Mr. Michael Starrett:

I hope I will cover all of the points I want to. In an Irish context, and still in some other European countries, the national park works on a model where the State owns the land and decides it is a national park. That would be less contemporary than most European countries, which would have dedicated national park legislation based not only on nature conservation but on socioeconomic and rural development needs as well. There is a need for that to be looked at in the context of the upland areas. Our national parks do a fantastic job, but they are very restricted in terms of the location and resources that are put their way. There has been a modest increase, I understand, in their allocation this year but, again, the legislation needs to be there for the legislators to really buy-in and see the value of it, and I welcome the fact that the Department is looking at that at the moment.

I have a particular interest in that because my background was in national and regional parks in the UK and France. I have made an art of looking at models and the ways in which countries cope with this type of situation. One of the issues, of course, in an Irish context was the resistance to the use of the term "national" for anything that was considered privately owned. That is an obstacle that needs to be overcome. Every other European country has overcome it with good and targeted legislation. The French regional and national parks are now focused on socioeconomic development. That is their ultimate purpose. It is a shame that Deputy Danny Healy-Rae is not here at the moment because it is really targeting rural depopulation and the decline in rural areas, so there is a job of work that could be done and heritage can play its part.

In terms of the need for capacity, the Deputy asked if we are happy. No, we are never happy with the resources and I will check the figures but I think that, in terms of our budget allocation at the moment, we are around 2006 or 2007 levels. The Heritage Council took a 65% cut in its allocation and has never recovered that. Within the context of our new strategic plan and the working arrangements with the Department at the moment, I hope that is addressed in the course of the lifetime of this plan.

Where do the resources go? It is important to say that, during that time of cuts, the community-led sectors, exemplified by heritage, all knuckled down. They took the bad news, as did we all. They survived. They upped their ante. They did more for less, but that can only be done for so long. There is a point where that piece of elastic can be stretched to breaking point. There needs now to be some acknowledgement, recognition and not taking for granted of the community-led voluntary sector and we need to make sure the resources and capacity are provided to allow that to happen. I hope that comes through the Heritage Council as this plan is implemented.

The council's board, as represented here by Ms Marie Bourke, has a number of new initiatives and ideas and wants not only to build on what has happened over the past 20 years, but make sure that we address these contemporary issues. They touch on climate change and it is clear the role that heritage can play in that. It may sound as though it is a far stretch but again I appreciate, in the absence of Deputy Danny Healy-Rae, that he touched on the value of heritage-led regeneration to help overcome some of the housing crisis. It does not solve it, but it can play its part if it is properly resourced.

Our work has always tried to support the local level delivery of a service, and we are a public service and that is what we are focused on. I welcome the positive responses from all members of the committee to the way in which services at local level could be bolstered. That is something that the Heritage Council has listened to heritage officers about but the Heritage Council would know itself as well. Given the capacity and resources, the Heritage Council would be only too pleased to achieve that.