David Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

This is the third time I have had the pleasure of speaking on this kind of Bill. I remember the time when Martin Mansergh was Minister of State. I thank those Ministers who precede the present Minister. The Irish Manuscripts Commission did very valuable work in preparing the volumes concerning these defunct statutes. I think we owe a great debt to them and also to the National Library and the Oireachtas Library, which have done tremendous work. I pay tribute to the people who went through these statutes, but unlike Senator Sheahan, I think it would have been a fascinating task. These old laws give one a tremendous feeling of the history of the country. Sometimes from our current perspective they appear laughable, but they were far from laughable at the time. The Minister of State is quite correct when he said that much material remains on the Statute Book simply because of inertia. This material is obsolete and has long since served its purpose. It is out of date and is cluttering everything up, so it is good to get rid of it. It will continue to clutter up the Statute Book until it is removed. This is done not just as a kind of tidying-up exercise but to enhance public accessibility to relevant and vibrant statute law.

Among the issues dealt with are restrictions on exports. I found that interesting, because that law hampered this country during its association with the neighbouring island, which, in a very mean-minded way, restricted Irish trade. People such as Molyneux, Jonathan Swift and Bishop Berkeley were all to the fore in resisting it. There is a reflection of religious wars, the proclamation of James II, followed by restrictions on Catholics. There were also a number of instruments that specify persons. It is astonishing that there should be statutes dealing with individual citizens - so-and-so who was a victim of robbery, or somebody who was impeached and a reward was offered for them. I have picked out a number of things of particular interest. We could spend the whole afternoon on this fascinating work - I see the Leader is nodding his head in agreement. On 26 June 1663 there was a proclamation ordering the burning by the common hangman of a book about the "murthers" and massacres committed on the Irish. That is a very interesting example of censorship. There were murders and massacres committed against the Irish and the Government was intent on preventing any dissemination of these ideas. Something we could do with, and that I think should not be repealed - I wonder if I should table an amendment providing that it be retained - is a proclamation ordering the apprehension of street robbers in Dublin. Why are we getting rid of that? Street robbers should be apprehended. I do not see any reason for getting rid of that at all. On 3 February 1755, there was an order for the surveying of pavements in the city of Dublin. Was that ever more relevant? Have a look at Parnell Street, which would benefit from a survey of the pavements. Do we have the opportunity of tabling amendments?