glasnevin cemetary

One thing I found interesting about this is the report in a Sunday newspaper that the cemetary had been sold to a legal firm by Peter White as part of a larger deal. If the graveyard is privately owned, why is the State investing money in it?

It’s the next step in the battle for ownership of ‘our’ Republican heritage. And isn’t there an election just around the corner?:rolleyes:

But if it results in significant investment in the graveyard, then I won’t complain.

@ctesiphon wrote:

It’s the next step in the battle for ownership of ‘our’ Republican heritage. And isn’t there an election just around the corner?:rolleyes:

But if it results in significant investment in the graveyard, then I won’t complain.

My son goes to school in a prefab, and there isn’t a secondary school in our area (population> 5,000) and Berties wants to blow 25 million euros on a cemetary… 🙁

Oh I’m not saying I endorse it as an approach, mickeydocs, but I’m glad to see investment in elements of our national heritage. Though jdivision’s point re private ownership is worth considering. The govt offers grants to owners of Protected Structures, but they’re nowhere near as much as €25m., and crucially the owner must stump up costs too.

However, if it came down to a choice between graveyard management and school building, only the most staunch conservstionist would advocate the former over the latter. I’m not one of them.

Equally, there are other things I would consider far more wasteful of taxpayers’ money than conservation. Without rehearsing the well known arguments- electronic voting, anyone?

anyway, like I said- there’s an election just around the corner. Surely someone in your area is advocating the building of schools? :rolleyes:

there’s an election just around the corner

Now that we know that Bertie is in fact a Socialist this is simply Bertie’s interpretation of the Beveridge maxim ‘From the Cradle to the Grave’

BTW

I think you were right with your first post it is part of a turf war over the republican vote and thankfully it is an election year this money will never be spent and in July when reality returns the OPW will continue to maintain Glasnevin like they always have on a shoestring.

@ctesiphon wrote:

However, if it came down to a choice between graveyard management and school building, only the most staunch conservstionist would advocate the former over the latter. I’m not one of them.

Why not have both? Ditch the interpretive center and invest in built environment education. Cemeteries have enough monuments to stand and gawk at. I’m thinking historical/literary graveyard tours, Bloomsday type stuff. I learned more about history and had much more fun ‘interpreting’ it while burying Paddy Dignam one 16 June than standing around staring at another dusty old plaque. Historical scavenger hunts, gravestone rubbings, novel re-enactments . . . the possibilities are endless.

@ctesiphon wrote:

Oh I’m not saying I endorse it as an approach, mickeydocs, but I’m glad to see investment in elements of our national heritage. Though jdivision’s point re private ownership is worth considering. The govt offers grants to owners of Protected Structures, but they’re nowhere near as much as €25m., and crucially the owner must stump up costs too.

However, if it came down to a choice between graveyard management and school building, only the most staunch conservstionist would advocate the former over the latter. I’m not one of them.

Equally, there are other things I would consider far more wasteful of taxpayers’ money than conservation. Without rehearsing the well known arguments- electronic voting, anyone?

anyway, like I said- there’s an election just around the corner. Surely someone in your area is advocating the building of schools? :rolleyes:

Great reply ctesiphon. I live in Donabate Co. Dublin, and plenty of politicians have promised the earth, the moon and the stars but unfortunately none have guaranteed a secondary school.

I’m all for heritage protection, starting with our educational heritage.

I’m not sure if this is going to be money all that well spent.

Glasnevin Cemetery is fine as it is. I first went to visit the grave of my grandparents there about 5-6 years ago (I had never met them) and, having done so, I chanced upon the gravestone of Sean T. O’Ceallaigh, former President of Ireland. No big fuss about the grave – he’s just there along a path with a whole lot of other people.

The beauty about places like Highgate, especially the overgrown part – rather than the more manicured Karl Marx bit across the road – is that there’s plenty to discover, and lots of stories to find out for yourself.

I agree that Glasnevin Cemetery has almost reached the status of a “national” cemetery. While it’s good for people to visit it, I can’t see how chucking €25 million at it is going to achieve a better “experience” for the visitor than actually just wandering around it for an hour or two. All over the cemetery there are stones which tell a lot of stories.

As an uncle of mine used to say: “Glasnevin Cemetery is FULL of people who thought they were indispensable”:D

Thanks to Paul Claekin for posting this. I agree with ctesiphon on this regarding our Republican heritage. I am not replying to this, to push some sort of a Republican agenda. If Bertie wants to spend money in Glasnevin cemetary, whats wrong with that? In my opinion too many people forget where they live, and how good they have it. Without these men and women who are buried in Glasnevin cemetary, we would all be waving British passports. Thats my humble view:)

That is a frightening thought; as much as we all suggest what we perceive to be better solutions to particular issues independence has been critical to the emergence ofthe rich economic and cultural tapestry that is modern Ireland.

The alternative being a remote province receiving the same priority as say Brittany or Wales. It is right that the memory is preserved of those who were unlucky enough not to survive the War of Independence.

However it raises the question as to how such national heros graves were allowed to deteriorate into a condition where such a sum needs to be spent. Surely a proper allocation in the past 10 years on a phased basis would have solved the problem.