I propose to take Questions Nos. 16 and 21 together.
I am of course aware that there is concern at the proposal to lease approximately 90 acres of Killarney National Park to Killarney golf club as part of a third golf course. However, I am satisfied that, rather than undermine conservation and amenity values, any agreement with the golf club will benefit these qualities.
The area in question is located on the periphery of the national park. It has been let for grazing cattle as it is not regarded as an integral feature of the national park. It forms only a small part of the red deer's grazing land within the park but in any event that area would continue to be available for grazing by the red deer herd under any agreement that may be reached with the golf club.
Negotiations with the golf club are ongoing at present and consequently, I am unable at this stage to give precise details of the terms and conditions that would attach to any agreement between the parties. I can, however, indicate that in order to meet the requirements of the Office of Public Works the lease would have to contain the following conditions. (a) Building development on the lands will be prohibited; (b) There should be no interference with the movement or grazing of the red deer over any lands controlled by Killarney golf club; (c) A public footpath will be developed through the lands linking Killarney town with Fossa; (d) The club will have to keep to a minimum any tree removal on all lands to be included in the proposed third golf course. The club will also have to provide compensatory planting in accordance with a plan agreed in advance with the Office of Public Works; and (e) A lease of the area in question for a term of 99 years and subject to the foregoing conditions, would be granted to the golf club provided the State gained the full commercial value of the lease. In this regard the Office of Public Works proposed that the club acquire lands for conservation by way of extension of the national park. This has been accepted in principle by the golf club's committee and negotiations are proceeding on this basis.
It is evident, therefore, that this proposal does not represent a potentially damaging precedent for our national parks. Indeed, I would consider the leasing of peripheral land on conditions that will continue to protect its amenity, and heritage values, and in return for a significant extension to the national park, is a precedent which could only be regarded as beneficial to conservation generally.