Vol. 518 No. 1
38 Mr. Kenny asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage Gaeltacht and the Islands the proposals she has to develop the Great Blasket Island as a national park; the cost to the State of the appeal to the Supreme Court; if she has visited the Blasket Island; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10983/00]
Following on the Supreme Court decision in July 1999, which declared An Blascaod Mhór National Historic Park Act, 1989, to be invalid, the 1989 Act is no longer available to me to facilitate the establishment of a national historic park on the Great Blasket Island.
The current position is that future policy on the Great Blasket Island, taking into account a range of issues, is being reviewed at Governmental level. I am not in a position, therefore, to comment further on this issue at present.
The State's legal costs incurred in the defence of An Blascaod Mór National Historic Park Act, 1989, will be in excess of £1 million. While I have not yet had the opportunity to visit the Great Blasket Island, my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Ó Cúiv, has visited the state-of-the-art visitor centre, Ionad an Bhlascaoid Mhóir in Dún Chaoin, which has been in place since 1994.
My Department is fully committed to promoting the unique cultural, heritage and educational importance of the literary tradition of the Great Blasket Island as evidenced by the ongoing promotion of this heritage, especially by means of Ionad an Bhlascaoid Mhóir in Dún Chaoin.
Since the 1989 Act is no longer available to the Minister, does she wish to see the Great Blasket now taken over by the State as a national park and will it be from that point of view that she proceeds to Government with her discussions? Did the Attorney General advise that the State should appeal the High Court decision to the Supreme Court which has cost £1 million? Is it the Minister's intention to call together the various parties and the landowners on the Great Blasket to have a rational discussion about the future of this unique island in terms of what her objective might be regarding the creation of a national park there?
Both parties in Government feel very strongly about the protection and preservation of the great heritage which is part of the Blasket Islands and which is important in all sorts of ways with regard to the educational, social and historical understanding of our past. The national park is important. Under the National Monuments Acts, the three main houses there are protected, Peig Sayer's house being one of them. The question of the SACs and the NHAs that will be relevant to that island ensure that the flora and fauna are protected under our law. As the Deputy will be aware, there have been attempts to buy parts of the island. Unfortunately there was not a resolution to our efforts in that regard.
Currently the Government is reviewing what will be the best approach at this stage given that the 1989 Act now falls by way of the Supreme Court case. The Deputy is right in saying that while all of these issues were going through the courts, I sought legal advice on the matter, on foot of which I took a view on the best way to approach these issues. Currently it is being assessed by Government and until Government makes a decision, I will not be in a position to go public. When it is decided the Deputy will be made aware of it.
Does the Minister intend to introduce a Bill following Government discussions, to acquire the Great Blasket and make it a national park? I am aware of the protection of the flora and fauna and so on and the planning process only allows for particular developments. I ask the Minister for further clarification. She obtained legal advice and took that advice and appealed the case to the Supreme Court. Was that legal advice given by the Attorney General?
As the Deputy knows, this case went straight to the Supreme Court but the costs were incurred at the High Court, not at the Supreme Court. Concerning legislation, that is an issue that may be considered when we have a final decision from the Government.
(Dublin West): What is the Minister's view?
Deputy Higgins cannot intervene because it is a priority question.
(Dublin West): I am being muzzled.
Was this advice from the Attorney General?
I will have to check.
