Seán Kyne (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State and congratulate all involved in bringing forward this Bill. Having served for some time as Minister of State at the Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, I know the Bill has been some time in the making. There was a unique scenario whereby it went through pre-legislative scrutiny when much of its content had already been written, although there may subsequently have been changes to it. The legislation was known as the monuments and archaeological heritage Bill in its earlier incarnations. It is not unusual for the Title of a Bill to change but I wonder why the word "monuments" was removed. The Bill is a natural successor to the National Monuments Act 1930. Will the Minister of State consider changing the Title to include the word "monuments", which would provide continuity with the previous legislation?

I have some concerns regarding the language used in the Bill, particularly in sections 12 and 13. There is reference to a "relevant thing", "a class of relevant things", "the date and time when he or she found the thing concerned" and "the circumstances in which he or she found the thing". I find that a strange usage of the English language. Is it possible to find a better word than "thing", such as "item" or "object"? I do not know whether the usage of "thing" perhaps follows through from international archaeological terminology. It seems a strange wording to use.

Section 18 relates to the promotion of public awareness of a register of monuments. There is an issue I have raised before, including with officials, not specifically in reference to this section but more generally. When land is sold, there should be a practice whereby an auctioneer is required to advise the new purchaser that a monument has been found on the land the individual has bought. Some of these monuments may be quite innocuous and could be described as landscape features. Some of them may be overgrown. While people are waiting for registration of title of deed and all that goes with it, damage could be done to a monument of which they are not aware. Unfortunately, one of the first things a new owner might do is send an individual out with a machine to do some clearing, as per the terminology used down the country. Whether or not they have planning permission to do that, it is often what happens. It would be a shame if monuments were lost in circumstances whereby people genuinely are not aware there is something there because they have just bought the land. We should make provision in the Bill such that when people go sale agreed at an auction or whatever, there would be an onus on the auctioneer to ensure information is provided to the new owner. Such a precautionary measure might help to protect monuments.

Unfortunately, there is sometimes a requirement that capital works take place. They might include road projects, for example, to which the Minister of State might not be agreeable in general. There is sometimes disruption to archaeological sites or the need for an archaeological dig. In my own area, Transport Infrastructure Ireland, TII, has produced a wonderful document called A Moycullen Miscellany. It was written by Jerry O'Sullivan and his team and details the history, architecture and archaeology of the N59 Moycullen bypass, which should be open in August or September. It gives an in-depth history of the area, including its historical features and monuments and any archaeological finds. The people involved went out and launched it in the community and locals were interested in what they had to say. Where archaeological digs and excavations are required as part of a capital road project, that type of information should be published and presented to people within the community who are interested in it. It was a nice touch to do that in the case of Moycullen. As I said, there is a need for capital projects at times and they can have an impact. There have been debates in the past on other projects. Where there is a requirement for projects and they go through the phases of planning and so on, it is right that there should be a record of any finds and that such record would be presented to the local community.