In welcoming the Minister of State I recognise that he has inherited part of the problem. I am not here to score political points but to try to do something about the issue and to raise the question of the future of the excavations now that the extra period which was given is rapidly drawing to a close. The Government, and specifically the Minister of State, have to make a decision in the next week or fortnight as to the future of the excavations.
By virtue of the mandate the Minister's party got 18 months ago, he can decide that the national monument which has been so declared by the court in an unprecedented legal case can be systematically destroyed by a local authority. The least he could say is that we do not know enough about that monument and that he will provide extra time and extra resources for the full and comprehensive excavation of that monument. He could say the Wood Quay site will be preserved as a national monument and systematically excavated in accordance with modern methods of archaeological excavation, unrushed, unhurried, and not starved for resources. The final format and future of the monument should be decided upon when the excavation has been completed. Those are the three alternatives. The Minister will have to make a decision within the next fortnight.
The fear is that the Government will go for the first option, that they will let time run out like sand in an hourglass and permit the destruction of that national monument. If that is to be the decision of the Government, I want to know why. We would all like to know what the decision is to be. The cat and mouse game that has gone on so far is unacceptable and unworthy of a Government who enjoy an unprecedented majority in this House. I was a member of the Dublin City Council from 1974 until September 1977 and I participated in many of the discussions about the civic offices in Wood Quay. There is an issue which affected me as a public representative then and which directly affects the Minister, that is, the accuracy and trustworthiness of the advice public representatives obtained from professional officials—and I do not mean administrative civil servants— in the execution of their duty.
The big question mark which hangs over the decision to be made by the Minister, or the Cabinet if it becomes a Cabinet issue, is on whose advice will they make their decision. The corporation made their decision about the future of that monument and the site on the advice of certain museum officials. In deference to the traditions of this House I will not name them. A decision was made about the value and the substance and the long term future potential of this site on the basis of considered professional opinion given to the 45 city councillors. The same advice is being given to the Minister through administrative channels. In the words of one eminent individual who is not in the employ of the State, Wood Quay is a hole in the ground. After an unprecedented presen-tation of professional viewpoints, which did not come from within the ranks of professional specialised civil servants, Wood Quay was declared a national monument by a court of this land. One noted urban archaeologist and historian who knows the Dublin scene fairly well, talking about the Wood Quay excavation, or the Dublin Viking excavation as it is popularly called, said:
The results of the excavations were beyond all expectations and caused an immense interest in early Dublin amongst archaeologists and historians throughout Europe. For citizens and tourists, however, the sites remained closed off behind high fences and were never seen or explained and hence were very little understood.
This was said by Richard Howarth in An Taisce, Volume 1, No. 5, October-December 1977. The public march last autumn changed the nature of public understanding about this matter. Public representatives and their officials made decisions about the future of that site on the basis of professional advice tendered to them by people directly related to the National Museum and in positions of responsibility. In The Irish Independent of 26 April 1975 it was stated that one of the difficulties of the excavations in Wood Quay was the problem of resources within the National Museum itself. It was stated that the Wood Quay excavations were stretching the resources of the National Museum and the director intended to propose that work on other excavation sites such as Knowth should be suspended and work concentrated on Wood Quay.
We know the site is important. We know the extensive excavations have stretched the resources of the National Museum in the past. We also know that the professional assessment of that site was rejected by the court. The court opted to take the contrary view and decided that the site is a national monument. When they made that decision they changed dramatically the whole picture within which we have to operate. The Minister and the Government have a specific responsibility because they have the mandate. They have the 84 seats. They have to decide whether they will authorise the destruction of that national monument. They have avoided making any clear decision. Fianna Fáil were noted for their noise and claquery on Dublin Corporation when they were in Opposition. The 15 members of the Fianna Fáil Party on Dublin City Council have been noticeable for their silence on this issue. Why are we hearing nothing from the people who have the responsibility and who unashamedly sought a mandate and indeed bought a mandate as we heard earlier today in Private Members' Time? The silence may be related to the fact that if they act responsibility on the implications of the court decision there may be some kind of a price tag. Because they used up all the cash in the kitty to pay for election promises, there is not a brass farthing left in the kitty.
Because the Government are even in trouble in terms of servicing existing election commitments as witnessed by the exposé we had here this evening and because they got themselves into post election difficulties by promising more than they could deliver in terms of cash, they are now prepared to sacrifice the Wood Quay site because they do not have the money or the option to get extra money to take the course of action that is needed in order to deal responsibly and positively with it. This spendthrift Government have blown money in every direction from cowboy banks that were bailed out and given promises of bailing out beforehand. Perhaps I should withdraw that particular phrase.
