My first duty is to thank very sincerely all the Senators who contributed to the Second Stage debate on the Bill establishing the National Heritage Council. It is an indication of the interest in the measure when there were so many contributors. I have no doubt that those who spoke expressed a keen and knowledgeable interest in the Bill itself, in the establishment of the council, what its functions should be and how best it could be used to preserve, promote and foster our heritage.
In my introductory speech I invited Senators to make comments or suggestions for improvement. I indicated at that time that my mind was by no means closed as to the content of the Bill, because I share the views expressed by many Senators that it is a type of Bill that can be improved by all the contributions made and by taking note and cognisance of many of the points made. Therefore, I am grateful for the contributions, and the helpful and learned suggestions made are worthy of careful thought. Some very detailed points about individual sections of the Bill were made and perhaps it might be more appropriate to consider them at Committee Stage when we will have an opportunity of discussing them in greater detail. However, some more general points were made by all speakers and I will deal with them later. Before doing so, I would like to clarify some general aspects of the proposed council.
The concept of a National Heritage Council was not simply plucked out of the air, and I want to dispel any doubt in anybody's mind that that was the case. The Government arrived at the conclusion that this was the best means of preserving and protecting our heritage only after a long and careful examination and consideration of all the possible options. As I indicated already, this conclusion by the Government was not meant to imply that the job was not being well done up to this by the relevant parts of the civil service.
In my opening speech I complimented the agencies, and I repeat those compliments. It can be taken as an indication of the Government's satisfaction with the work of the civil servants involved that in the main they will continue to carry out this work in the future under the aegis of the council that will be established by means of this Bill.
The important new factor will, of course be the council. It is extremely important in itself and it will consist of 15 expert and interested people selected by the Government. These people will bring their expertise and their enthusiasm to bear on the important task to be assigned to them. In order to enable them to do this with the utmost effectiveness, it was felt that it would be preferable to give the council the type of independent status associated with non-commercial State-sponsored bodies. I want to assure Members of the House that the calibre of people to be selected will be specifically related to the tasks the council will be expected to perform in an efficient and competent way. I see the establishment of the council as being the beginning of a new era.
Large administrative bodies generally have a multitude of objectives. It is true of Government Departments as it is of other large organisations and functions that matters relating to our heritage tend to be dealt with on the periphery, being in the main marginal to a Department's principal objectives. Here the council will have as its primary function the preservation, protection and promotion of our heritage.
The Government's intention was to set up a body which would concentrate solely on heritage matters. The council will bring together under one roof, as it were, a number of disparate elements of the Government's administrative machine which are concerned with like matters. This, of itself, should lead to greater effectiveness. The bringing together of related heritage functions into one organisation should help to more clearly identify the national heritage in the public mind. The task of protecting and preserving our heritage is not simply a matter for the Government alone but it is one that should involve all the people of this country. The mere fact of having that council will bring more clearly to people's minds the necessity to preserve what is such an important element of our country's past.
As is clear from the Bill, the proposed council will not be concerned with all aspects of our national heritage and culture. A number of very important aspects such as our language, literature and music are not mentioned in the Bill and it is not intended that they will be the concern of this council. The Bill contains a basic framework which permits a council to be established and certain functions related to our physical heritage to be assigned to the council. Further functions can be assigned later on by way of order. This Bill does not, therefore, contain the last words of the Government on national heritage. As I said earlier I believe that it represents the beginning of a new and a very significant era.
I would like to stress that the Government's commitment to the archaeological and natural heritage in the Bill before the House should not be taken as any lessening of commitment to other equally important elements of our cultural heritage. We will continue to work strenuously for the preservation and development of our total cultural heritage. By concentrating the charter the council now proposed on our physical heritage, it will be better able to establish clear objectives and avoid dissipation of its resources over a wide spread of activities.
