Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Dár ndóigh, cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire.

I will address my comments to the contents of Part 4 of the Bill. Over the past 20 years, the Heritage Council has done excellent work in carrying out the functions that have been assigned to it under the Heritage Act of 1995. Indeed, in May last I had the pleasure of visiting the information exhibition that was organised by the council specifically for Members of the Oireachtas and it was heartening to listen to representatives of a dozen or so not-for-profit heritage organisations on that occasion extol the changes that the Heritage Council has brought about by using its limited means to work with its local and national partners. The benefits to communities the length and breadth of the country, in terms of economic activity, job creation and enhancing the quality of rural community life, cannot be over emphasised. This is work that improved the quality of where we live and it is critical to maintaining and enhancing the attractiveness of Ireland to overseas tourists.

However, I believe that a refocusing of activities and functions of the Heritage Council, as is proposed in the Bill, with a particular emphasis on engagement with public authorities and local communities but to the exclusion of educational bodies and other organisations, will adversely affect the work of those educational bodies and other organisations. I have had a look at the strategic plan for 2012 to 2016 of the Heritage Council and I note that it refers to the importance of working with numerous organisations in order to achieve the outcomes of this plan. Such bodies and organisations include local authorities, educational bodies and many other bodies, some of which are educational trusts and some of which have a nationwide brief. While I appreciate the wording in the Bill to amend the Heritage Act 1995 at section 6(3)(b), I strongly believe that the functions of the Heritage Council must also include the original emphasis of engagement with, "educational bodies and other organisations". The Heritage Council cites bodies, such as the Discovery Programme, the National Biodiversity Data Centre, the Irish Landmark Trust, the Museums Standards Programme, as key partners in enabling it to achieve its outcomes, and most, if not all, of these bodies have educational objectives. How are we to know in the years ahead that there may not be other not-for-profit public organisations that become involved in important national heritage undertakings that would benefit from the support of the Heritage Council? These organisations must not be precluded from seeking public support and therefore we need to ensure that the Bill does not eliminate hardworking publicly-motivated bodies. The Bill's amendment of section 6(3)(b) of the 1995 Act must be further amended to retain the phrase, "educational bodies and other organisations".

As a matter of public policy, it is important to include within the requirements, not only of support but of consultation, educational bodies and other organisations, whether they be publicly-funded bodies or private bodies. As a matter of public policy, why would one deliberately excise a reference to consultation with educational bodies and other organisations? What mischief is the Minister trying to address by taking it out? It is good to include consultation with the community and other persons, but why would one take out a reference to educational bodies and other organisations? What is that designed to achieve? It seems that can only do mischief. We should be promoting a culture of consultation with educational bodies and other organisations, and, indeed, the support for those, and for their initiatives, as arises.

As to the rest of the Bill, it is a great pity that it proposes to remove the requirement for the Heritage Council to establish statutory standing committees on wildlife, archeology, architectural heritage and inland waterways and given the proposed reduction in the number of board directors, it seems it will not always be possible to have board members or, indeed, standing committee members who are skilled in directing the board to effect policies in all the different heritage areas that are cited at section 6(1) of the 1995 Act. Of course, I am aware that the Heritage Council will still be able to appoint committees as it requires and that is why I am concentrating my fire, as it were, on the need to change the amendment to section 6(3)(b) of the 1995 Act contained in the Bill so as to reinsert the reference to "educational bodies and other organisations". It should not really fall to us here in the House to have to propose the amendment. It is a reasonable, minor amendment that the Minister could bring forward on Committee Stage and I think everybody in the House would support it. I am requesting the Minister to revisit that section and to reinsert the reference to "educational bodies and other organisations" at section 6(3)(b). If the Minister is minded to make this amendment - obviously, we will need to propose it if she does not - it will ensure that the Heritage Council does not lose its original focus as it further develops its functions and inclusivity in so many important heritage areas in Ireland.