Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Tairgim leasú a 35:

In page 32, between lines 18 and 19, to insert the following: “(a) that the historic, archaeological and cultural heritage of Ireland, as the product of the labour, craftsmanship and talent of their forebearers, belongs equally to all the people of the Irish nation and that this heritage must be protected for the people and as the inheritance to which future generations are entitled as a right;”.

While the intent of this amendment is accepted in the Bill, it is not set out so explicitly therein. This would be a useful declaration of intent by the House, as it enshrines a rights-centred approach to our heritage in legislation. It recognises and takes account of why we need to protect our heritage, namely, for future generations. It is a reflection of the provisions of the 1916 Proclamation, which reads, “the right of the people of Ireland to the ownership of Ireland”. We have discussed the number of national monuments and how we cannot list, expose or highlight the prominence of every one of them. At the time, I mentioned there was a nice little book, entitled National Monuments of Ireland in the Charge of the Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland, which was published in 1964. Only 400 or 500 were listed in the book when it was published.

There were many additions afterwards. The question is where to stop because there are so many. It is a useful book and tool. When I was younger, you could nearly tick off which site you had visited as a child. Nowadays, maybe the Internet can be used to do that. We have the ability to identify many more national monuments, record them and share that record with the public using a much better method than publishing little books like that. Every county and village could have a book the size of the one produced in the 1960s.

Protection is a big issue. There is a big onus on who pays for the access and protection. There is a question of whether it is better to leave the national monuments we know exist. I mentioned Sinéad Marshall's book on the list. I think there are still 30,000 on the list. Each is a national monument because they are designated quite clearly, and there are many others. There are many burial sites so one can start multiplying the number of national monuments we have. It makes the job a lot more difficult but not impossible. It is about trying to capture that people understand that it is not theirs to destroy or charge fees to visit and the history that goes with all of these monuments should be shared as much as possible. That might mean access to the site by archaeologists or historians; it does not necessarily always mean that the public has to go traipsing through people's fields. That is part of it.

There are quite a lot of national monuments in the National Museum and national collections. Thankfully, in this State, in the main, access to those is free of charge but there are national monuments held in private collections which can be quite costly for people to access. We need to address that issue as well, not necessarily in this legislation. It would be preferable if a message were to go out underlining the approach that will and is being taken and that this legacy should be in the ownership of the people as much as possible and nobody can sell off, damage or do anything that would undermine the portfolio of national monuments we have. That is the intention. It is not to cut across the Bill but to add to it and have that clearly stated.

See this speech in context