Joint Committee on Public Petitions and the Ombudsmen debate -
Thursday, 20 Jun 2024

Invincibles Reinterment Campaign: National Graves Association

An Cathaoirleach

I welcome everyone to the meeting. Apologies have been received from Deputy Cormac Devlin. The first item is the approval of the minutes of the private and public meetings on 12 and 13 June 2024. We have already approved them in the virtual private meeting but we must do this for procedural reasons. Are they agreed? Agreed.

I will read some formal notices. I remind members of the constitutional requirements that members must be physically present within the confines of the place in which Parliament has chosen to sit, namely Leinster House, in order to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate where they are not adhering to this constitutional requirement. Therefore, any member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting.

Our next business is No. P00036/23, Invincibles Reinterment Campaign, from the National Graves Association. We are meeting with representatives of the National Graves Association: Mr. Aidan Lambert, petitioner and secretary of the Invincibles Reinterment Committee; and Mr. Seán Whelan, chairman of the National Graves Association.

I will explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practice of the Houses as regards references witnesses may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present or who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts is protected, pursuant to both the Constitution and statute, by absolute privilege. They are again reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity, by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Before we hear from our witnesses, I propose that we publish their opening statements on the committee’s website. Is that agreed? Agreed.

On behalf of the committee, I extend a warm welcome to Mr. Lambert and Mr. Whelan. I suggest that our witnesses make their opening statements of five to ten minutes duration. When the witnesses have finished making their opening statements, we will then have questions and comments from members. Each member will have ten minutes and members may speak more than once. I call on Mr. Lambert to make his opening statement.

Mr. Aidan Lambert

The campaign to have the Invincibles, Joseph Brady, Daniel Curley, Michael Fagan, Thomas Caffrey and Timothy Kelly, exhumed from Kilmainham Gaol and reinterred at Glasnevin cemetery is now in its 11th year. The campaign began when historian, Dr. Shane Kenna, wrote to the Minister of State with responsibility for the Office of Public Works asking the Minister of State to consider reinterring the five men.

Shane received an acknowledgement of his letter on 13 June 2013, stating “once enquiries have been completed in the matter you have raised, you will receive a substantive response”. Shane received no further correspondence on this matter. Shane later approached the National Graves Association, NGA, asking if it would pursue the campaign. The NGA agreed to establish a subcommittee, called the Invincibles Reinterment Committee, after the 1916 centenary celebrations. Dr. Kenna passed away, sadly, in February 2017 after a year-long battle with cancer. The Invincibles Reinterment Committee was established shortly after Shane's passing.

The Invincibles Reinterment Campaign has the backing of 92 relatives of the five men. Twenty-eight councils have given their support to the campaign and have written to the Office of Public Works calling on it to facilitate the exhumation and reinterment process. In addition to the family and council support, we have included the names of 73 TDs, 14 Senators, 30 MLAs and eight MPs in the petition submitted to the committee in August 2023.

The replies received from the Office of Public Works over the duration of the campaign have outlined three main points as to why it is opposed to the reinterment. The following is taken from a letter received by the National Graves Association on 5 May 2021:

(3A) there is no detailed plan showing definitively exactly where individuals were interred and even were it to be precisely located, there would be practical issues involved in positively identifying the remains.

(3B) It is understood from contemporaneous accounts that after execution, the remains were buried in quicklime and this would render an exhumation and positive identification very difficult, if not impossible.

(3C) Kilmainham Gaol is a National Monument and an iconic and much respected site in the context of the national independence struggle in particular. The fact that it is also a grave location adds a significant resonance to its penal and historical significance and there is a strong opposing view to the current campaign that believes that the grave should not be disturbed, and the remains should be left within the confines of the Monument.

In respect of point (3A), the National Graves Association submitted a map to Dublin City Council in 1938 showing the burial location of the Invincibles in Kilmainham Gaol. It was a hand-drawn map in the possession of the NGA that identified the location of ten IRA Volunteers exhumed from Mountjoy Prison in 2001.

