Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State and his officials for coming in. It has been a useful exercise and exchange of commentary. We have slightly erred and strayed into the area of built heritage. It is clearly a different strand and is reasonably well protected. We have the record of protected structures. People spoke about Mountjoy Square. We have architectural conservation areas to deal with that. We have city and county development plans that do the job well and are obliged to keep a record of protected structures. It is best placed there and close to the ground in relation to local government. People are active and proactive at that level. It is constantly reviewed and one can add a building to the record of protected structures through three mechanisms, which I will not go into. That is live, active and in the heart of communities and I think it is best left there.

There are a number of issues, including planning law and the issue of the national monuments law. There is a huge overlap. We are familiar with the 31 local planning authorities, all with statutory county development plans. They are clearly mapped. I am familiar with Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown because I live there and was a councillor there for over 20 years. All the monuments are mapped out there. We have the famous Carrickmines Castle that many are aware of. At all times it is incumbent on the planners through pre-planning or any discussions about it that there is some discussion regarding these identified sites. They are not all identified but the ones registered or on the lists are identified. There is a real role for the local authority and we do not want to duplicate process so I recommend, if it is not already there, that there be greater synergy with local authority mapping so we can clearly see it there. The Land Development Agency has done extensive mapping of lands across the country. There may be synergy and building of data and information that we should explore.

Who will keep the inventory? Who will add to it, particularly in relation to monuments? How does one revoke a monument? We have a hotel called the Radisson Blu St. Helens Hotel that the President, when a Minister, designated a national monument.

However, it could be very well argued that it should be a protected structure. We have to look at things. We never set something in stone. That is a functioning hotel.

There may be a case to revisit some of the designations. There is always a case to revisit protected structures, particularly at a time when we are looking to develop our towns and cities. I just wanted to make that point.

What is do the witnesses see in relation to the county development plan process and that relationship?

On guardianship, especially in relation to structures mentioned, guardianship means a monument remains privately owned but the Minister or the local authority becomes responsible for the maintenance. Therefore, the local authority could become responsible for the maintenance. There are big funding issues here and big funding implications for private owners as well. I am not saying that has to be addressed; that is the reality of it. How does the Minister of State envisage the funding, particularly of local authorities? That is an area I want to get into. The power to revoke or remove a monument from the list is an important one we need to understand because we, of course, can change protected structures.

I am a member of the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine. Given the land mass of this country in terms of agriculture, sustainable agriculture, utilisation of lands and agriculture, and issues around access to national monuments and structures, has the Minister of State had any engagement with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine? The Minister of State said he had interdepartmental discussions with a range of key stakeholders. Will he touch on that? Perhaps he might share with us how he looked at the best practice internationally on this.

I will wrap up by talking about the Valletta Convention, which was ratified in 1997. It is a very important convention that covers this area. Somebody may have already suggested it, but I would like to see it considered to be added to the Long Title of the Bill. There has to be clear reference to the Valletta Convention. It is critical.

There are just some thoughts. Other issues are mapping and registration. Who centrally controls the register? There is a role for local authorities in that, or certainly an overlap and a sharing of data. That is very important. I thank the Minister of State and Department officials for their time.