"The IRA 1956-69: Rethinking the Republic" by Matt Treacy

[Phelan]

The CP released the information when they deposited their archive. It is in the public realm.

[C. Flower]

The CP released the information when they deposited their archive. It is in the public realm.

When did they do that ? Was it to the NAI ? No conditions attached ?

Quite an extraordinary thing for a CP to do in my view.

[eamo]

There is a minimum number of members an organisation must have in order to be registered as a political party in Ireland. At least 300 members I think, but I may be wrong.
Whatever the minimum number is, it is more than likely that a small party below the required number of card-carrying members would put down the names of strong supporters as members in order to make up the numbers. The supporters may or may not be told they have been "signed up".
So it is possible a list of party members might include supporters who don't know they are listed as members.
You also have the situation where people who would not be accepted as members of a party claim to be members because they once bought a party paper.
Because a name is or is not on a membership list in Irish politics is meaningless.
AND SO......the work of historians becomes guess work. BUT HEY!! .....that is the Irish way

More nonsense. The IWP was not a registered political party.

The lists are what they are - membership lists. Have you even read them? Or are you unable to understand terms such as 'membership', 'subscriptions', 'lapsed', 'new members', 'expelled' and so on. Can you be expelled from a subsription list to a newspaper?

The only more absurd explanation I've heard is that someone forged them and placed them in the CP archive decades ago. Obviously anticipating that someone would write a book about this in the second decade of the 21st century

Hi Phelan, my post was really just musing on the nature of political party membership lists and was prompted by Saoirse go Deo saying in the preceding post that; "It seems pretty clearcut to me, they have him down as a member.".

I suppose I should have made that clear, sorry for getting you so steamed up.

As you point out,

The IWP was not a registered political party.

so my musings would not be relevant to the IWP.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[C. Flower]

No use asking you any questions, Phelan it seems....

Had to do my own legwork.

The Phoenix, hot on the muck-raking trail, has gone trawling through the CPI archives, recently handed over to the Gilbert Library in Dublin, looking for any mention of Anthony Coughlan

http://www.communistpartyofireland.i...12-treacy.html

Handed all their papers over to a Dublin City Council public library in 2011.

As I said before, quite extraordinary.

http://www.communistpartyofireland.i...9-archive.html

[Phelan]

The lists are in the CPI archive in Pearse Street, not in the NAI. There are Department of Justice files in NAI that have details of memberships of IRA and Sinn Féin including of people still alive. So such lists quite evidently do not breach the DPA.

Whatever about denying membership, denying it and then suing someone when you were a member is disingenuous to say the least.

And by the way, why is it dishonest to release such material into the public realm? There would be no primary source history of recent periods if that was the case. None. Also recall that these lists are nearly 50 years old!

C Flower, I did answer your question!

I do not see what is extraordinary about releasing membership or any other records from half a century ago and more.

It is a fantastic archive and fair play to them for depositing it, even if they may regret having entrusted it's cataloguing to someone who was not sensitive to possible issues arising!

[C. Flower]

C Flower, I did answer your question!

I do not see what is extraordinary about releasing membership or any other records from half a century ago and more.

It is a fantastic archive and fair play to them for depositing it, even if they may regret having entrusted it's cataloguing to someone who was not sensitive to possible issues arising!

You did - But not everyone - myself certainly not - would know that "Pearse Street" meant one of the Dublin City Council public libraries. Is this library an important centre for Irish historical studies ?

The attitude of the CPI seems to be that its business is history. Eugene McCartan describes the CP documents as a "collection." It seems unlikely to me that much if any attention was paid to what this material comprised.

Membership lists are personal data belonging to the people on those lists. If they are still living, they have rights over that data. So, for me there are two issues, one, that the CPI has a careless approach to personal data of members and two, that it views its mission as a Communist Party to have been consigned to the past.

[Phelan]

You did - But not everyone - myself certainly not - would know that "Pearse Street" meant one of the Dublin City Council public libraries. Is this library an important centre for Irish historical studies ?

The attitude of the CPI seems to be that its business is history. Eugene McCartan describes the CP documents as a "collection." It seems unlikely to me that much if any attention was paid to what this material comprised.

Membership lists are personal data belonging to the people on those lists. If they are still living, they have rights over that data. So, for me there are two issues, one, that the CPI has a careless approach to personal data of members and two, that it views its mission as a Communist Party to have been consigned to the past.

Other political groups including the Workers Party (which substantially has possession of the pre-1969 republican archive) have allowed researchers - including Hanley and Roy Johnston - access to records from similar and indeed later periods and containing references to living individuals who were members of SF and IRA. I really do not see the issue.


Others, unfortunately, who have access to potentially valuable historical sources for decades have still not handed them over.

30 years is the general rule regarding release of records, including much more sensitive state and security files.

[C. Flower]

Other political groups including the Workers Party (which substantially has possession of the pre-1969 republican archive) have allowed researchers - including Hanley and Roy Johnston - access to records from similar and indeed later periods and containing references to living individuals who were members of SF and IRA. I really do not see the issue.


Others, unfortunately, who have access to potentially valuable historical sources for decades have still not handed them over.

30 years is the general rule regarding release of records, including much more sensitive state and security files.

Did the WP release its membership lists ?

Some state files are released - and often heavily redacted.

[Phelan]

Did the WP release its membership lists ?

Some state files are released - and often heavily redacted.

The WP have allowed researchers such as those I referred to access to leadership minutes and internal documents which name members. There are also documents in NAI with names and addresses - some of them still the same! - of members of republican leadership in the 1960s. SF have also deposited materials although institutions, with exception of Belfast Linenhall, appear to be slow in making them available.

As I said before, much historical research would be impossible if such details were not available from at least more than 30 years ago.