Martin Heydon (Kildare South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the representatives and officials for coming in today for what has been an interesting conversation.

I congratulate them on their work, as a starting point. Both the Heritage Council and each of the individual heritage officers, who we all would deal with in our own capacity in our counties on a regular basis, particularly on built heritage and around heritage week, play a crucial role. The council also plays a key role. I might not engage on a day to day basis with it but I am acutely aware of that.

I am struck by Senator Ó Ríordáin's point that heritage can be seen as a negative. I see ways in which in the past 20 years the Heritage Council has redressed that balance. The linkages between the Heritage Council and agricultural schemes such as REPS, and now GLAS, have been positive because farmers normally saw a heritage monument on their land as a negative where somebody was traipsing over their ground and there was a concern about being sued. It is positive that it could form part of one the environmental schemes to be enhanced. I recognise the role the Heritage Council plays in that.

I am chairman of the Friends of Athy Heritage Centre and Museum in south Kildare. The depth of heritage in Athy is phenomenal. Predominantly because it is an unemployment black spot and we have many challenges, heritage is blamed unfairly for a great deal. If I am on local radio speaking of the positives of heritage, it will be said to me afterwards that heritage has held the town back but it has not. One tries to show people the potential that Ireland's Ancient East and Ireland's Hidden Heartland have to open up people's minds. In all those spaces, tourism in particular can show what can be done.

To touch on some of the points that were made earlier, what the heritage centre and museum is doing in Athy is interesting. On the points made about the Magdalen laundries, part of the issue might be that this is so recent and so raw. No doubt recognising in one's place the heritage of that place is what will people will buy into. I refer to those who are not initially passionate about heritage and have a passing interest only. One pulls them in through linkages to their own area. In Athy Heritage Centre, the section commemorating local people who died in the First World War is most interesting. That is how one makes the linkages. People say such a person was a relation of theirs and they trace back their roots; that has got them in the door. Then they learn about Ernest Shackleton and the connections there and about the different elements of the centre.

There is a great deal more we have to do. The Heritage Council needs much more support. I completely understand that and it comes across clearly here. I look at sites, such as the Curragh plains, in south Kildare and see considerable potential. The Curragh needs an overall heritage management plan and I work closely with Ms Bridget Loughlin and the good people in Kildare County Council to try to develop that. There are numerous agencies involved.

I am struck by the fact that Mr. Starrett stated there is no legislation for national parks. That is something on which he might expand. The Curragh is not a national park although I would like it to be. There is a means through which one can look to have a place designated but in terms of its overall management, Mr. Starrett might come back to me. I thank him for his presentation.

Heritage officers come under the remit of the Heritage Council but are members of staff of the local authorities. I am conscious they pointed out that, like arts officers, they are under a different Department than the local authorities themselves. Are the heritage officers suggesting it would be better if they were under the local authority structure completely? I am not convinced. If heritage officers were directly answerable to the busy Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government, there would be a risk of them being overlooked. I am conscious of Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell's points on a stand-alone Department. The Constitution states we can have only 15 senior Ministers and Departments. Unless there is to be one cut, such as children and youth affairs or agriculture, or we hold a referendum, that will not change any time soon. There are linkages between culture and heritage. We must get the balance back. It is evident, in terms of funding, that in the future we need an increased focus on heritage to ensure that balance is correct. I am not convinced that it needs necessarily to be set alone but the heritage officers definitely need more support in what they are doing.

On Ms Clerkin's point on the possibility of an assistant heritage officer role, she stated that is a request she put in to the Heritage Council. I am sure Mr. Starrett would need more funds for that to happen. I presume Ms Clerkin is not saying that for Mr. Starrett to press a button. Is that something Mr. Starrett needs support directly from the Department for?

In that regard, I do not know how the individual heritage officers manage. The key role that heritage officers play in each of the countries is engaging with local communities. Both Dr. Gallagher and Ms Clerkin made it clear. There is no point in somebody coming down from Dublin telling people their heritage. One needs to help the local community to see what is important and let the community develop it. I am aware that involves a lot of hand-holding. There are some really good people who volunteer their time, and whether they are applying for built heritage schemes or the development of county heritage plans, there is a great deal of work. It is not practical to think that it is down on one person. I ask the heritage officers to expand on what support they need to be able to get that assistant heritage officer role because it is important.

So that I am clear on how it works, will they state whether the role of the conservation officer is merely a planning authority role? Do conservation officers come under the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government? The work of heritage officers is something we as a committee should support. Their work in enabling local communities to ensure there is local ownership and buy-in of community initiatives is key.

Are the heritage officers happy with the plans, in terms of resources? Do they need more resources to implement the existing heritage plans or do the plans need beefing up? Are they happy enough with the structure? If and when we get additional resources, where best can they be spent and directed?