asked the Minister for Education if he will outline the progress to date on the survey of urban archaelogy commenced in 1976, the number of officers involved in carrying out this survery in the Office of Public Works and in the National Museum, if any of these officers are full-time and in the case of part-time officers the approximate proportion of their time spent on the work of the survey; the areas surveyed in detail to date, the areas yet to be surveyed; the type of information obtained and the form the survey is taking; if any of the material collected to date is ready for publication; when and in what manner he intends to publish the survey; and if any or all of the results obtained to date have been conveyed to planning authorities who may need the information for planning applications covering the areas in question.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Urban Archaeology Survey.
As I indicated in reply to a similar question on 23 May 1979, the Department of the Environment, the office of Public Works and the National Museum have arranged for one officer each to spend part of his official time on duties relating to the survey.
Research has been carried out into the procedures adopted in other countries for the preparation of a plan for urban archaeology. The purpose of the research is to establish whether a similar approach is appropriate for this country.
In view of the involvement of the National Museum in the actual excavation of an urban site the amount of time that has been devoted to the survey in recent months has been restricted. Decisions have not yet been taken on the form in which the results of the survey might be published.
I am having the situation reviewed for the purpose of deciding on whether it is appropriate to proceed with the survey as originally visualised, and, if so, what measures are required to ensure its completion within a reasonable period of time.
Has any area been surveyed yet?
As I indicated in my reply on May 23, parts of Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Wexford have been surveyed.
Can the information from the areas that have been surveyed be published and, if not, why?
I have not given any great thought as to whether the results of the survey should be published. The Deputy will take it from my reply that I am not wishing to be taken as reporting that any great progress has been made in this area. Part of the reason for this is that when the earlier proposals were made, the situation was not copperfastened. Instead, what was involved was more of an aspiration in respect of any plan. The Deputy lived with this situation for the best part of a year and I do not think he can claim that any great progress was made during that time in the matter of the survey. However, I accept the spirit of what is intended but the Deputy will accept that because of the new duties which fell to the museum as a result of having personnel on the Wood Quay site, it was not possible to proceed with the survey in the way the Deputy would have hoped and in the way in which I would have considered desirable. I would draw the Deputy's attention to the last paragraph of my reply where I indicated my resolve to proceed with the survey as was envisaged or else to pursue some other line by which what is required would be provided. The Deputy knows that I am embarking on a programme of the decentralisation of the museum services and whether what is involved in this instance is something that should become part of that programme is a question that I shall be considering.
I thank the Minister for giving me a lot of information for which I did not ask and I would ask him to give me the information I asked for. When is it intended to publish the report in respect of the areas which have been surveyed and if there is no such intention what is the reason for that?
I was not proposing to publish anything which would not be of any great value. It was not envisaged in the Deputy's proposal that any part of the survey should be published but perhaps he will tell us why he did not make such provisions in his submission on the matter to the then Government.
The Minister has been in office for almost three years and he could have changed the terms of reference if he had so wished. Can he explain why the information that has been obtained already in respect of substantial areas of Dublin and other cities is not being published especially since it would be of so much use to planning authorities?
My answer to that is that the personnel who would normally be preparing such material for publication are so busily engaged on other matters that I do not consider it desirable to take them from that other work in order to prepare the type of publication to which the Deputy refers.
Would the Minister not agree that anyone engaged in planning and development in any of the areas covered by the survey will benefit considerably from having available the information as to an area's archaeological significance and that if such information were available to those interested the type of situation which occurred at Wood Quay could be avoided for all time? The Minister's failure to publish this document is putting everyone concerned, including developers, in a very difficult position.
I would not agree and I think that the Deputy is reflecting on the local authorities and in particular on Dublin Corporation in that he would give the impression to the House that the corporation were not sensitive to a situation such as Wood Quay. Dublin Corporation employ planners, architects and other people who have a sensitivity in this area of archaeology and they are not necessarily waiting for a representative from the museum or from the Department of the Environment or from the Office of Public Works to tell them about the regard they should have for archaeological considerations.
I am allowing only one more supplementary on this question. We have been on it already for ten minutes. That is not fair to other people who have questions on the Order Paper.
Would the Minister not agree that a prerequisite for any planning authority is the result of this survey if they are to carry out their work effectively especially in relation to the preservation of buildings of historical and archaeological value, and that if there is a need for further staffing in this area, that situation should be rectified?
I indicated earlier to Deputy Bruton that I am in sympathy with the spirit of the case being made.
But what is needed is action.
Deputy Bruton was the originator of the scheme but unfortunately during the year in which he held office he failed to do anything about having it implemented.
We must move on to the next question but I shall allow Deputy Bruton just one more supplementary.
Is the Minister aware that Dublin Corporation would only become aware of a situation of the kind in question if they received a planning application but that the publication of the findings of a comprehensive survey would be useful to the people who might be intending to submit a planning application and that if the information were available publicly in the first place there might not be any need to make a planning application?
I am not prepared to comment on a hypothesis.