Skip to main content
Normal View

National Monuments

Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 18 September 2013

Wednesday, 18 September 2013

Questions (9, 24, 38)

Brendan Smith

Question:

9. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht the timeframe for the restoration of the national monument at Moore Street, Dublin 1; the further difficulties that need to be overcome to ensure that redevelopment takes place in advance of the centenary anniversary of the 1916 Easter Rising; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38479/13]

View answer

Martin Ferris

Question:

24. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht his views on the current state of the 1916 national monument at Moore Street-Moore Lane, Dublin 1; when he will make a decision on the future of the site; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38505/13]

View answer

Maureen O'Sullivan

Question:

38. Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht the category and status of the national monument at 17 to 21 Moore Street, Dublin 1, on the Office of Public Works listing of national monuments; and the responsibility and role of his Department in this matter. [27977/13]

View answer

Oral answers (12 contributions)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 9, 24 and 38 together.

The national monument at Nos. 14 to 17 Moore Street is the subject of a preservation order under the National Monuments Acts. The effect of the preservation order is that any works affecting the site require my consent, as Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, under section 14 of the National Monuments Act 1930, as amended.

On 16 July last I made a determination on a consent application and related environmental impact statement submitted by the owners, which dealt with proposed works on the monument site. I believe that, having carefully considered all the relevant factors, my decision on the consent application is the best way to ensure that work can take place at the national monument to develop an appropriate centre to commemorate the events of Easter week 1916, while also ensuring that the monument site is fully protected for future generations.

My decision provides for the creation of a 1916 commemorative centre, involving the full repair and conservation of the four buildings. The order I signed did not approve the demolition of any structures or the removal of any material from the site which dates from 1916 or before; nor did it approve works for the provision of an underground car park within the boundary of the national monument site, or the demolition of the Moore Lane facades of Nos. 15 and 16.

The national monument is in private ownership and, accordingly, the advancement of proposals that reflect the terms of the consent I have granted is a matter for the owners. The consent is, however, conditional on the submission of a revised project design for approval within nine months of the decision date that takes full account of the elements of the proposal for which consent has been refused and the conditions attached to the approved works.

A further condition requires substantive works to commence on site within three months of the approval of the revised proposals.

Responsibility for the upkeep and maintenance of the monument rests with the owners. My function in that respect is confined to considering any related proposals by the owners for which my consent must be sought under the National Monuments Acts. In addition to the order which I signed in July, consent has been applied for and granted from time to time for various works to protect the monument buildings, including, most recently, improvements to the appearance of the front of the buildings. The buildings are also included in the record of protected structures maintained by Dublin City Council under the planning Acts, and the council has specific powers of intervention should any particular concerns arise about their condition.

I take it that the very fact this matter has arisen on every Question Time over the past 12 months is indicative of the seriousness with which all Members regard it. Although it took two years for the consent to be issued, I commend the Minister on having given it and ensuring Nos. 14 to 17 are to be protected and that a commemorative centre will be erected. Now that consent has been given, we must move on to the question of whether anything at all will happen. Could the Minister give us any indication as to whether any sort of meaningful discussions have taken place between Chartered Land, NAMA and Dublin City Council? It is required that a planning application or plan be submitted within 12 months to the local authority to get this issue moving. We want to see the development happen and a proper commemorative centre developed but this will not happen without the co-operation of NAMA, Chartered Land and the local authority. What can the Minister and his Department do to ensure the required co-operation?

I understand Chartered Land has sought a meeting with me. I will facilitate that immediately. What happens between Chartered Land and NAMA is very much up to those to parties and I obviously cannot get involved. I have had two meetings with the specialist sub-committee of Dublin City Council, whose members are very proactive on this project. What I gave permission for was very much what they were looking for. They welcomed it and are very supportive of what we are trying to do.

The monument is not in State ownership but private ownership. Therefore, it is up to Chartered Land to produce a plan for me within nine months that will state clearly what it intends to do with the national monument at this stage, bearing in mind the refusal I gave for intervention with the monument. I hope the plan is forthcoming. It is very much in the hands of Chartered Land and Dublin City Council. NAMA also has a key role to play.

