Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 25 Oct 1995

Vol. 457 No. 5

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - British Apology for Great Famine.

Bertie Ahern

Question:

4 Mr. B. Ahern asked the Taoiseach the plans, if any, he has to seek on behalf of the people of Ireland a solemn expression of regret for the effects of the Famine on the Irish people in view of the fact that Queen Elizabeth will next month sign a New Zealand Act of Parliament in which the Crown expresses to the Maori people its profound regret and apologises unreservedly for the loss of lives, and the devastation of property and social life, in relation to acts that happened up to 150 years ago or more. [15456/95]

There are no such plans. I do not believe it would serve any useful purpose to proceed as suggested by the Deputy in his question, as the Government's Famine commemoration programme I launched earlier this year is the most appropriate way of commemorating the greatest tragedy of modern Irish history. As Members will be aware, we had a full day's discussion on the Government's programme on Thursday week. I should like to thank Deputy Ahern for his kind remarks on that occasion and the House generally. It was a most interesting, fulfilling debate all round, of which we should have more.

I might restate those sentiments in that the strong support from this side of the House was for the work undertaken initially by Deputy Tom Kitt and carried through successfully by the Minister of State, Deputy Avril Doyle, on the Government's Famine commemoration programme in which the nation overall is participating. There has been some criticism since I made those remarks in the debate, to the effect that nobody who had lived through that horrific period would still be living. While being aware that the Queen's apology to the Maoris, in her capacity as monarch of that country, will be given on the advice of the New Zealand Government, will the Minister of State agree that a little humility on the part of the British Administration in their attitude to this country — not very evident over recent months — would greatly assist the present process of reconciliation? As the Minister will be aware from what I said in our earlier debate on the Great Famine, I was thinking more along the lines of the British expressing their sympathy. Since the Maoris will receive the Queen's sympathy, in her capacity as monarch of that country, would the Minister of State consider such would not appear to be beyond the bounds of the British Administration in our case?

Even though I am not sure what relevance it has to our position in commemorating the Great Famine, I should point out that neither the Queen, Crown nor British Government is apologising to the Maoris. I have a note from the Deputy High Commissioner for New Zealand in London before me confirming that the relevant New Zealand Act of Parliament, which awaits the signature of the Crown, will restore some land to the Maoris and deals with this issue. The New Zealand Government is apologising to the Maoris, not the Crown or the British Administration. That is really an extraneous issue which I should place on the record.

Frankly, as a nation, I consider we have too much self-respect and dignity to demand an apology, or an expression of sympathy or regret; to do so would merely devalue the issue. The greatest way we can commemorate the lost generation of the Famine is not by proceeeding, as Deputy Ahern suggests, but rather to ensure that full reconciliation, between both traditions, is achieved within all parts of this island. After all, we are an independent, sovereign State.

Ironically, the great tragedy of the Famine has speeded up our separateness from Britain and our continued, firm commitment to self-determination. We have taken our place among the nations of the world, we sit around the European table, as full and equal members with the other 14 members states. I do not consider the dignity of this nation should be put into question by asking or demanding any such apology or expression of sympathy. The facts speak for themselves. We will commemorate the horrors of our Famine, remember the tragedy of those who died, and those who had to leave our shores, in a dignified manner. We will tell the story as it was without any sanitisation; the facts will speak for themselves.

The Minister of State will be aware that the Irish community in the United States of America, in great numbers, are also commemorating the Famine and taking an extraordinary interest in our commemorations. I am very interested in the debate there. I assume the Minister saw the headlines on this issue in American papers — it received a fair amount of coverage here, not always agreeing with what was stated in this House. If the Minister of State has not seen them, I can furnish her with cuttings of such articles.

I could quote much of what was said in the papers, not always constructive.

It was a criticism of the overall debate rather than anything I or any other Member said. Would the Minister of State consider it fitting, during this commemorative period, to speak on behalf of Irish people at home and abroad, who seek some recognition of what they believe to have been a grave historical wrong, which is the point being put forward across the United States and in Australia on the part of the Irish communities there joining us in commemorating those events? Will she agree that is not an unreasonable request?

That is a slightly different point, although I am at one with what the Deputy said. As chairperson of the Government's Great Famine commemorative committee, I will speak out quite clearly about the great historic wrong, about the hopelessly inadequate response of the alien Administration of the time to the failure of the potato crop which resulted in starvation in the midst of plenty. There need have been no famine, it was not the lack of potatoes but rather the lack of substitute food and of an adequate response on the part of the alien authorities at the time which resulted in the starvation, famine, destitution and emigration. I have no difficulty in stating that as it was. Neither have a I any difficulty in stating that the alien Administration at the time was physically and psychologically removed from our people and did not respond — with the wisdom of hindsight 150 years later — as we would have wished today. That will be stated; the Taoiseach has said it. I have said it, Members on all sides of this House have made that fact quite clear but that is not quite what Deputy Ahern is asking today. I will not go down the road, cap in hand, representing this nation, with any lack of respect, demanding an apology from anyone. The facts will speak for themselves. As chairperson of the Government's Famine commemoration committee, I will be delighted to represent the views of the overall global Irishness which resulted in large measure from the emigration that began and continued post-Famine. I will express their views, concerns, regret, anger and resentment but, as a sovereign nation with self respect, we will not go cap in hand requesting any such apology.

(Interruptions.)

As requested by the Irish community worldwide, the Minister of State should represent them with great confidence, seeking recognition of the injustice occasioned by a grave, historic act. Would she agree that, in the course of its deliberations, her committee should recognise and reflect what the communities in Irish-America and Irish-Australia are saying, thus representing our traditions and putting forward our views, as we on this side of the House feel obliged to do? Will the Minister make this point forcefully, whenever and wherever she can, particularly to the British Administration?

How many opportunities will the Minister have in the immediate future to underline the need for greater understanding among the British public, and the Irish abroad, of the great suffering experienced by Irish people during the Famine? It is one thing to make a statement at home on the suffering that followed the Famine but it is quite another to travel abroad to make a similar statement. How many opportunities will the Minister have to make this point overseas in the coming months?

I expect to have several opportunities to clearly state the case. There are plans for me to make a three-city tour of Australia next March on this issue.

The Minister should not stay at the Waldorf.

There are also tentative plans for a visit to the UK, particularly Liverpool. This might take the form of an ecumenical service similar to that which took place at Tuam. Those who attended that service will recognise that it was a very suitable commemoration of the tragedy of the Great Famine. There have also been talks of a visit to the US but nothing specific has been organised.

The Government's programme continues officially until the middle of 1997. I expect to have many opportunities, other than those mentioned, to state the view of Irish people at home and abroad on this issue. It can be an extremely healing and helpful part of the present reconciliation process to clearly state the facts. It is only by stating those facts that we can move forward, that the healing process can begin and that we can begin to recognise the sins of commission and omission of decades and centuries of injustice. That is the way we should best commemorate the lost generations of the Famine and I have no difficulty in doing so on behalf of the Irish people.

The time has come to deal with questions nominated for priority.

I ask that my questions on western development be carried over.

I ask that Question No. 6, in my name, be resubmitted.

I hope the Deputies' requests will be acceded to.

Top
Share