Vol. 471 No. 4
22 Mr. E. Byrne asked the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht if he will give a timeframe for the implementation of the recommendations in relation to the protection of architectural heritage contained in section 2.4.5 of the recently published document entitled Developing a Government Policy on Architecture; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20968/96]
The document referred to is a discussion document entitled "Developing a Government Policy on Architecture: A proposed framework and discussion of issues" which I launched on 17 September 1996. The document sets out a proposed policy framework for architecture in its broadest sense, including a specific section on architectural heritage to which the Deputy refers, and raises issues of how to achieve high standards of design and construction, innovation in architecture and sustainable development. As I stated in the preface to the discussion document, the policy proposals contained in it have not yet been discussed with my Cabinet colleagues, and before bringing specific policy recommendations to Government early next year, it is important to stimulate a wideranging discussion involving the community at large. I therefore instituted a four month public consultation process and have invited Government Departments, local authorities, professional bodies, interest groups and the general public to submit their observations on the discussion document to the heritage policy division of my Department, not later than 17 January 1997.
The report of the interdepartmental working group on Strengthening the Protection of the Architectural Heritage was published simultaneously with the discussion document referred to in the Deputy's question, and deals comprehensively with the protection of the architectural heritage. Most of the proposed actions relating to the protection of the architectural heritage contained in section of 2.4.5 of the discussion document on developing a Government policy on architecture referred to by the Deputy are also contained in the interdepartmental working group's report. Any aspects of the policy proposals contained in section 2.4.5 of the discussion document which are not already specifically dealt with in the working group's report will be considered in the context of consideration of the recommendations of that report and of any observations received on those recommendations. The report will form the basis for a package of specific legislative, administrative and financial proposals relating to the protection of the architectural heritage which I, with my colleague, the Minister for the Environment, Deputy Howlin, intend to bring to Government, following detailed consideration of the report which is currently taking place in both of our Departments.
In relation to the proposal in the discussion document that the Convention on the Protection of the Architectural Heritage of Europe should be ratified, the Government recently authorised me to move a motion in Dáil Éireann approving the terms of that convention, which Ireland signed in 1985. I will move such a motion in the Dáil shortly and subject to Dáil approval, the Minister for Foreign Affairs will arrange for ratification of the convention.
Is there any significance in the fact that there is no member of Democratic Left present in the House? Could this be an example of four legged creatures leaving the sinking ship?
Almost eight months have elapsed since my party introduced a Private Members' Bill to give proper legal protection to architecturally significant and historic buildings. However, it was voted down by the Minister and the Government.
A question please, Deputy.
When will the Government introduce a Bill to deal with this important matter?
As I said in my reply, these two invaluable reports are comprehensive and well worth study by professional bodies and by the public. Submissions will be received between now and 17 January. The Department is examining those reports, as is my colleague, the Minister for the Environment, Deputy Howlin. If we advertise for submissions to get the public's views, we must examine them. Many former Governments were not good at consultation. When we examine the submissions, we will have three different proposals to forward to Government — legislative, administrative and financial.
What is the Minister's view on a national inventory of architecture? I understood from the Minister's speech on Deputy Quill's Private Members' Bill that the compilation of such a list could take up to 25 years. Is the Minister aware of the 63 recommendations sent to his Department by the Heritage Council? Is he concerned that a new central authority to deal with an inventory of architecture may be another quango?
It should not be called a quango. I thought there was agreement among the parties on the importance of architecture. If we set up a national architectural inventory, we should not try to destroy it by saying it should not be given time.
Will another authority be established to deal with it, as has been proposed?
Time should not be used as an excuse for delays. Despite the fact that people talked about the architectural heritage of Ireland for decades, I inherited an area of comprehensive neglect.
What has the Minister done since?
The Minister is a godsend.
Let us hear the reply.
I am delighted to hear that. People will make submissions between now and 17 January. For the first time we will go to Government with proposals and carry out a survey. It will not, as Deputy de Valera said, be a useless quango. It will do valuable work.
Is the Minister aware that 18th century furniture from Headford House will be sold later this week in Christies of London? Is he further aware of the concerns expressed by architectural historians and by the Heritage Council about the need to keep this furniture in Headford House? Has he any plans to buy the furniture?
That is a specific matter.
I did not know about the sale but I appreciate the concerns expressed. Because of the importance of furniture, which was not included in previous legislation, I referred specifically to interiors such as wallpaper and furniture in the National Cultural Institutions Bill, 1996, which I introduced in the Seanad. I appreciate the Deputy's concerns and I will have the matter investigated by my Department. Deputy Quill's Bill drew attention to the need for consistency in relation to interiors as well as exteriors.
This is an urgent issue as the sale takes place next Thursday.
There must be a bottom up strategy. Preservation lists are included in every county development plan. Will the Minister ensure that written statements are included during the planning process? Our architectural heritage is under threat every day. Some planning officials are endeavouring to stem the tide. Preservation orders and listings carry weight in the written statements, therefore they could help to protect our architectural heritage.
That responsibility lies with my colleague, the Minister for the Environment, although I do not say that to take away from the Deputy's proposal. A proper national inventory would be no good without the support of society. I will examine this issue with the local authorities to see if they can operate in the way suggested by the Deputy.
I ask the Minister to take appropriate and immediate action in relation to the Headford House furniture because the sale will take place on Thursday.
In his reply the Minister tried to cloud what I said. I said the Heritage Council had put forward certain recommendations and had expressed its concern about setting up a new central authority to draw up a national inventory of architecture. I want to know if the Minister shares that concern. Does he agree that the establishment of this committee to give advice is another excuse for prevarication?
I am glad the Deputy clarified her statement because it was wrong to refer to the suggested national body as a quango. Of course, I read the reports of the Heritage Council with great care.
Will the Minister accept that what is needed is not further discussion or deliberation, but action and law. Ireland is losing on average five major houses of historic or architectural importance per year. Each year we delay enacting law to give them proper protection the more buildings are lost that can never be replaced.
To illustrate my point I draw the Minister's attention to the destruction in the past month of the historic house in which Tomás Mac Curtáin, the Lord Mayor of Cork was assassinated in 1920. There was no law to protect or prevent its demolition or to require the developer to restore the essential historic features of that house. That is only one case in point that illustrates the necessity to enact law in this area sooner rather than later. I ask the Minister to respond to this matter.
Deputy Quill's supplementary question has the merit of drawing attention to the fact that not all the great houses were occupied by people with a particular background, but that the concept "historic house" includes the house of Tomás Mac Curtáin, for whom I have great admiration. I agree that this is a dangerous situation and I do not want to score any point. The legislation on the protection of such buildings should have been in place long ago. I will try to ensure that there will not be any undue delay in that regard.
