Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I join you, a Chathaoirligh, in welcoming the guests to the Public Gallery. Their work is very important, and well done to them on it. I know they are working closely with Senator Seery Kearney. I wish them well.

I welcome the Minister of State and thank him and his officials. I have had some engagement with his officials on this Bill. I acknowledge the contribution of Senators Cummins, Fitzpatrick and Seery Kearney, who are also on the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage and who did a lot of work on the pre-legislative scrutiny of the Bill.

The Minister of State is an excellent one. He is fiercely committed. He lives in a beautiful part of the world, Kilkenny, so he is very close to the natural and the built environment. However, he is the Minister of State today; he will not be the Minister of State for ever. We are working on primary legislation, which will be his legacy, we hope, but he will not always be here to oversee it. He will not be able to give it the passion, the drive and the commitment he has. We have to be mindful of that when we draft primary legislation to ensure that it is robust enough, has longevity and sets out to do what it is meant to do, which is to protect our historic and archaeological heritage, which this Bill seeks to do. As I said this morning on the Order of Business, I want to acknowledge the Minister of State’s commitment and close collaboration and work with the Heritage Council and the launch of the strategy that I attended this morning. It was great he launched it. I want to also acknowledge the work of Dr. Martina Moloney and, of course, Virginia Teehan, the chief executive officer. That was important. The report is entitled Our Place in Time. I mention that because all our heritage is interrelated and interconnected with our archaeology. It is important that we acknowledge that our national historic and archaeological heritage is a vital part of who we are. It supports our identity and sense of belonging. That is why it is so important and it must be valued, cared for and open for all to enjoy.

I liked the quote this morning. As I was coming in here to talk about the Bill, I thought that I would quote it yet again. In the preface to Our Place in Time, there is a lovely piece from President Michael D. Higgins to mark the 20th anniversary of the Heritage Council. The Heritage Council is very much embedded in this legislation. It was apt and worth saying again. It is in the preface of the report launched this morning. He said: "When we speak of heritage today, we are talking about [the] interaction with the world around us, both real and abstract, our identity and our need to tell our own story in our own way." That is what Michael D. Higgins said some years ago. Again, the Heritage Council used it and it was very apt. That is only one piece of the paragraph.

It is important that we talk about leadership and stewardship. It is important we talk also in the context of biodiversity and climate all interacting - research, partnership, communities, public engagement and the safety of archaeology going forward. That is important.

I want to support this legislation but there are one or two issues that need some engagement that I want to first address. First, I thank the library and research team for an extensive digest on this Bill. It assists us and I acknowledge their critical work in the Parliament in helping us to navigate and understand legislation in a fine grain and in finer detail. There were nine pre-legislative scrutiny recommendations to this report, two of which raised concern and have been flagged by library and research service. One is the pre-legislative scrutiny recommendation No. 2, that the Bill provide an automatic entry into the planning authority’s record to protect the structures and those prescribed. Of course, the Minister of State’s Department is not suggesting that be included. Some of us would be familiar with a county development plan. I took my own county development plan in the county I live in, Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown, to see that all these sites are marked on the plan. They are marked on the maps. They are included in the inventory next to the record of protected structures. It was rightly pointed out that they are not protected structures. However, it is significant. What is a city and county development plan? It is a contract with the people. It is a written as well as a map-form document that sets out the future planning for the life of a development plan, possibly now to be ten years if the other legislation is approved. Therefore, it is important that it is a port of call or a point where the public would look at it and see what they could legitimately expect. What is around them and what are the limitations if they are acquiring land for agriculture or they want to develop something? It might be said it is repetition. I would rather have something repeated. However, to suggest that it is not relevant and unnecessary begs the question “Why?”.

I am familiar with the Carrickmines Castle. I want to flag that as well. There are many lessons to learn from Carrickmines Castle, the place that was a result of many judicial reviews and High Court actions. Many people were vindicated in all of that fight with the Government. Where is all the archaeology? Where is it all going? Look at the reports of what was promised. Séamus Brennan was Minister at one point with responsibility for roads and transport. The stuff is stuck in boxes all over the place. None of it is being put on exhibition, no one has a definitive list of it and no one knows anything about it. However, that is for another day.

There is a lesson from Carrickmines Castle out in Carrickmines at the junction in South County Dublin. It is a great, historic site, yet none if it is to be seen except part of the M50. We have lessons to learn. We made many promises and we did not deliver. We should have it marked on the county development plans. They are local, people understand them, they go to their planning office and they can see them. It may be a repetition of what the Minister of State is proposing, but let us be sure and have it in two places.

On the pre-legislative scrutiny recommendation No. 6, the proposed Bill provides for things of cultural interest. That is a concern and there are issues around that. I would like to draw the Minister of State’s attention to the Faro Convention. I do not want to sound too intelligent because I knew nothing about the Faro Convention until I was at the gathering this morning at the Heritage Council. A distinguished archaeologist who was invited to the event and asked me if I had looked at the Faro Convention. I said that I knew nothing about it but I take it is Faro in Portugal. He told me it deals with a lot of our cultural heritage and advised me to take a look at that. I am only flagging that. I know nothing more about it. However, it ties in with concerns on pre-legislative scrutiny recommendation No. 6.

I wish to quickly raise other issues. There is too much power going to the Minister. While the Minister of State is an excellent Minister and is fully committed, the Minister may consult - broadly through this document – through the vehicle of the Heritage Council. It only has to have regard to it. It can reject every bit of what the Heritage Council advises. Another Minister could come in, do a consultation and if he or she is not happy, decide to move on because of the national development plan. That is the balance. We need national progress and infrastructure, but we also need to look after archaeology. I am concerned about that.

I am particularly concerned about the Valletta Convention. Initially, it was not in the Bill. We made a very strong case and eventually it was put in or partially put into the Bill. We thought that it would be more than just a wink and a nod at the Valletta Convention, which is the European convention on the protection of archaeological sites, and it would be deeply embedded in the legislation.

I will leave it at that. I have concerns about those issues. I want to flag that I have already worked on some amendments. I will hopefully table them in the morning, so there will be adequate notice. I am happy to talk to the Minister of State’s officials in advance. I worked on the amendments. I think they are just those areas. If they are all ironed out, I am happy to support this legislation.