In respect of point (3B), the use of quicklime in burials was for sanitary reasons and, contrary to the myth, quicklime slows down the decomposition of human remains and reduces odours rising to the surface which would attract vermin. It does not have any negative effects on bone. This can be verified by the Chief Medical Officer, Professor Mary Horgan, and Tom Condit, the archaeologist who oversaw the exhumation of Thomas Kent and the Mountjoy Ten. The use of quicklime was a standard practice for burials in prison yards and evidence of quicklime was found during the exhumation of 1916 leader Thomas Kent in 2015 and during the excavations of the Mountjoy Ten in 2001. In all these cases full skeletal remains were recovered.

In respect of point (3C), the National Graves Association fully respects the national monument status of Kilmainham Gaol. However, the yard in which the Invincibles are buried is not accessible without permission from OPW staff. There is nothing in the yard to suggest it is a burial site although there is a small plaque some distance from the grave area. The yard has not been included in the standard tours of Kilmainham Gaol for more than a decade.

A suggestion by Senator Gerard Craughwell at the public meeting of the petitions committee on 21 March 2024 to have a monument placed on the grave of the Invincibles as an alternative to reinterment at Glasnevin cemetery has been rejected by the families. His latter comment referring to their possible reinterment at Glasnevin cemetery in which he stated "if the relatives are supportive of this, [then] nobody should ... [stop] it" was very much welcomed by the relatives.

On 17 January 2024, Deputy Patrick Costello asked the following parliamentary question of the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform, "given the recent announcement that exhumations are to take place in Mountjoy Prison to recover the remains of executed prisoners buried on site, if his Department will commence a similar scheme of exhumations to take place at Kilmainham Gaol". The then Minister of State, Deputy Patrick O’Donovan, gave the following answer:

Requests such as this are of a very sensitive and delicate nature and there are a number of matters to consider, both in terms of the significant practicalities involved and the ethical issues. While the general area of the site of graves in Kilmainham is relatively well known, there is no detailed plan showing definitively exactly where individuals were interred and even were it to be precisely located, there would be practical issues involved in positively identifying the remains.

Were the OPW to possess the power to institute such a move (which it does not, given the responsibility of the Minister for Heritage under the National Monuments Acts), it would still likely be of such delicacy as to require being considered at the highest levels of Government.

In light of the ambiguity around which Department should take responsibility for getting any exhumation and reinterment process under way and the comment by the Minister of State, Deputy O’Donovan, that it would “require being considered at the highest levels of Government”, we are requesting that committee direct its correspondence to the Department of the Taoiseach asking that Department to take responsibility for the decisions required. We are also requesting, based on the evidence given, that the committee makes a determination on this petition in advance of the upcoming general election.

The National Graves Association has made available graves in Glasnevin cemetery in the event of a reinterment. Family members have viewed the location and are happy with the location and have agreed that the five men should be reinterred together. There is no State funeral being sought.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Lambert. Before I allow other members to contribute, I wish to comment on a few notes I have made myself. This is another example we have seen on this committee of Departments just ignoring people when they contact them. We must consider that we are 11 years down the road and that Dr. Kenna did not even get a reply back to his correspondence except on only one occasion. Where any petition or anything which has the backing of 92 relatives of the five men, 28 councils in the country, 73 TDs, 14 Senators, 30 MLAs and eight MPs, it is absolutely crazy we are in a situation where we cannot even get answers from a Department. We have said it before and this is another example of each Department trying to pawn it off on to someone else. I congratulate the families on recognising the importance of Kilmainham Gaol and what is there but my opinion - other committee members can speak for themselves - is that when you have that kind of backing and it is so sensitive, it should be done.

I am aware of some of the myths around quicklime do not stack up as far as I am concerned. Other incidents have shown that it does not affect the skeleton of a person. If we are able to tell about dinosaurs 3 million years ago, I cannot imagine it is that hard to identify skeletons belonging to the families. I will come back in with a further contribution later. I call Deputy Ó Snodaigh.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoireach agus leis na haíonna for the presentation. I was present at a presentation made in the audiovisual room a few years back which laid out in no uncertain terms about quicklime. I believe Seán Sherwin was explaining because he was one of those who oversaw the removal of The Forgotten Ten, the condition of the bodies and everything else. He explained much more to me than I had known at that stage. Basically, quicklime was not there to degrade those who are buried but to degrade the land around it, in some ways. Regardless of whether this is quicklime, if there are skeletal remains there, intact bodies or coffins, or whichever way our patriot dead have been buried, and if they are in an inappropriate place, then they should not be there.

