OPINION (AN COLÚN): The State's approach to our burial grounds is seriously lacking

IT was nice last week to hear a member of the Tipperary County Council executive say a number of insightful and enlightened things about the subject of burial grounds in the county. The proper care of graveyards and cemeteries is an emotional subject for many people and it was good to hear that the Council is aware of the high esteem in which burial grounds are held and the sensitivity of the subject matter.
The comments were made during a monthly meeting of Nenagh Municipal District. The meeting was told that burial grounds are an important feature of the historic landscape in Ireland and frequently provide clues to understanding our past. “They also are of social and cultural value,” the executive member pointed out, “and can be an oasis for a rich variety of plants and birds. Local communities are very involved in the care of their parish burial grounds, whether through routine maintenance, active use, or the keeping alive of tradition or memory. Keeping the burial ground in good condition is important to local people as it reflects pride in their parish and is an acknowledgement of the contribution our ancestors made to the development of each parish.”
Tipperary County Council is responsible for the management of a large number of burial grounds (approximately 240), the majority of which are historic. It is also responsible for the provision of new burial grounds, whether on new sites or as extensions to existing facilities. However, other entities, such as various religious organisations and communities, and local community-based groups, have also created new burial grounds or extended existing burial grounds in recent decades, particularly in Norrth Tipperary. Over the decades a number of parish priests have developed, or extended, parish graveyards at various locations throughout the county.
In recent years, a large number of representations have been made by various groups, such as community-led groups and burial ground maintenance committees, to the County Council asking for a new burial ground or the extension of an existing burial ground. In every case, the existing burial ground has reached capacity.
However, the State's response to our burial grounds is seriously lacking. Cost is a major problem. There is no state funding available to local authorities for the provision, management or maintenance of burial grounds, so the entire cost falls on local authorities. Local authorities point out that the income generated from the sale of gravespaces and the issue of memorial permits do not meet the repayments on capital and maintenance costs.
In other words, as so often happens in this State, money does not go into worthy projects such as the upkeep and development of burial grounds and is instead ploughed into dubious projects or projects which go way over budget (such as the National Children's Hospital).
Development costs associated with the provision of a burial ground are also high as there are many upfront costs such as boundary wall construction, the development of footpaths, internal roadways, carparking, the construction of headstone/memorial foundations and landscaping, with the result, according to one Council official, “that the payback for investment can take a prolonged period of time to recoup or in some cases may never be recouped.”
Land is another issue affecting the development of our burial grounds. The provision of available and suitable land, at reasonable cost, is, in many cases, a major constraint.
Site Investigations are another additional cost. Current environmental standards require hydro-geological risk assessments to be carried out on potential sites in order to assess their suitability from the perspective of environmental and groundwater protection. These assessments can also involve a geophysical survey in the interest of the preservation of archaeological heritage.
Long-term Maintenance Costs are significant; and the local authority must conduct a planning consent procedure, known as Part 8 (as it relates to Part 8 of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001), which involves public consultation, referral to statutory agencies and, ultimately, adoption by the elected members of the Municipal District where the proposed development is located.
All of these costs, said the Tipperary Co Co executive member during the Nenagh MD meeting, feed into the Council’s Three-Year Capital Programme, “which is inadequate for the tasks at hand.”