Vol. 534 No. 4
31 Mr. McGinley asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage Gaeltacht and the Islands the criteria she used in issuing a licence to alter to the Asgard restoration project group; the agencies consulted; the advice received; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10882/01]
The Asgard is owned by the Minister for Defence who agreed to the removal of the vessel from Kilmainham Jail, where it has been located since 1979, by the Asgard restoration project. My Department did not raise any objection to this on condition that appropriate accommodation and suitable insurance cover was provided and subject to the National Museum of Ireland being satisfied with the accommodation.
The housing of the Asgard has recently been examined by officials of the National Museum of Ireland. The ARP has been verbally advised that the current accommodation is unsatisfactory and a formal notice to this effect has been issued to the ARP.
The licence to alter issued by my Department in respect of the Asgard requires the Asgard restoration project to provide the director of the National Museum of Ireland with a detailed proposal or work schedule regarding the proposed work of alteration. It is also a condition of the licence that access is provided to the National Museum of Ireland to inspect work in progress. This work has not yet commenced. I understand a schedule for the work involved will not be prepared until after the Asgard restoration project has raised the additional private funding necessary to carry out the restoration. In the meantime, the allocation of funds to the Asgard is primarily a matter for the vessel's owner, who is the Minister for Defence.
Does the Minister agree that the reason she had to issue a licence to alter is because the Asgard has been classified an archaeological object and that our first priority is conservation and preservation, not restoration? Does she also agree that, if this restoration plan proceeds, less than 10% of the original Asgard will remain and that it will not be a restoration and more a desecration of a national treasure? Did the Minister seek advice from the National Museum, the Heritage Council and from independent consultants? Will the Minister confirm that their advice was that the emphasis should be on conservation and the Asgard being on display in a maritime museum for future generations rather than on this so-called restoration which will result in less than 10% of the original Asgard remaining?
It will not be restoration or conservation but desecration. I am surprised the Minister agreed to such a course given from where she comes and given her responsibility. Does the Minister agree she may be in violation of the 1992 European Convention on the protection of archaeological heritage which we signed in 1997 in allowing this nonsensical restoration to proceed which flies in the face of all advice from anyone who knows anything about archaeology?
The view expressed by the Deputy is held by a number of people and formed the essence of the debate which took place on the Asgard. There are some, like the Deputy, who believe the Asgard should not be made a seagoing vessel but should be in a museum. There are others, and I share their view, who believe it should be a seagoing vessel. I sought advice on this from the National Museum of Ireland and the Heritage Council. It is fair to say the thrust of their general advice was closer to the former rather than the latter view. I brought the matter to Cabinet and it supported the licence being given to allow the Asgard to be restored as a seafaring vessel. The licence was issued by my Department with certain conditions attached.
I am sure the Deputy is aware that, as Minister with responsibility for heritage, I have the responsibility of deciding on whether a licence should be issued. The vessel is owned by the Minister for Defence and any Exchequer funding for its restoration would come through that Department and not mine. Discussions are also ongoing on sponsorship and private moneys to be made available for the vessel.
The Minister of State, Deputy Coughlan, is aware of the emotional attachment people in Donegal have to the Asgard. If this project is allowed continue as planned, we will have the Asgard in name only. The vessel is unique. What is proposed is like adding diamonds to the Ardagh Chalice or putting a coat of pebbledash on the high cross of Monasterboice. Conservation must be the order of the day. If the restoration project proceeds, we will have a replica masquerading as the Asgard. The only original feature which will remain will be the name.
The Deputy should ask a question.
Will the Minister put this nonsensical plan on hold until it is properly investigated and the views of all interested parties are taken into consideration?
I understand the views expressed by the Deputy. However, he is somewhat out of date. I am sure he realises the licence was issued in December 1999 and it was at that stage, and previous to it, that discussions took place and views were expressed and given an airing. It was on foot of those discussions and views that I brought the issue to Cabinet which supported the proposal to restore the Asgard to being a sailing vessel. The Deputy is right in saying the Asgard has played a very important part in our history and the fact it will be a seagoing vessel will create further interest, especially among younger people who may be in a position to learn more about the history of the Asgard than they might were it to remain a museum setting.
It will not be the Asgard. The Asgard is lying at the Point Depot exposed to the elements.
An t-Aire ar Cheist Uimh. 32.
Deputy Coughlan knows all about it. She unveiled a plaque to the Asgard at Gola.
The Minister, without interruption.
I will seek the Chair's permission to raise this on the Adjournment.