If a family, or families in this case, are behind their reinterment the State should actively do it, not only facilitating the wishes of the families but also facilitating the wishes of those who were around at the time. This was not something that anybody in the nationalist republican movement at the time wished for and this State should have done something along the lines that it did in the case of the Forgotten Ten, eventually, in the case of Roger Casement who was brought back to Ireland, and in the case of Thomas Kent. There have been others. We should take the dignified steps and do this.

The map that has been sent in shows the location in Kilmainham where they are, basically facing the gateway. Was there any ground penetrative radar used or that type of thing? Has anybody done that?

Mr. Aidan Lambert

I have spoken to an archaeologist and I sent him a photograph of the yard to get his opinion on it and his advice was that the best way forward would be to do test excavations in maybe three locations around that area to see what it would uncover. The radar would not penetrate through the granite slabs that were there.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

I presume the slabs can come up easily enough. It is not a big yard. Three or four of the slabs could be taken up, as was said, and it could be done without disturbing the ground at all.

Mr. Aidan Lambert

I think the way it works is that you would have to scan the entire yard to see where the variations are under the ground.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

The Israelis might be able to give us some equipment since they are-----

An Cathaoirleach

On the slabs being taken up, ground in Roscrea, in the Sean Ross mother and baby home, was scanned recently. It is possible to scan the ground now that would show where ground would have been disturbed. I know it is a different Department, but it is possible to scan the ground now. The slabs may have to come up but it is possible to scan the ground.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

I know that would be the first thing. I read the then Minister of State, Deputy Patrick O'Donovan's letter from 5 May 2021 to Matt Doyle, the secretary of the National Graves Association. In some ways, it is very funny. It states that "The Office of Public Works clearly understands that any move to undertake an exhumation and re-interral project certainly cannot be undertaken unilaterally [Nobody asked it to do it unilaterally.] and would have to be considered and approved in the first instance as a policy matter, which is outside our remit." This was from the then Minister of State. How can it be outside a Minister of State's remit? It is within their remit.

I do not know whether he is still in that position as there have been a few changes but that is the reason for the petition. You have a Minister of State saying it is nothing to do with them. When I contacted Kilmainham, it said, no, it is the OPW. The OPW says it is the Minister of State but you have a Minister of State saying it is not them. I think the petitioners in this instance are correct. It has to go to the next level, which is the Taoiseach, or at least get the Minister of State to say why it is this not within their remit. I have had questions back and forth with the Minister of State but they are not very forthcoming in terms of movement.

The rest of the latter basically outlined why it should not happen, but the very same reasons were used in the case of the Forgotten Ten, that they would never get all of the families on board. I remember that being said because I was on the centenary committee. It was said that could not happen and it was excuse after excuse. When a policy decision was taken, all of a sudden all of the work that was required, whether it was ground penetrating radar or DNA, was able to be done. It was not done quickly because these things take time, but at least it happened. Now we have a dignified burial for the ten and Thomas Kent thereafter. What extra can be done by us?

Mr. Seán Whelan

The political will to get this done at the level of TDs, Senators and county councillors as well as the MPs and MLAs is clearly there already. What we need to do is push that level of commitment up to the ministerial level and the Taoiseach's office level. As the Deputy said in relation to the Forgotten Ten, that campaign was started in 1936. It got pushed on heavily in the 1980s and into the 1990s by Tess Kearney and then Seán Óg O Ceallacháin came on board as well. He was a member in the 1990s, I believe. Of course, Seán Sherwin became involved and between them all - Tess Kearney, Seán Sherwin and Seán Óg O Ceallacháin, they managed to get it up to the Taoiseach's office and the Taoiseach got involved in it and then everything moved quickly.

