Ms Virginia Teehan:

We welcome head 27 which provides a facility whereby the Minister may vest in local authorities burial grounds whose status is currently unclear. This point was raised earlier in the committee. We believe it is good to rationalise that.

We also welcome head 30 containing measures to assist the implementation of the 1972 convention concerning the protection of the world cultural heritage and natural heritage. We welcome the clearer understanding of that world convention and the rationalisation of inserting protective mechanisms in a county development plan. We think that is a very good move.

Under head 39, we note and support the continued restriction on the use of metal detection devices. As we said in our opening statement, in 2018 we commissioned RED-C to carry out a survey of the public attitudes to archaeology in Ireland. When it came to the protection of archaeological remains, only 30% of the population knew that it was illegal to search for archaeological objects with a metal detector without a licence from the Government. This is an issue for the protection of our heritage. A large proportion of the people believe that this should be restricted to ensure that the archaeological objects do not fall into private collections and that monuments are not damaged.

Under head 66 we welcome the statutory footing for the Archaeological Survey of Ireland. That work has proven its importance in recent years. We think that is essential and will support the management of archaeological sites. Earlier we mentioned the context of these sites and the setting of archaeological monuments in the landscape. I reiterate the point made earlier on the importance of the national landscape strategy should that emerge as a result of this Bill when enacted.

We also note the approach taken, specifically in head 86, on the "promotion in knowledge and awareness" of archaeological heritage in keeping with a more progressive practice around individual and community ownership of heritage as well as public engagement. This has not been as evident in previous drafts of the Bill, because it was very much around protection. We welcome this overall tone and approach. Finally, we noted earlier, as we did in our submission, that we are concerned about the absence of any reference to the role of the Heritage Council in the Bill. We are an independent advisory body. Under the previous legislation, we were given the responsibility to assume the powers of the previous National Monuments Advisory Council. We would welcome the clarification of the role of the council this pre-legislative scrutiny process.