Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 6 Nov 1968

Vol. 236 No. 13

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Hill of Tara.

4.

asked the Minister for Finance when it is intended to have the Hill of Tara acquired by the State; and why the promise made by the State to do this about four years ago has not yet been implemented.

An area of 43½ acres on the southern side of the Hill of Tara has already been acquired by the State. Negotiations to acquire a further area of about 57 acres on the northern side broke down with the refusal of the owner to accept a substantial offer made by the Commissioners of Public Works. Notice was then served by the Commissioners on the owner of their intention to acquire the property compulsorily under the provisions of the National Monuments Acts, but injunction proceedings to restrain the Commissioners from proceeding with the acquisition have been instituted and are listed for hearing during the present sittings of the High Court.

(Cavan): I thought Meath County Council were looking after that.

No, only one of the Fianna Fáil members. Would the Parliamentary Secretary be able to say what progress was made from the time the late Donogh O'Malley mentioned in this House that it was proposed to take over this area completely to the present time, apart from what was done over the last few months when notice of intention to acquire was given to the owner? Could the Parliamentary Secretary say whether there is any porcedure whereby the price of national monuments such as this could be decided by arbitration rather than have the matter bandied about between various bodies for a number of years?

In answer to the first part of the Deputy's question, I would say there were protracted negotiations with the owners of the land to see whether an amicable agreement could be arrived at and, these having failed, the other process was resorted to.

But why protracted? Why was an offer not made and then, if the offer was not accepted, some other means employed?

A very substantial offer was, in fact, made.

If a substantial offer was refused why were some other steps not taken then rather than wait until the present impasse occurred? Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware numerous foreign interests are anxious to acquire this place and one day we may wake up and find Germans or Americans owning it.

There is no possibility of that eventuating.

When the High Court is finished the Parliamentary Secretary may be very surprised.

Top
Share