Michael Kitt (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister of State and thank him for a comprehensive overview of the question of national monuments and the need for this legislation. As he quite rightly said, the measure he has brought before us is necessary as a consequence of the court decision on the completion of the M50 at Carrickmines. He said clearly that there is a vacuum following the court's decision to strike down section 14 of the National Monuments Act 1930. When people discuss the cost of these matters, they say that we could spend the money on health or education.

Senator Bannon rightly said that we must consider heritage issues. The protection of archaeological finds is one such important issue. The Minister of State has said not only that we should protect archaeological finds, but also that we should put in place a mechanism to stop anyone from bulldozing or otherwise damaging national monuments. Above all, it is important to work with archaeologists. For that reason, I am glad the Minister of State referred to the new legislative requirement to consult the National Museum and the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism.

The Bill should place a greater emphasis on the role of local authorities. I was a member of Galway County Council for 17 years. Like other counties, Galway had a county monuments committee during that time, although that role has since been taken over by some of the strategic policy committees. My local authority's monuments committee consisted of a mix of people — advisory members, honorary members and experts in the field. The work done by such people was excellent. They identified monuments, told us about the history of the monuments and provided the Irish language names of monuments. Many plaques were erected on the sites, in conjunction with Bord Fáilte. In some cases, walkways were put in place to assist people in getting to monuments. The work of the monuments committee should be recognised and I wish to do so today. I would like the work of local authorities to be recognised too.

The site of the Battle of Aughrim, one of the most famous battles in this country's history, is near Ballinasloe. Many people visit the site, which is of historical significance, to see where the armies were positioned on the battlefield. At a time when we are conscious of trespass laws and do not want people to have accidents on private property, it is important that certain areas should be mapped out well. It is difficult to do so in respect of private property, however. I am glad that a heritage centre has been developed in the village of Aughrim, but people like to see battlefields and everything else connected with the history of Aughrim.

I reiterate that I would like to see more references to the work of local authorities. Above all, I would like to see a major national monuments Bill, which was mentioned by the Minister of State, to be brought forward by the end of the year or early next year. Such legislation is needed to bring the existing Acts up to date. Many infrastructural projects are being pursued, as the Minister of State said. There has been a legislative vacuum since section 14 of the 1930 Act was rejected. We should do everything in our power to protect historical sites.

Despite the planning and geophysical studies on particular routes, to which the Minister of State referred, one cannot be sure what one will find when one starts to examine a site on which a project will be constructed. We are aware that the unexpected can happen. It is important that someone is charged with calling a halt if it transpires that a more detailed study of a certain area is needed. It is significant that the Bill refers to the N25 Waterford city bypass. I understand that archaeologists have made substantial discoveries in that area. Such finds should be protected and I hope the Bill will be successful in that regard.

We spoke about the conservation of water this morning and it is also important to conserve our archaeological heritage. It should be the primary concern of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, which has a major role in that regard. The National Monuments Act has been in place since 1930. The Minister of State mentioned that Ireland ratified the Valetta Convention on the protection of archaeological heritage. The Department has a professional structure that is responsible for overseeing the protection of our heritage.

It is difficult to strike a balance between development needs and protection. There are many examples of good balance, such as the famine memorial near Croagh Patrick. Many people were worried about the development when it was originally proposed to erect a memorial, but a good compromise was reached. That was not the case in respect of mining at Croagh Patrick, another contentious issue that has not been resolved. We will always have to try to balance development and conservation.

It is worth repeating the Minister of State's comment that the legislation is based on the understanding that it will be necessary to interfere with a national monument in certain cases. Good reasons for such interference relate to public health and safety, in particular, but also to archaeology. The application made by the NRA and Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council was proposed on public interest grounds. The construction of a motorway along an approved route can be justified on the grounds of public interest or health and safety, even if it affects the archaeology of the site. The Minister of State said today the archaeological work undertaken would preserve the main elements of the site, by record or in situ. I take it that is the position.

There are certain difficulties in dealing with local authorities, and obviously the existing legislation was unable to deal with some of those more complex issues. For example, if a monument is in the ownership of a local authority there has to be joint consent between the Minister and the local authority. An order has to be made by the Minister, the order must come before both Houses of the Oireachtas and a section 26 excavation licence must be issued. I presume what the Minister is doing, and he can reply on this, is introducing a single tier approval process which removes the need for an excavation licence as the archaeological mitigation can be dealt with in any conditions that accompany the consent. It is clear, however, that has not been happening and that this new process must take place. I hope the amending legislation will give a high priority to the protection of archaeological heritage.

In addition to the issue of the N25 at Woodstown, there is a reference also in the Bill to the M3 motorway which replaces the existing N3 and bypasses Dunshaughlin, Navan and Kells. Six route options were examined, four would have had an adverse impact on the heritage and the preferred one had less impact and also caused significantly less interference with dwellings and land holdings.

In regard to Carrickmines, I understand 130 archaeologists were employed on the site to carry out the excavations and over €6 million will be spent on the archaeology. With that number of people employed and that degree of investment, the excavations will make a significant contribution to our understanding of history and the changing settlement patterns of south County Dublin and enhance the national archaeological record. Less than 10% of what remains of the national monument will be removed by the final works. Over 90% will be preserved in an area of one and a half acres, which will not be impacted on by the motorway. The Bill rightly covers a number of issues in respect of Carrickmines as well as the Waterford and Hill of Tara monuments.

One of the inspector's reports from An Bord Pleanála highlighted the level of consideration given to the archaeological impact. The report states:

Having regard to all the evidence given at the hearing and the cross-examination of the archaeology impacts in the Tara-Skryne area presented at the hearing and in the details set out in the EIS, I am satisfied that the route as proposed would not have a significant impact on the archaeological landscape associated with the Hill of Tara ... I also consider that the route will not impact significantly on the archaeological landscape associated with the Hill of Skryne.

I am happy with what the Minister has done. Nobody wants to have to amend a Bill that was enacted in 1930 but there is need for a new Act. I hope the Minister will come back here, if not this year then next year, and introduce a comprehensive Bill to deal with national monuments. I hope this Bill will get approval in the House as soon as possible.