If the Office of the Taoiseach can be persuaded to get involved in this, all of the problems that are thrown up by the OPW would be non-existent. We know these bodies can easily be found. We know the quicklime did not disintegrate them. We know that in relation to the Mountjoy martyrs, the ten, these arguments were all put up. They said the bodies could not be identified, they were buried in one grave and we could not separate the bones and, as Seán Sherwin explained two years ago here, not only did they clearly find each body, they found every single bone down to the smallest human bone for each one of them. The whole skeleton structure was reinterred. Not only did the quicklime not degrade the skeletons, it actually preserved some of their clothing, especially leather clothing like boots, belts and I think trousers in one instance.

The arguments against doing this do not stand up if the political will at a senior level is there to get this done. As the Deputy said, the families are entirely behind this. Each one of the five families appointed people to sign documents to authorise the National Graves Association to act on their behalf to have this done. As far as we are aware, due to a number of campaigns since the 1930s until 2001, principally by the National Graves Association but also involving others, the five Invincibles who remain beneath the slabs in Kilmainham Gaol are the only executed patriots still buried in prison grounds of which we know the location. I know it is now a museum, but there is no access there for the families. If a family member was coming over from America or Canada, the family cannot say they will show them their relatives grave because they need to get permission from Kilmainham and this takes time, so it all has to be organised in advance.

If they were buried in a dignified place, like Glasnevin cemetery which is where we and the families want to have them reinterred, any family member could visit at any time. All of these arguments are there but at the end of the day, if the political will that has been shown at county council, TD and Senator levels can be replicated in the Taoiseach's office, this will get done.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

This is probably an unfair question but can the witnesses understand where the opposition is coming from? What is the opposition other than what was in the then Minister of State's letter?

Mr. Seán Whelan

The opposition does not seem to be there other than a lack of will to get something done. There is no real argument that I am aware of that has come up to say it would be wrong to do this. The argument is that there is quicklime and it would be too difficult to find them. Kilmainham Gaol is a museum but it does not acknowledge them anymore in their tours. These are the arguments that are coming up. I am not aware of any arguments being brought up to say it would be wrong to do this. The arguments are that it is impossible to do it, there is this problem with it, it is going to take time, it is within the remit of someone else's office and so on.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Has the director of Kilmainham Gaol ever communicated directly with the National Graves Association or is it just through the OPW?

Mr. Aidan Lambert

It is just through the OPW. We have had no contact with Kilmainham Gaol whatsoever.

Deputy Pat Buckley

I thank the witnesses. I was listening to them both. It is bureaucracy personified and that is being very polite. I am normally relaxed on the more profane language but this is plain black and white. I see where the frustration is coming from. The excuses are not based on fact. They are based on the assumption that we do not know, maybe there are bodies there or maybe there are not but they are not affording the National Graves Association the opportunity to prove it which must be very frustrating.

I see from the OPW the response that it is going to be a unilaterally big problem. When I was a young fella, going back a good few years now, my first experience of exhuming bodies was with my dad. We took 92 nuns out of a convent in Youghal. We never met with any problems. You applied for each person to be exhumed, you paid the fee which was about £60 at the time, each exhumation was done and what was left of those bodies was transferred into the new cemetery. There seems to be a lot of hiding behind diplomacy here, or whatever word you want to use. Maybe "diplomacy" is the wrong word.

Mr. Seán Whelan

Bureaucracy.

Deputy Pat Buckley

Yes, absolutely. Bureaucracy. I cannot understand why it has to go to the Taoiseach. Is there not a role for the county council in this? As they said, and as I am well aware, they have the backing of the county council and others. The fact we have to be in here discussing this is desperate. According to the OPW:

Kilmainham Gaol is a National Monument and an iconic and much respected site in the context of the national independence struggle in particular. The fact that it is also a grave location adds a significant resonance to its penal and historical significance and there is a strong opposing view to the current campaign that believes that the grave should not be disturbed....

Whose idea was that? It was not the witnesses' idea. The OPW is making excuse after excuse. What frustrates me is that there are so many families that are frustrated. The National Graves Association made the point that you cannot just rock up to Kilmainham Gaol at your ease, willy-nilly, and say I am just going in to see one of my relatives. The word I would use is bonkers. Why are they making it so difficult to do the right thing? They mentioned the historical value of this. The witnesses also mentioned it. They are probably the last remaining souls that have not been reinterred where they should rightly be. I had the honour of being at the reinterment of Thomas Kent. It was mind boggling to see that it could be done and I was very proud to be there. As Deputy Ó Snodaigh asked, where do we go from here? I have written down notes already. We have to write to the Taoiseach for permission. Why does it have to go to the Taoiseach? Is there nobody in one of the Departments who actually has the cojones to make this decision? Is there somebody above them who is trying to stop them doing the right thing?

