Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 20 Jun 1996

Vol. 467 No. 3

Burren National Park Management Plan: Statements (Resumed).

Mr. Lawlor

When discussing this matter I will compare it with practical experience in my constituency in the Liffey Valley. In 1984 I proposed that the county council should examine the possibility of designating the Liffey Valley as a special amenity area. This was supported by a colleague of the Minister, Councillor Michael Gannon. At that time we had a three member electoral area in that part of the country. The planning officer and a senior parks officer set about the task of studying the valley, which was in excess of 500 acres. They identified the various amenities that exist in the Liffey Valley and eventually submitted their draft report to the council many months later which was unanimously endorsed and sent to the Minister for the Environment. Fortunately, given the excellence of the proposal, the amenity area order was signed. I am proud to have been the one who proposed it. At that time I think it was the only special amenity area order that had ever been signed, although some have been signed since.

This did not require a raft of consultants or result in delays or controversy. The task was undertaken to ensure we could provide protection for an excellent amenity running virtually into the heart of Dublin city. Comparing that with what has happened in this case, one cannot help but feel the Minister when in Opposition took a particular view and a vigorous line of opposition to the expertise within the Office of Public Works, the people to whom he is now going back to dig himself out of this sorry mess. Those people are being asked to submit a scheme. These are the people to whom the Burren project was entrusted. It is a sad reflection on responsible political and other community leaders that they should have doubted, queried, questioned and differed so vigorously from people who have given a life's work within the Office of Public Works protecting the environment and bringing forward praiseworthy proposals and superb projects. Nobody could assume the Office of Public Works or Clare County Council would have any hand, act or part in damaging the Burren or any other area of high amenity value for which it is responsible.

The Minister in his contribution clearly said that following the protracted delay, we are virtually trying to put the wheels back on the wagon, however small they may be. We have a new name, lest anybody would say that a car park and other facilities were built at Mullaghmore. The Office of Public Works will prepare a planning scheme and Clare County Council will consider it. I do not know what position the Minister's former fellow travellers will take or whether they will vigorously oppose it as they did previously. At least the Minister will be on the right side of the argument on this occasion and this might bring the matter to a conclusion. The former Minister of State, Deputy Dempsey, was responsible in his approach and ensured that what was to be done at Mullaghmore was to the highest national and international standards. He was trying to ensure that visitors to the Burren would be facilitated in a proper environment and was certainly not going to damage the Burren.

The conclusion is that we are going back to where we started, with modifications, courtesy of the Brady Shipman Martin report. To put a further favourable gloss on the presentation a wider area of County Clare is being embraced. I do not think the consultants have proposed anything the County Clare planning team would not do under its development plan. In their written statement they have incorporated all the various suggestions as in the normal preparation of any county development plan. If the truth were known, substantial parts of the consultants' report may be direct lifts from the written statement of the Clare county development plan. The designated special amenity areas are of special interest. They will be included in the current county development plan and will be protected because those people are entrusted to ensure that what will happen in County Clare will be to the highest national and international environmental standards. The planning application will emerge in due course and I do not doubt it will be approved.

However, a narrow point of law must be considered first. Every arm of the State should be required to go through due process. For years, the Department of Education, the Office of Public Works and various other State agencies did not have to go through the rigours of the planning system. In a controversy, this understandably gave rise to the probably incorrect belief that the Office of Public Works was in a position to go ahead with something in the Burren without planning permission. It created the impression that the Office of Public Works could railroad through the system, something which would not get planning permission. This is where the real mistakes were made.

When it was decided the Office of Public Works must apply for planning permission, due process should have prevailed. The professionals in the Office of Public Works and An Bord Pleanála planning sections should have been allowed to go through the process and come to their conclusions. However, the position is vulnerable because of the Minister's hasty action at that time. The EU has every right to seek the return of the funding it provided for the projects. It can point out that the Minister and Government of the day decided not to allow procedures to conclude. The work of the other arms of the State evaluating the proposals was halted and the application was withdrawn. This gave rise to the belief that there was something basically defective in the proposal. This was unfortunate and we must now ask the EU to provide funds for a modified proposal for the same project.

There will be two choices if and when the number of people seeking to visit this wonderful amenity cannot be accommodated. The numbers can be restricted or facilities must be built to cater for them. There will be a problem if the projected number of visitors and the facilities it is intended to provide do not gel. Deputies from the county are aware of the inconvenience endured by local people in terms of illegal car parking which prevents them having access to their homes and farms. They will be confronted with a most unsatisfactory situation unless proper facilities are provided.

Nobody doubts the new awareness and knowledge among non sun worshipping visitors from Ireland and abroad. There has been a change in the type of holidays people want. People have a tremendous interest in visiting cities with historical backgrounds, such as Dublin and other European capital cities, particularly in eastern Europe. Others are interested in visiting the Burren and in mountain trekking holidays. People have more disposble income and the number of tourists is colossal. Places such as the Burren, which is unique, are bound to be on the itinerary of many visitors from home and abroad. They must be accommodated and this is the purpose of the plan. It was also the original intention. I visited Glenveagh park which is an ideal facility provided by the Office of Public Works. Having regard to all the controversy about Mullaghmore it is deplorable that responsible people who managed many good facilities around the country were so doubted.