Can the Minister update the House on the planning position? I understand from colleagues in Dublin City Council that for planning to take place any proposal will have to come back to the Minister before returning to the council as the planning authority. Does the Minister accept their view in this regard? The Minister stated he is to have a meeting with Chartered Land. Has he considered my request that he meet all the relevant stakeholders, including the relatives of the leaders of the 1916 Rising, the National Museum of Ireland, relevant State agencies and the NGOs, not only to preserve the national monument fully but also to develop the site of the historic 1916 battlefield?

I agree with the point being made by Deputy McLellan. At issue, among other matters, is the fact that the land is in the ownership or control of NAMA. Do we know whether Chartered Land has the capacity or finance to proceed with the development? Does the Minister know or can he establish it? If he cannot engage directly himself - I am not sure why he cannot do so-----

I must operate within the legislation.

Okay, if the Minister is prohibited from doing so under the legislation, can he call on somebody else to engage, whether it be the local authority or some other body, to establish whether NAMA will make the funding available for the development to happen? If there is no funding, there will be no development and we will continue to look at a derelict site. Not alone are these critically important buildings derelict, but all of us deserve to be ashamed of much of what we see in the north O'Connell Street area. The city deserves better and we all need to co-operate to try to achieve a better outcome.

I support the remarks made by other Deputies but on a practical note, it is only a short space of time to the 1916 centenary celebrations. If the people who sacrificed their lives could see O'Connell Street now and the facades of the businesses and the users or occupiers of those businesses, they would not believe what they had sacrificed their lives for. There is an air of menace at nighttime on O'Connell Street. It is all linked in and it is shocking. I ask the Minister to take a leadership role and encourage Dublin City Council to get active about this. We should not go through the normal slow administrative choreographies that occur. This needs executive action. O'Connell Street is the gateway to our city. It used to the be the street that led to the house of parliament, now the Bank of Ireland, to Trinity College and to the Rotunda, now a hospital. It is a shocking embarrassment that while O'Connell Street has received road and footpath surfacing and a spire which is not very inspirational, the shocking activities of those amusement arcades, fast food stores and so forth are allowed to continue. This needs robust action now.

In response to Deputy McLellan, I have no problem whatsoever in meeting the stakeholders. I have already had numerous meetings with them and the decision I came to was welcomed by the relatives of those involved in 1916 and indeed, was universally welcomed. I must repeat that the planning permission process is the responsibility of Dublin City Council. My role in this, as I have said many times in this House, is only to approve what the developer proposes for the site. The developer had a major plan for the site but it included demolishing some of the monument and building a car park underneath a section of it and I refused that. I am sure that Deputy McLellan agrees with that decision and would support me in doing that. Sometimes I am rather confused as to what people really want here. Are people playing politics or do they really want a solution? I hope it is the latter. I have no problem whatsoever in meeting any stakeholders, which I have done already, including members of Deputy McLellan's party.

On the issue of NAMA and Chartered Land, Deputy Ó Fearghaíl's party colleague, Senator Mark Daly asked Chartered Land, when it was making a presentation to the 1916 commemoration committee, if it could produce a letter from NAMA clarifying whether money is available to carry out the project. That was a number of months ago but the committee never received such a letter from Chartered Land. As far as I am aware, that was the only time Chartered Land was asked to come up with confirmation of a commitment from NAMA for the necessary funding to carry out the work.

Finally, in response to Deputy Mathews, I would love to have responsibility for all of O'Connell Street. The problem of dereliction on O'Connell Street has been with us for some time. It is not a new phenomenon but I hope that the centenary of 1916 will be the catalyst for a major upgrade of the street. Some very good work has already been carried out on O'Connell Street but there are some parts of it, because they are in private ownership----

The problem is the users of the street, the occupations----

I ask the Deputy to allow the Minister to reply.

Certain parts of the street which are in private ownership are in obvious need of upgrading. Dublin City Council has a key role to play in that respect, in terms of ensuring that happens. I assure the Deputies that in my capacity as chairman of the decade of commemorations committee I will do everything possible to make progress on this matter.

One project that we can advance, hopefully, is that of the GPO, as it is in State ownership. An Post is coming forward with proposals for the site shortly. This is a project that State agencies can get behind, as we have control of the site.

Top
Share