Mr. Seán Whelan

There should be people within the Departments who can make decisions on this, but after 11 years they are not doing it.

Deputy Pat Buckley

Especially when there are managers. We come across it at these committees and in other organisations. People have been appointed into a position of decision making. They have the backing of the families, which is the most important part of it. However, the State has decided that it is not going to do it. I do not know how the witnesses can keep calm because I am very frustrated, and "frustrated" is a very mild word to me. Where do we take it from here? It has been mentioned that we have to write to the Taoiseach but I wonder why we have to do so. Surely there is somebody within the Department who is supposed to be responsible, but then again we do not know which Department is responsible for this because they are all passing the buck again.

Mr. Seán Whelan

We see a lot of parallels between the reinterment of the Mountjoy Ten and the reinterment of the five Invincibles. When we say that getting the Department of the Taoiseach involved with it can make it happen, we do so because that is exactly what happened with the Mountjoy Ten. There were years of campaigning and going back and forth between different Departments, but as soon as the Department of the Taoiseach got involved and gave the instructions to get this done, it got done very quickly.

Deputy Pat Buckley

I suggest that as a committee, we should write to the Taoiseach and seek to get involved here. Surely there has to be a common-sense approach but unfortunately-----

An Cathaoirleach

I propose we do.

Deputy Pat Buckley

Yes. In this "big house", there is a big, hollow gap of common sense. It does not happen too often here and that is really frustrating. I could be banging doors on this and asking why is it so difficult to do the right thing and why is it so extremely difficult and frustrating to assist with doing the right thing. Given that the members of the National Graves Association are volunteers who preserve history, it is very frustrating that there are those in the State who want to fight against them for doing the right thing. I suggest that we write to the Taoiseach, ask him to get involved and use the examples that have been given to us already to see where we can go from there. It is sometimes frustrating that it is so difficult to do the right thing in this country because you are going to get battered for it. I thank the Chair and the witnesses.

An Cathaoirleach

In the OPW's response to Mr. Doyle, it claimed:

Kilmainham Gaol is a national monument and an iconic and much respected site in the context of the national independence struggle in particular. The fact that it is also a grave location adds a significant resonance to its penal and historical significance. There is a strong opposing view to the current campaign that believes the graves should not be disturbed, and the remains should be left within the confines of the Monument.

Who are those with the "opposing view"? In my opinion, the families' views should take precedence here. I will play devil's advocate here. If it is known who holds the "opposing view", is there ongoing communication with them other than through the Department?

Mr. Aidan Lambert

No. There was one letter received from the Kilmainham restoration committee, or what is left of that committee-----

An Cathaoirleach

They were opposing.

Mr. Aidan Lambert

-----and they were opposing.

An Cathaoirleach

Was that the only opposition?

Mr. Aidan Lambert

That was it, yes.

Mr. Seán Whelan

When they say in that letter that there is "strong" opposition to having the graves disturbed, that is a powerful word. It sounds quite emotive in that the graves would be disturbed, but the families want this to happen. We are in contact with 92 family members of these five men and 92 of them want this done.

An Cathaoirleach

Like I said at the start, when you have that many family members and all the support that is there, one opposing view should not stop it. I agree with the other speakers. Why is the OPW there in the first place if it cannot make a decision on something that is under its remit? It should not have to go to the Taoiseach but I join Deputy Buckley in proposing that this committee should write to the Taoiseach to ask him to get directly involved with it if that is what it takes. It is frustrating for us - Deputy Ó Snodaigh would know this from different committees - to hear of one Department trying to pawn it off to another. To have it going on for 11 years at this stage is absolutely crazy. There was no detailed plan of where exactly the individuals were interred. Has the National Graves Association ever made any maps other than what we have here available to the OPW or are there any other maps that would identify-----

Mr. Aidan Lambert

Kilmainham Gaol has that map and has had it for a number of years. I made the point that a rough sketch map identified the location of the Mountjoy Ten. It was in the possession of the National Graves Association, which passed it over to the State, which was able to find the bodies quite easily from that map. This one is sort of more detailed. The south-west corner would be the starting point. That is where the first burial of Joseph Brady was. A number of newspapers and books at that time suggested that was the location.

