Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I join speakers on all sides of the House in wishing the Minister, Deputy Heather Humphreys, well in progressing her plans for a programme of commemorative events to mark the centenary of 1916. Without wishing to be divisive - I recognise that we all have our individual views on these issues - I note the emergence of a common theme among speakers on this side of the Chamber in our emphasis on the 1916 Rising as a seminal event in Irish history. Of course, it is not just about the event itself but also its legacy. What was done in 1916 led to the achievement of partial independence for the island of Ireland.
It is a question of celebrating and commemorating. We commemorate the event itself, which was a blood sacrifice by a group of very brave and courageous people - they must be considered such by any stretch of the imagination - who went into battle knowing defeat was inevitable and their own lives would be forfeited. They acted from the very highest of motives, namely, to secure for the people of this country a free and independent existence detached from the then all-powerful British Empire. I support Senator Comiskey's comments regarding Seán Mac Diarmada's cottage in Kiltyclogher, County Leitrim. I have visited it on many occasions over the years for various events. Just as the events in Dublin at Easter 1916 were not universally accepted by people in this city, there were mixed views about Mac Diarmada in County Leitrim. I remember hearing that a memorial service that was held in the church in Kiltyclogher some time after his execution was very poorly attended. This gives an indication of the mood of people at that time. Ireland was involved in a world war and its people were, in the main, supportive of the war effort on the basis that it was genuinely in the interests of Irish freedom. In that climate, the actions of the revolutionaries were not universally accepted. The stories are plentiful about prisoners being spat on by ordinary people as they were brought through the streets of Dublin. Many of these people had sons, brothers and other family members fighting for Irish freedom, as they saw it, on the Continent.
This leads me to the element of revisionism that has crept into this debate in recent months. I was particularly taken by the view articulated by the former Taoiseach, John Bruton, that the Rising should not have happened at all. After all, he argues, we already had secured Home Rule. In fact, we had not secured Home Rule but only a diluted form of it. A 32 county arrangement was not on offer. The original achievement of the Irish Parliamentary Party from 1910 to 1912 in securing a commitment to Home Rule for the 32 counties of Ireland was remarkable and should be applauded. However, this was not what emerged following the obfuscation and conspiracies that were going on within the British Cabinet at that time. Many members of that Cabinet were anti-Irish and anti-Nationalist and they pulled the wool over the eyes of John Redmond.
The Home Rule proposal that was presented to the Irish people in the middle of the war was a diluted, partitionist arrangement from which the North was to be allowed to secede. We were not even talking about the Six Counties at this point but the whole nine counties of Ulster. When that was no longer on the cards, the Unionists fought tooth and nail to ensure Fermanagh and Tyrone were included, even though they should, in the normal course of events, have been incorporated into an independent Ireland.
I say all of this in order to present a counter view to all that we have been hearing about the futility of what was done in 1916. The Rising was not a futile act but a brave act on behalf of people who believed in their cause. It is sometimes forgotten that the reason the rebels in the GPO surrendered, the reason Pádraig Pearse went out, accompanied by a woman, to hand over the terms of surrender, was that neither he nor his colleagues wished to inflict any more loss of innocent life on Dublin. They stepped down not because they realised they would not be able to defeat the British forces - the gunboat Helga was on the quays at this stage, shelling half of Dublin into smithereens - but because they wanted to protect innocent life. That does not sound like the actions of people who had a casual approach to the value of life. That is the vision we are commemorating.
Like Senator Craughwell, I have tremendous pride in our Defence Forces. I had an uncle who served in the forces and I have always defended their record. As a colleague of mine said earlier when we were chatting about this issue, it is useful to overlay contemporary events with the events of 1916. We cannot deny the military dimension. The Rising was, after all, a military act and an act of rebellion against the British Empire. In commemorating what happened, we must acknowledge that reality. In my home county of Leitrim we have a particular interest in events commemorating 1916. As well as Seán Mac Diarmada, there is another Leitrim connection in the person of Thomas MacDonagh, whose people were from Carrigallen on the Cavan-Leitrim border. I am sure they and their colleagues, including Pádraig Pearse, would have relished the delicious irony that today the Irish Defence Forces have an international reputation for bringing peace to the world. That to me is the ultimate legacy of 1916.