I would now like to deal with some of the points made by Members, and I again thank them for the interest they showed in the measure and for the study and time they obviously devoted to studying the Bill itself. A number of Senators suggested that consideration should be given to including other aspects of our heritage with the terms of reference of the council. As I said, it was decided not to include every aspect within the scope of the National Heritage Council because it was felt that initially the council should deal only with the physical heritage. I would like to stress that it is possible that other aspects of our heritage could be added later. It must be remembered, however, that even as matters stand the council will not by any means be a small body. From the start it will employ not far short of 1,000 people. That in itself is significant in size. If everything connected with all aspects of our heritage as, for example, the language, song, dance, art, literature, archives, folklore, etc. were to be included the council would be an unwieldy body. As I said, further functions can be added and indeed the council itself, when it is established, I have no doubt, will have many suggestions for inclusion. I was asked for an assurance that the list of functions was not exhausted. I have no trouble in giving that assurance to the House and repeating that the list of functions is not exhausted. The council will be empowered to take on additional functions and, as I have just said, the council itself will have a major say in what additional functions it should take on. For my part I will not exercise a limiting or restricting role in considering such additions.
I was asked by some Senators, I think Senator O'Connell especially, why the council should not report to the Department of the Taoiseach. I should explain to the House that in putting forward arguments of that nature the Senator, I thought, gave the impression that the council will be part of the public service. The fact is that the council will be an autonomous body. The Minister will only have limited powers over it. It will have the same freedom — and rightly so — as have other non-commercial, State-sponsored bodies. I might add that the Department of the Taoiseach is a central, policy-making Department and we do not feel that it would be structurally correct to include a huge executive area within that Department. The council, as I said earlier will be a very big executive area even before it takes on any additional functions, as it may do under the Bill. The council will be among the largest of our non-commercial, State-sponsored bodies.
The question of Wood Quay was raised by some Members. The final position regarding Wood Quay is that everything of value that the site could yield was saved. In addition, the corporation will provide an extensive museum on the site which will be under the control of the proposed National Heritage Council and will have an exhibition of all the artefacts found there together with reconstructions illustrating the pattern of life in Dublin during the Viking era. The museum area will also house the old stone city wall.
In view of the ever increasing rate of destruction of monuments and sites and to cope with the hazards of a developing society the Commissioners of Public Works have had in train for some time the updating and strengthening of the national monuments legislation. This new legislation will not be introduced until the proposed National Heritage Council has had an opportunity of assessing the nature of the problem and the powers which they feel they will need to protect adequately this aspect of our heritage. New legislation together with the results of a recently commissioned study on urban archaeology will enable the council to deal more effectively with the protection of monuments and sites.
The case of the Derravaragh Canoe was raised by a number of Senators. I should say here that canoe was seen in the lough when the level of the water dropped. The exposed part of the canoe was beginning to split as it dried out. The equipment required for the conservation of antique wooden objects is highly specialised and is not at present available to the National Museum. Arrangements have been made, however, to supply this equipment. In the meantime the only safe and practical course is to leave the canoe in its present habitat. It would be incorrect to say that the canoe in any sense has been "cast away". I think that phrase was used by some Senator. That is not the case.
The question of urban archaeology was raised, and I think I should mention here that my colleague, Deputy MacSharry, Minister for Finance, in his budget statement provided a sum of £25,000 for the commissioning of a study on the subject. Obviously this is an indication of the importance that we attach as a Government to urban archaeology. A contract for the carrying out of the study has been entered into with the Department of Archaeology in University College Dublin. I look forward to publication in due course of the findings of the study. I expect the findings will set very significant guidelines for the future.
Senator O'Connell asked about the photographic facilities in the OPW. He may like to hear that they are outstanding facilities and all connected with their operation deserve to be complimented. I am pleased to tell the Senators that these facilities will be transferred to the National Heritage Council. Senator Mallon raised some very interesting points about the all-Ireland dimension of our heritage. I want to thank him for his thought-provoking contribution. I agree with him that our heritage is a common one; the heritage of this country is the heritage of the island of Ireland. I want to assure him that when the council is being established it will be representative of all traditions of this whole island. It is extremely important that the co-operation that exists at the moment between the staff and the Commissioners of Public Works and the National Museum and their counterparts in Northern Ireland should be further developed.