An Cathaoirleach

How big is that location?

Mr. Aidan Lambert

It is difficult to say. It is not terribly big. Maybe it is twice the size of this room in total.

An Cathaoirleach

It would not take too much to remove the slabs. Would the committee be happy if they were to remove some slabs and do scans or would the committee look for the whole site to be scanned?

Mr. Seán Whelan

We think we know exactly where they are, in that corner of that relatively small yard. The logical thing to do with the scans will be exactly as the Cathaoirleach suggests, start off where we are pretty sure they are and do the scans there. We will probably find them pretty quickly. If the will is there it will be done.

An Cathaoirleach

There is an area in Sean Ross Abbey where we were looking for baby bones. If it is possible to scan these sites - it may not be possible to scan through the granite, as Deputy Ó Snodaigh said - I would imagine we could lift those slabs and put them back exactly as they were and do the scans on the ground. Like other speakers said, the excuse of the lime is absolutely bonkers. It should not be used by any Department or any Minister as an excuse for not moving this forward. Does Deputy Ó Snodaigh wish to come back in?

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

There is a number of things. I have been involved in the restoration of buildings around the city and it is easy enough to remove slabs with the help of an archaeologist. If there is a drainage problem in Kilmainham Gaol and it is fixing another wing, they will move slabs, it will move slabs and bits and pieces and put them back. We just have to do it faithfully. Moving the slabs is not a major problem once it is done with an archaeologist. In the main, this is not the part of the gaol that is visited by the tours, so we will not disturb the tours or the public. It can be done quietly and it can be closed off as has been done. Over the years, the whole gaol has been closed off for films, so we can do that. It should not take that long as was mentioned. The excavation of the remains of children can be done.

The location mentioned is logical, given that there is a gate at the other end. People would not have been buried at the gate, so the logic is to bury people along the wall. The map for the 1916 leaders, who were executed, showed that they were buried along the wall. They were laid out and marked. For all their sins, the British kept records. Years later those exact locations came out. I presume the same was true in Mountjoy, in that people kept records. They did their dirty deeds but strangely enough they kept records. If they said they buried them in that yard, then they are buried in that yard. There was no nowhere else.

I have one other question and forgive my ignorance, but are there other remains in the gaol? I cannot remember. I know people died in the prison and were buried sometimes in Golden Bridge or elsewhere.

Mr. Aidan Lambert

In one of the letters from the OPW, it states that other people were buried there. We do not seem to know how many. It was the same in Mountjoy. The ten were taken out without disturbing the remains of the other people who are buried there .

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

The location was known.

Mr. Aidan Lambert

That is being looked at now. All the bodies have been exhumed from Mountjoy over the last year or so.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

It is usual. If we look at other jurisdictions, they are more than happy to repatriate the Irish dead, the patriotic dead from abroad. The Indians did it with the Connacht Rangers. Casement was reinterred

Mr. Aidan Lambert

Sir Roger Casement.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Yes, Sir Roger Casement. Reginald Dunne was as well. It has been done, so this is not modern. We are way beyond where they were 100 years ago or so, when they were willing to return the remains to families. We now can identify people very quickly through DNA. It is not as if the wrong souls will be buried in the graves that thankfully the national graves has identified and that those families are happy with in Glasnevin.

Not all of the Mountjoy Martyrs are buried in Glasnevin. One was buried in a family plot and that is the right of the families. That might happen here if there are graves the families are happy for them to go in to, but at the very least we need to identify them and anybody else who is buried that gaol if we can at all. People's remains should not be in gaol after they pass. Families should have access to them and we, as a society, should have the facility to honour their memory by doing this when we can.

An Cathaoirleach

Is Mr. Lambert fairly confident from records that that is where they are, in that yard?

