Vol. 431 No. 7
3 Ms F. Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht if, in view of the recent Supreme Court decision, any future policy in relation to the interpretative centres concerned will fall within his remit; the proposals, if any, he has in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
21 Ms Keogh asked the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht if, in view of the Supreme Court judgment, he will now be recommending alternative proposals to the Office of Public Works.
24 Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht the response of the Government to the judgment given by the Supreme Court on 26 May 1993, regarding interpretative centres; if it is intended to abandon proposals to build such centres at Mullaghmore in County Clare and Lugalla in County Wicklow; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Tógfaidh mé Ceisteanna 3, 21 agus 24 le chéile.
The Supreme Court decision to which the questions refer is the majority decision of the court of 26 May 1993, that State authorities are not exempt from the provision of section 24 of the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1963.
As I indicated in my reply to a question on 24 February 1993, the Government approved the suspension of work on three visitor centres, viz. Lugalla, Mullaghmore and the Boyne Valley, pending the outcome of the Supreme Court hearing. Since the court has made its decision I have had discussions with my colleagues in Government as to how we should proceed from here and the Government has (1) agreed that, arising from the Supreme Court decision of 26 May 1993, in the matter of the Local Government (Planning and Development) Acts, 1963 to 1990, and in the matter of section 27 of the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1976, it is now necessary to apply for planning permission to regularise the position; (2) instructed the Office of Public Works to engage in the widest possible consultations with all interested parties before submission of any planning application, this process to be completed within two months; and (3) agreed that the Office of Public Works apply for planning permission following such consultations.
With respect, I do not think the Minister has answered my question which has to do with future policy in this area and whether he would be personally responsible therefor. What I was really asking was whether the power struggle within Government in regard to who is responsible for this issue had been resolved, which is a critical factor in arriving at a solution. In the interests of the community concerned, would the Minister agree that what is now needed is an approach that brings together the Office of Public Works, Clare County Council and other environmental groups in a serious endeavour to resolve the issues and find a consensus so that those groups do not find themselves in an escalating cycle of legal activity?
I am grateful to the Deputy for her wishes in relation to the future on what have been divisive issues. I share her concerns. It is for that reason that, with her, I welcome strong Government commitment to consultation.
In answering the first part of her question I should inform her that the Government has decided that the Office of Public Works in the heritage area will draw down an annual work programme from my policy proposals. This will be implemented following consultation between the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Dempsey, and myself.
Deputy F. Fitzgerald rose.
Can we have brevity at this time for obvious reasons? I want to complete the five questions involved. I cannot remain unduly long on any one question as this would be to the disadvantage of the questions at the bottom.
Does the Minister support the idea that a planning application should be made in respect of the centre a Mullaghmore? Will this form part of the plan which will be drawn up in the coming months?
I think the Deputy would agree that it would not be in the public interest for the Government to ignore the Supreme Court ruling, which is perfectly clear. It creates an obligation to observe the planning process. What is important is that a consultation process, which all of us wanted, will take place.
Does the Minister believe that it should be built?
Deputy Shatter may not intervene at this stage.
I have no bother answering his question——
It is not in order, Minister.
Does the Minister believe that it should be built?
I told Deputy Shatter that he may not intervene at this juncture.
The answer to the question I was posed is that a consultation process will take place and the planning application considered appropriate folowing that consultation process will be submitted.
Deputy F. Fitzgerald rose.
Question No. 4.
With respect, a great deal of consultation has already taken place, what is the Minister's view?
I am sorry, Deputy, but we must proceed to the next question in your name.
