because it was the first Wednesday after the feast of the Holy Trinity and, interestingly, the 750th anniversary occurs on the same day and religious calendar date.
I welcome my many distinguished visitors in the Gallery and in the Distinguished Visitors' Gallery, who are here specifically for this debate. I apologise that we had to delay the start of the debate due to the workings of Parliament, about which others have spoken. We have distinguished visitors from Trinity College, who have a particular interest in the history of parliamentary democracies, but also members of the Castledermot Historical Society in County Kildare, who are very welcome. However, I should single out one of the guests, Assistant Professor Paul Horan, a colleague of mine in Trinity in the School of Nursing and Midwifery who instigated this commemorative debate today. Paul e-mailed me some time ago, bringing to my attention the fact that this year marked the 750th anniversary of the first parliamentary sitting. I met Paul, we spoke about it, and I did a bit of research into it. I checked the Oireachtas website and found to my surprise that it states:

The earliest known Irish Parliament for which there is a definitive record met on 18 June 1264 at Castledermot in County Kildare.

So it was already noted on the Oireachtas website. I then brought the proposal to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges in this House and got unanimous support. I thank the Leader for arranging the debate on the foot of the CPP's agreement. It is important that we mark important historical dates with commemorative debates such as this.

The Minister has been to the fore in ensuring we have appropriate commemorative ceremonies in this decade of centenaries. While 750 years goes back much further than any of the other events we are marking in this decade, it is important we commemorate it and I thank the Minister for taking the time to be with us.
It is also important to mark particularly important dates in the history of parliamentary democracy in Ireland. In December 2008, shortly after I had been elected for the first time, I arranged an event to commemorate the first election in which women had the right to vote and were elected, the election of December 1918 to which others have referred. It was a very significant election in many ways in Irish history, but was also significant because it was the first time women had the right to vote and a woman was elected to either the British or Irish Parliament. I refer to Constance Markievicz, the first female MP and TD. We marked the election with a photograph in the Dáil Chamber of all the women still alive who had ever been elected to either House of the Oireachtas. For guests who have not seen it, the photograph is on display in the corridor of Leinster House. That was the 90th anniversary of the 1918 election and I very much hope that when we come to the centenary of the election we will mark it as an important date for women as well as in general Irish history.
Although there is no photograph or visual image of the parliamentary gathering 750 years ago, thanks to the great work of Paul Horan we have a good deal of information about it. I am grateful for the recording by the archbishops. There is a record of the meeting on 18 June 1264 in the Liber Niger, the Black Book of Christchurch, which is the register of the key diocesan archives of Dublin and Glendalough from the 12th and 14th centuries, normally on display to the public in the crypt of Christchurch Cathedral in Dublin. We are very fortunate that the record exists because with the destruction of so many ancient State records in the blowing up of the Public Records Office in the Four Courts in June 1922, we lost a great many records of such early gatherings.
An article by Mr. Horan in the current issue of History Irelandprovides the background and a summary of the material in the diocesan register. He writes about his interest in this coming from his family connection to Castledermot in County Kildare. He then describes what the document says about the gathering. I have the record from the archbishop's register. I will not trouble colleagues with the Latin version. The English translation says, "The 1264 June 18 inquisition at the parliament of Tristledermod [as it was then called] Wednesday after the feast of Holy Trinity, 48, Henry III before Sir Richard de La Rochelle, Chief Justice of Ireland." It goes on to list the 32 members present. Others have spoken about these people, who were described as knights and jurors and also included the Bishop of Meath and Treasurer of Ireland, Hugh of Taghmon, the Chancellor, the First Baron of Trim and various others. These were key officials, magnates of State and land-owning knights. It goes without saying, at that time, that they were all men.
The inquisition was about the conduct of Archbishop Fulk de Sandeford and, as Mr. Horan wrote, sought to adjudicate on the matter of the rights of the archbishop as against those of the then Lord of Ireland, Prince Edward, son of Henry III. There was an interesting footnote that at the time Henry III and his son were prisoners of Baron Simon de Montfort, who subsequently summoned the first parliament of elected members in England in December 1264, some months after this first parliamentary sitting in Ireland. Yet again, we beat the English to another important historic date. Not only did we elect the first female MP, but our parliamentary sitting predated the first one in England.
The inquisition was about whether the church, that is the archbishop, or the State, in the form of the English king's representative as Lord of Ireland, could hold courts and exercise justice. It was a classic church-state struggle as to whether the archbishop, in his time "took arbitrarily to the loss and prejudice of the Lord Edward and his liberties". It goes on to say the archbishop had pleaded in his court "all pleas of the crown". It appeared that the archbishop had been taking it on himself to deal with matters that should have been matters of state. This brings us to a very contemporary theme of church-state relations, the state allowing the church to take on many aspects of governance the state should have been taking on.
Many have spoken about the history of the struggle for independence in Ireland, Home Rule and the subsequent events in 1916. Since the emergence of the Irish State in the 20th century we have seen a continuing tendency by the State to allow a different church, the Roman Catholic Church, to take on the mantle of a "shadow welfare state", to run our education, health care and social provision institutions to the great detriment of the people of Ireland. There was also great benefit and I do not underestimate the immense work religious orders did in carrying out the work the State should have done. However, the system lacked the democratic legitimacy and accountability to Parliament that institutions of the State would have. Overall it has meant our Republic has not been as strong as it should have been.
We are remedying this, and the debates we have had in recent years about the Magdalen institutions and mother and baby homes have been very important. It is also very important that our Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, although this can only truly be exercised in a republic where we have genuine separation of church and State, where no single religion is elevated above others. Reading the record of 750 years ago reminds one thatplus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.