Mr. Aidan Lambert

Absolutely. Even in the letters from the OPW, it states that the area is generally known. There is no precise map but it knows the starting point for any archaeological dig.

Deputy Pat Buckley

It was stated that the then Minister of State's response was very wishy-washy. It stated that requests such as this are of a very sensitive and delicate nature. It does not say to who. It goes on to say that there are a number of matters to consider, both in terms of the significant practicalities involved and the ethical issues. What practicalities? It does not say. What ethical issues? That should be gone out the window because the family members have no concerns. Let us scrap that part.

It goes on to state that there would be practical issues involved in positively identifying the remains. We have all heard how things have changed with DNA, you name it. If the National Graves Association removes those slabs and starts scanning, it will probably identify the five bodies before anything happens. What are the chances of having five, six or seven? It is specifically detailed. Significant records have been kept. I cannot understand how any Department or any Minister of State can use the fancy terms and the big words to be dismissive. There are no ethical issues when family members are saying they want this done. The fact the association has a plot in Glasnevin means it is not going to be overly complicated. I am hopeful that we should get a proper response from the Taoiseach. This is common sense. Technology has evolved so much now. When it can be done for the likes of Thomas Kent, it should be done for everybody. It is part of our history and our culture and it is not about hiding something. In regard to this craic of not taking responsibility for making decisions, what is wrong with assisting family members with their request to have these people interred where they should be and not where they are lying now? That is all I have to say. I thank the Chair.

An Cathaoirleach

One last thing, 28 councils have given their support. Of the other councils, was there any common thread coming back from them? Was it maybe motions were not put to the councils?

Mr. Aidan Lambert

In all the councils where it went to a vote, passed it. With regard to the other councils, sometimes we just did not approach the right councillor. We took a break from the councils. We may look at going back to them.

An Cathaoirleach

I cannot imagine why they would not pass it. Some 28 of the councils did. Maybe motions did not go in front of the councils to support it. I come back to the 92 relatives, the 28 councils and the 73 TDs and the amount of support. I propose, and Deputy Buckley might second it, that we, as a committee, write to the Taoiseach immediately, asking him to get involved. We do not want a generic letter coming back saying it is the responsibility of the Department of heritage and the OPW. We have had those excuses. We have had those responses from them.

We ask that he intervene directly and give a decision on it. After 11 years, the families deserve to know.

Mr. Aidan Lambert

Either he should make a decision or it should go to a vote in the Dáil.

Deputy Pat Buckley

I second that.

Mr. Aidan Lambert

We are confident that we would win the vote.

An Cathaoirleach

We will follow that up on the behalf of our guests. Hopefully, there will not be a wait of another 11 years and we will get a decision or commitment from the Taoiseach before a general election is called, which could happen at any time at this stage.

Deputy Pat Buckley

Shortly.

An Cathaoirleach

Does anyone have questions? There are no members online. Are Deputies Ó Snodaigh and Buckley happy?

Deputy Pat Buckley

I am happy. The people who have watched us from the committee room are the families. We must do our job.

An Cathaoirleach

This discussion has been very beneficial and informative for the members who were here today. As I have said, we will work on behalf of our guests. I hope we will get a response. I thank Mr. Lambert and Mr. Whelan for outlining their side of things.

Deputy Pat Buckley

Yes.

Mr. Aidan Lambert

I thank the Chairman for the invitation.

An Cathaoirleach

Do our guests wish to make a closing statement or comments before we suspend the meeting for five minutes?

Mr. Aidan Lambert

We have covered everything. I thank the committee and the staff, who have been very helpful. There has been much correspondence back and forth, particularly over the past week. Everybody has been very efficient and helpful. Thank you.

Mr. Seán Whelan

I feel exactly the same. I thank the members for their time and I thank the Chairman for inviting us here today. I thank all the staff for being so helpful. As everybody agrees here, the families are the priority in this matter.

An Cathaoirleach

They should be the priority.

Mr. Seán Whelan

The families are completely behind us. In our experience, there have been unprecedented numbers for this sort of event. It is really only the Mountjoy marches that would have had the same number of family members.

An Cathaoirleach

We will suspend for five minutes to allow the witnesses to leave.

Sitting suspended at 2.22 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.