This was brought to my attention through correspondence which was probably also sent to Deputy Bruton's office. I looked back at the position at that time and at the issues and arguments. Legislation was tightly drafted on some of these issues while some of those I thought would have been included should have remained so. There is a case history which answers the Deputy's question, as was laid out by the then Taoiseach, Dr. Garret FitzGerald. I offer my condolences to Dr. FitzGerald and his family on the death of Joan FitzGerald who was held in the highest regard by all Members who attended the funeral services yesterday and today.
Dr. FitzGerald explained what happened and said one of the first thoughts he had on the money was that it might be used to assist ex-servicemen in the Irish Army. However, he felt there would have been a difficulty in convincing the British trustees and Treasury that the money should be transferred from British ex-servicemen to Irish ex-servicemen. He said that one might ask if it could not have been provided for both – he said it could have been, and that might have been the answer. However, Dr. FitzGerald said that at the time people were agitating in an extremely unpleasant way against the commemoration of the dead of the two world wars. It was becoming an area of contention and there should have been none. Dr. FitzGerald was speaking about the introduction of the legislation in the House after he had left office. He went on to explain why this happened and he was taking responsibility for it. He obviously took part in negotiations and he dealt with Lord Killanin. It was an issue of great contention and he had great difficulty dealing with it. That is why the legislation was drafted in that way.
Thankfully we are now in slightly different times and people are not agitating in the same manner – the allocation was passed in the House last year. Money was also allocated to the peace park in Messines. However, at that time, people vociferously canvassed and lobbied against this.