I listened with interest to the suggestions made about the establishment of a centre somewhere, as he said, straddling that zigzag line that crosses our country where we could exhibit aspects of the heritage of the whole of this island. It is something to which I will give consideration and I am sure the council constituted on the grounds that I envisage would also be interested in examining this idea.
Last week I attended for the second time in three years the Irish Trade Union Conference in Belfast and I spoke at the conference dinner. The previous occasion was in 1980. As Senators well know quite a number of years had elapsed since it had last been held in Northern Ireland. I said I was pleased to be the Minister attending the conference then and to be repeating that experience only just two years later. There you had a conference representing the traditions of workers in all parts of our country. That was the position that existed there. One must envisage the same being achieved when one talks about the heritage. I might also say that I took an opportunity before leaving the next day to visit some monuments being preserved there by the National Trust and I was certainly impressed. I support the sentiments expressed by the Senator and I am conscious, as we all should be, that in the heritage area, perhaps more so than in any other area, boundaries and borders are meaningless and non-existent. The establishment of the council by my Government will certainly take that situation into account.
Representation on the council was mentioned by quite a number of Senators. I accept entirely their concern and their reasons for the suggestions made. I considered at length the possibility of the membership being the nominees of specific bodies but I had to come down in favour of the means being used in the Bill because of the large number of organisations seeking such membership and the controversy and disappointment that could follow the failure of some bodies to gain representation. I felt that the best course in that representation on the council should be on the basis of individuals selected by the Government. While I accept entirely what the Senators said, that it is essential that the major interest groups be represented, I would not favour a statutory provision guaranteeing such representation to any particular organisation, simply because it would be impossible. It is to their credit that there is so much interest by so many organisations. In fact, the interest shown when the Bill was first circulated and published was very encouraging. So many organisations made representations that I fear it would have led to the establishment of a very unwieldy body if all the interested organisations and groups had to be represented there. I would ask the House to accept that position in good faith, and say to them that I would feel that the appointment of people and personnel on this council is a very important factor in the success of the council. The calibre of the people is extremely important.
Several Senators inquired about the new national monuments legislation and suggested that provisions about metal detectors, shipwrecks and treasure trove should be included in this Bill. Work is well advanced on the preparation of new legislation, the new National Monuments Bill. The stage has now been reached when I can say that the following provisions are likely to be included in the new Bill — I would hope to see the National Heritage Council examine and investigate the possibilities of any suggestions they may have regarding that particular measure:
(1) Provision for the protection of sites of ancient remains lying under water whether in fresh water or in the sea and especially of historic wrecks.
(2) Provision for the protection of "archaelogical areas", both urban and rural, in order to ensure that sites of ancient settlements, villages and towns would not be subjected to development without provision being made for archaeological investigation and the preservation of important remains discovered.
(3) To make the use of metal detectors subject to certain restrictions that would help to safeguard sites of monuments and areas of archaeological significance from being interfered with.
(4) To allow greater scope for the provision of visitor facilities at national monuments and for the carrying out of restoration works where appropriate as against mere maintenance as provided for in the current legislation.
(5) To increase fines for offences under the National Monuments legislation.
All these provisions are likely to be included in the new Bill, but they will not be introduced until the National Heritage Council have had an opportunity of considering them.
I must confess I am surprised at the fact that Senators largely confined their comments to Ireland's archaeologicial heritage. This heritage is one of which we should all be justly proud. The pattern of human settlement and land use from about 6000 BC has left an indelible mark on the face of Ireland and is one of the major attractions for our European neighbours with whom we share the greater European cultural and historical heritage. Urbanisation is increasing rapidly, and as a reaction to the noise, the smoke, the concrete, the congestion and the bustle of urban life people are looking to the natural environment more and more for refreshment of mind and spirit. But our natural environment is becoming increasingly vulnerable. Industrial progress is good for our economic growth and for the future well being of our nation, but unless we are careful this progress will be paid for with a price. That price will be the steady encroachment of modern building and technological developments into our natural scenery of great beauty and variety.
