JOINT COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT debate -
Thursday, 24 Feb 2005

Business of Joint Committee.

Deputy Gilmore

I want to refer to the letter we have just received from the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, dated the day before yesterday, which refers to our correspondence regarding the non-attendance of the director of the National Museum of Ireland at the joint committee on 2 February to discuss with us the archaeological issues arising from the routing of the M3 through Tara and Skryne. It is a remarkable letter from the Minister because it states: "In relation to the proposed route of the M3 motorway at Tara-Skryne, I understand that the Minister [that is, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government] has not yet sought the views of the Director of the National Museum on the formal direction which he proposes to issue". As I recall it, the director of the National Museum informed this committee that he had been advised by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government that he should not attend this committee to discuss that issue because he would be giving advice to the Minister.

First, it is extraordinary that the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government would have asked the director of the National Museum not to attend this committee in circumstances where the Minister had not even asked the director for his advice on this issue. Second, it is even more extraordinary that the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has not yet asked the director of the National Museum for his advice on this issue. I cannot recall offhand the date on which the National Roads Authority asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to exercise his functions under the new National Monuments Acts in regard to this road but it was well before Christmas. I am aware that under the legislation the normal procedure is that the Minister asks the director of the National Museum for his opinion and the director has 14 days within which to respond. The whole thrust of the amended national monuments legislation is that the Minister gets the request and asks the director of the National Museum for his opinion.

We have had public controversy in this country, and internationally — it was a major item recently on the front page of The Washington Post — over the archaeological issues associated with the M3 and whether it should be run through Tara and Skryne. In the context of the Meath by-election, 90% of people are now saying it should be built immediately but the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has been sitting on the request from the National Roads Authority for months and has not yet asked the director of the National Museum for his opinion. What is going on? We are being told by Government and the National Roads Authority that the building of the M3 is urgent, that commuters cannot get to work or in and out of town and that the archaeological issues will have to be set aside in order to facilitate it, yet the Minister has not asked the director of the National Museum for his opinion.

How will the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government make a decision on this issue? Not only was the director of the National Museum not allowed to attend this committee to give his opinion on it, he has not even been asked for his opinion on it by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

I understand Dr. Wallace has intimated to the committee that he would be happy to meet it when he has discharged his obligations to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, that is if he is ever asked for his opinion by the Minister. It would not surprise me if the Minister does not already think he knows more about this issue than the director of the National Museum.

We should write to Dr. Wallace and express our understanding that he is being told he cannot attend the committee but we should inform him that it is the committee's intention that he should attend here and express his view about this matter after he has discharged his obligations to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, provided he is asked to do that. However, he should be asked to attend the committee.

This is quite an extraordinary situation. There is a ballyhoo going on in the country about the M3 and the Hill of Tara. We are all waiting for the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to make a decision and indicate what he intends to do about it and how he will reconcile the 38 archaeological sites that have been found to date, the archaeological landscape and all the other issues with the building of the road yet he has not even asked the director of the National Museum for his view of it.

Deputy Cuffe

This letter smacks of the type of response one might have expected from the Bulgarian Minister for the interior in 1968 and not one we should be getting in 2005. The last sentence in the second paragraph states that it is only because of this statutory obligation on the director, which has not yet been discharged, that the issue of the appropriateness of his meeting with the committee has arisen at this stage. In other words, the foremost authority on archaeology in the country is not being brought in prior to the decision being made. That renders this committee toothless in that we are only allowed be privy to the views of the best authorities on archaeology after decisions have been made. That raises the question as to whether this committee should discuss issues such as archaeology in the first place.

I regard this as a muzzling of the director. I do not believe it arose as an issue when the Bill came before the Dáil. Nobody told us this will be used as a way of prohibiting the director from speaking out prior to decisions being made. There was never any insinuation that would be the case. It is ludicrous that we will be allowed to hear people speak only after an important decision is made regarding one of the most sacred sites in Ireland. Let us call a spade a spade. We want to have a discussion on whether it is right to run a road through the historic Tara complex. That is the issue on which we wish to give an opinion. It is appropriate that this committee should hear somebody with views on this subject at an earlier rather than later stage.

As Deputy Gilmore said, it seems curious that when even the Taoiseach has said he wants to get this road built as quickly as possible, the Minister has not sought the views of the director. Why the wait?

Chairman

The committee has done a huge job in highlighting the issues of archaeology and so forth. However, I am not sure we will change the Minister's mind. We could agree to Deputy Gilmore's proposal that we write to Dr. Wallace asking him to come before the committee at the first available opportunity once he has discharged his obligations. Is that agreed?

Senator Brennan

We should write to the Minister as well. He is obliged to consult with the director. Dr. Wallace said he is willing to come before the committee. The Minister should carry out his obligations at an early stage to allow that to happen.

Chairman

Is it the view of the committee that the Minister should consult with the director sooner rather than later?

Deputy Gilmore

He has to. We are hearing nonsense from the Government about the M3. The Government is codding people about it. It is telling people it is in a hurry to build it but nothing can happen until the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government decides what he will do about the archaeological issues. He has not yet contacted the director of the National Museum about it.

Chairman

There is no suggestion that the Minister is not acting in accordance with the legislation. That is not the case.

Senator Bannon

We should be told the reason the Minister has not contacted the director of the National Museum to date. This is a serious issue. As Deputy Gilmore pointed out, an international view is being taken on how we should proceed on this issue. It is alarming that the Minister has not yet sought the views of the director of the National Museum, who is the custodian of the artefacts of our country. It is baffling. This issue has been ongoing for the last six months and this is the fourth or fifth meeting of the committee in which it has been raised. This has thrown new light on the Minister not acting on behalf of the State in this matter. There will be great public concern that this has not happened to date. We should write to the Minister and ask him his reasons for not contacting the director of the National Museum in this regard.

Chairman

The Minister is on record as saying that he is waiting to receive the various reports. We should first establish if he has received the reports from the archaeologists. We could contact the Minister to ask him when he will make a decision and why he has not made it to date.

Deputy Cuffe

I suspect the date of the by-election has a bearing on his decision.

Chairman

Is it agreed that we write to the Minister conveying our view that he should take a decision on this as soon as possible and asking the reason he has not taken a decision to date? Is it also agreed that we write to Dr. Patrick Wallace inviting him to come before the committee as soon as possible after his legislative functions have been discharged? Agreed.