asked the Taoiseach the total legal costs incurred by the State in the High Court and Supreme Court cases concerning ownership of the Derrynaflan Chalice; if he will confirm that the amount awarded to the finders of the hoard was roughly the same as was recommended by the National Museum in the first place, but payment of this was overruled by his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Derrynaflan Chalice.
2.
The total legal costs incurred by the State in the Derrynaflan case have not yet been costed. I do not think it is in the public interest to give details regarding the negotiations for such awards. In the Derrynaflan case, the negotiations go back to 1980-81 when my Department were not responsible for the National Museum.
Does the Taoiseach accept that the ongoing negotiations were the concern of Governments, not excepting his Government for all of the time, that it appears that at the end of the day the figure awarded by the court was what was looked for on the one hand and offered on the other, but a Government Department intervened to do down those negotiations?
As I said, I do not wish to disclose the ins and outs of the development. This matter went on over a long time with many comings and goings. However, the Deputy will appreciate that the Department's concern is always to try to have regard to the public purse and they cannot be as generous or flaithiúlach perhaps as people in the private sector would be. Departments are always under that limitation when they are negotiating in a matter of this kind.
I regret the Taoiseach will not confirm or deny the import of the question, but would he at least accept that the whole case points up the need for this House to get its act in order in this area and not have to await, particularly in clear instances such as the Derrynaflan affair, costly proceedings to be told what it should be doing by another body?
Will the Taoiseach——
Let us hear the Taoiseach.
I am inclined to go along with the Deputy and I think most Deputies in the House will be in agreement that the present situation is very unsatisfactory. We have all been disturbed about developments which have taken place with regard to particular items of our national heritage. On the other hand I think none of us anticipated that somebody who went in and trespassed on somebody else's land would be able to go to the courts and receive such an enormous award as was granted in this case.
Will the Taoiseach confirm that when the Derrynaflan hoard was found in 1980 the finders were illegally present on the land of another man, they were illegally excavating on a national monument site which is forbidden, they were using metal detectors, the owner of the land got a very reasonable reward and was satisfied with that, and an amicable solution was reached with him?
Most of what the Deputy says is in accordance with the facts.
In addition to the points implicit in the questions from Deputy McCartan and Deputy Nealon, I would like to express the hope that the Taoiseach will also take the view that the very large reward paid to the landowners is also not necessarily in accord with natural justice or the public interest, particularly since two of the five Supreme Court judges expressed the opinion they should have been entitled to nothing.
That is a fairly valid point of view. On the other hand, the Deputy will agree that in this whole area it is important to keep a balance. We would like to see the State's rights fully adhered to and fully implemented at all times. On the other hand, we should have some incentive for people to come forward with these very important objects.
It is high time the thing was thrashed out.