Josepha Madigan (Dublin Rathdown, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for raising this matter. I note his comments on biodiversity. As he knows, today and tomorrow I am hosting a national biodiversity conference in Dublin Castle. The Government takes this issue very seriously.

High Island is a spectacular island; there is no doubt about that. It contains an early medieval monastery dedicated to St. Féichín. This is a national monument which is in my ownership as Minister for Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht. The church is located in a small enclosure, which lies in the northern half of the ecclesiastical enclosure on High Island. It comprises a conserved single-cell church, dedicated to St Féichín, and is one of the smallest of the Atlantic island churches.

As the Deputy may be aware, the day-to-day care of this national monument falls under the remit of the Office of Public Works on behalf of my Department. The OPW works in close co-operation with the national monuments service of my Department, which has overall responsibility to ensure the long-term conservation of the national monument. In the 1990s, a comprehensive State-funded excavation and conservation programme was undertaken on the monastic site and the results were published in 2014 in my Department's archaeological monograph series. As a national monument in State care, the monastery as it stands is fully protected under the provisions of the National Monuments Acts. Any works at or in its vicinity may only be carried out with ministerial consent under section 14 of the Act. There are also a number of recorded monuments on the property which are protected under national monuments legislation as well. These monuments are in private ownership.

In the interests of the preservation, conservation, management and presentation of the built and archaeological heritage, the State sometimes may wish to acquire certain heritage properties and monuments. From time to time, these may come onto the open market, may be bequeathed to the State or may be offered to the State for purchase or free of cost. I might also add that there have been no recent invitations to our Department to purchase the site from anybody. In addition, lands surrounding or in proximity to national monuments in State care often reside in private ownership. In certain cases, improved protection of the monument, or access to the monument, may be possible if the State was to acquire such additional lands. There has not been any recent approach in respect of this particular monument. I must inform the Deputy that such acquisition is the exception rather than the norm and that where a monument is already adequately protected and there is no exceptional case for acquisition in order to improve access, the case for purchase may not be pressing. In the case of High Island, the national monument and the recorded monuments are already well protected, in our view. Public access, even if the whole property were in public ownership, would continue to be hazardous and the site is unsuitable for large-scale visitor exploration. Additionally, value for money principles must be carefully considered where any acquisition is proposed.

The national monuments in State care already number some 1,000 sites at over 760 locations around the country and these command considerable resource commitments in terms of both funding and personnel allocation. In addition, there are in excess of 120,000 monuments listed in the record of monuments and places that are not maintained by the State. Suffice it to say that while I understand what the Deputy is saying, there is no exceptional case in this instance that would merit an acquisition of this nature.

See this speech in context