This Bill proposes to designate four areas as national parks, that is areas where the national beauty will be preserved unspoiled, not just for the immediate future but for many decades to come. The council will also take over responsibility for some other parks which are of great recreational or historical significance. In addition, the council will take control over the Shannon Navigation which in the past few decades has made such a significant contribution to the tourism industry. It is the intention that the council will eventually take over responsibility for the Grand and Royal Canals. It would be my earnest hope that the council, when it has been constituted, will give equal attention to archaeology and to our parks and waterways. Both are equally in danger and both are equally deserving of being preserved unimpaired for the edification and enjoyment of future generations.
Perhaps it was Senator Durkan — understandably, from his county — who referred with some disappointment to the fact that the canals are not being included. I want to reassure him that my concern also is that they should at the earliest possible opportunity be taken over by the council. As I said in my opening remarks, to do so at the moment, because of delays in clearing legislation, would have delayed the introduction of this Bill and I felt it more advisable to go ahead with what we could do but to make provision in the Bill whereby this function can be handed over as a responsibility to the new Heritage Council.
Senator Murphy referred to the recent decision to put the treasures of Ireland on exhibition at five venues in mainland Europe. I was glad he mentioned it, because it does give me an opportunity to assure the House that all necessary steps have been taken to protect these priceless objects from loss or damage. The conditions under which the objects will be exhibited abroad will be no less favourable to their safe keeping than the conditions under which they are exhibited at home. We will have written agreement to that effect from the authorities of all five venues. Furthermore, a representative of the National Museum and of the other participating institutions will be present at all times while the treasures are on exhibition. They will have power to take any necessary action to deal with any contingency which may arise, to the extent of ordering the closure of the exhibition if that should be necessary. The only period during which the objects will be at more than average risk will be during transit. In this connection we have been guaranteed the full co-operation of our national airline, and with the experience of the American tour behind us — I am sure Senator Murphy will agree — the risk factor involved is well within the acceptable limits.
Reservations were expressed about the Bill mainly because it proposes to set up a State-sponsored body and remove the work from the civil service. I was amazed at this because I have already dealt in some detail with the advantages of a State-sponsored body structure in this instance. I do not think there is much point in going over that ground again. But there was an implication that the establishment of the council would result in the loss of the knowledge and expertise which the Office of Public Works had built up over the years. I want to reassure the Members of the House on this point. This knowledge and expertise will not be lost. In fact I hope it will be cultivated and developed. I complimented the people concerned already for the wonderful contribution they have made in the past and for the great contribution I know they will make in the future. In the main, the staff of the Office of Public Works engaged on parks and monuments will be transferred to the proposed council and the council will have the benefit of that undoubted knowledge and expertise. What I believe we are doing is drawing together into one body functions that were on the periphery of big Departments and at times suffering for being on that periphery. We are drawing them into a body whose only function, I emphasise, will be the national heritage. The advantages there tremendously outweigh the disadvantages. The various Departments did a good job but I believe a better job can be done by bringing the functions together under a council with the interest, commitment and dedication needed.
Pub interiors were referred to. I want to apologise to the Chair and the House for my absence last night. As the House is probably aware through the press I was engaged in other activities not as pleasant as dealing with matters of national heritage. I understand that the contribution on pub interiors was eloquent and that there was a plea for the preservation of such interiors, and anxiety expressed that the new council should do something in this area. Pub interiors come under the heading of vernacular architecture or, as it is better described in Irish, perhaps, tithe na ndaoine, the houses of the people. Other such items are thatched cottages. People are aware of the necessity for preserving good examples of vernacular architecture. Already some items have been preserved. Recently, the Commissioners of Public Works bought an outstanding flax and corn mill near Letterkenny. I have no doubt that the National Heritage Council will also take an interest in suggestions like that and other items of interest in that area.
I want to thank the Senators for their interest. I am pleased to have had the opportunity of introducing this Bill in the Seanad and more pleased, indeed, that such interest was shown for the most part in a positive way. I believe that some of the points expressed can be used to improve the Bill. We will have the opportunity to discuss some other points in greater detail on Committee Stage.