Mr. N. Treacy

Is cúis áthas dom seans a bheith agam páirt a glacadh san díospóireacht seo. Is ceart go mbéadh seans ag Teachtaí páirt a glacadh san díospóireacht mar tá sé an-tabhachtach.

This debate on the Burren national park should not be necessary. We should be in the Burren either enjoying the facilities of the park or attending an official opening there following the completion of the centre. I was honoured in 1987 by the then Taoiseach and Government to be appointed as the first Minister of State with responsibility for heritage affairs. I was attached to the Office of Public Works and the Department of the Taoiseach and had the pleasure of serving for eight years as a member of successive Governments and for two terms at the Office of Public Works. Much of my time during that period was taken up with consideration of proposals by the Government and the Office of Public Works to create national parks in various parts of the country and to expand the tremendous record of investment, conservation and heritage management by the Office of Public Works over the decades.

We considered the serious economic situation in which the country found itself when we entered Government on 11 March 1987 and examined heritage tourism as a key area in terms of recognising the uniqueness of the country and the opportunities it presented to the nation and the wider international world for people to visit and enjoy our clean environment, open spaces and heritage. As far back as 1973, the Office of Public Works was directed by the Government to proceed with land acquisition in County Clare to create a national park, something which had been done with great success in the United States of America in the last century.

Successive Minister and key senior Office of Public Works officials, including some scientists, visited national parks in the US, Australia and the United Kingdom. Based on their experiences and their knowledge and commitment to heritage conservation they felt they knew the best way to proceed regarding the development of national parks. I joined an office staffed by enthusiastic and committed people operating to the highest professional standards. They were committed to providing the best conservation standards in unique parts of the country; County Clare was one of those areas. Other places examined were Kerry, Wicklow, Donegal, Mayo and Meath.

The debate displays hypocrisy. As a result of the change of Government and ministerial personnel, three sites appeared to cause particular problems for the smaller parties, and specifically the academic left of the enlarged Labour Party which tried to dictate the position within Government. The sites included Luggala in County Wicklow. With my full support and knowledge of the decision, and the full support of the then Fianna Fáil Government, the Office of Public Works acquired a site in the Wicklow mountains in a modern coniferous afforested area to build an interpretative centre for the Wicklow national park. The idea behind this was to enhance the beauty of the area, create opportunities for the capital city and encourage tourists to visit the area and enjoy the facilities, and to create opportunities for local people.

However, people with vast resources invited international stars to the area and eventually persuaded members of Government and others that their privacy could not be interrupted. Their view was that ordinary people should not be brought to special parts of the island which should be preserved for elite snobs. I rejected that view and I cannot understand why the decision was taken not to proceed with Luggala. This project should proceed.

The position was different in royal Meath. The current Taoiseach is from County Meath and a Labour Party Deputy is also from the county. It was easy for the new Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht to concede at Cabinet that they should get their centre. We were then left with Mullaghmore and the Clare national park. I know a good deal about Mullaghmore but I do not claim to know as much about County Clare as the Minister who was born there. I know a good deal about rural Ireland and the people of Clare and admire the uniqueness of their heritage and culture. My constituency straddles the northern boundary of County Clare from the River Shannon at Banagher across to the sea between New Quay and Kinvara in the lower northern periphery of the Burren. As a child I often visited the area with my parents. As a young person I worked in the marketing field in County Clare and spent at least 18 months there at one time. As I matured I had reason to visit County Clare on many occasions.

I consulted widely the people of that county on this issue and I thank them for showing the way and supporting the Government and the Office of Public Works in their efforts to invest in the uniqueness of the Burren. We have not capitalised on that. We considered the development from a conservation, geographical, archaeological, geological and commercial point of view. We believed the western part of the county was well served by people in small towns who, with private and public support, established visitor centres.

Rather than create a mass tourism drive along the western periphery of the county we believed we should bring the people to the unique parts of Clare, to the heart of the Burren. The shrewd professionals in the Office of Public Works acquired a site within 1.1 miles of Mullaghmore mountain which consisted of a disused quarry and a bulldozed field and was totally different from the adjoining unique area. I was under intense pressure from professionals and one or two politicians at that time.

Major campaigns were launched in the media against the Government, me and, in particular, the Office of Public Works to block the investment in the Burren National Park.

I have always had an open and objective mind. As one matures one must recognise the advice of professionals and accept their submissions and contributions. However, when one is elected to represent the people and appointed to Government to make decisions, ultimately, one must make up one's own mind about a project.

Over a three year period I brought many people from my home area, members of my family, foreign professionals, visitors to this country and others to the proposed site. I did not tell them where they were going or why I was taking them there. I asked them if they agreed we should invest in a visitor centre on that site and not one of them said I should not proceed with the development. I also had the benefit of professional advice from the staff of the Office of Public Works. Neither the Minister nor the Minister of State used the words "Office of Public Works" in their speeches today. Obviously, the Minister, aided by the Government, wants to rubbish that office. An agency that has served conservation well for more that one-and-a-half centuries is being taken out of State service. Neither the Minister nor the Minister of State acknowledged that, with the co-operation of County Clare property owners, residents of the area and the farming community, the Office of Public Works carefully, honourably, positively and slowly acquired land for a national park in County Clare. There was no friction or agitation involved in that process. However, when a decision was made to proceed with the investment, academics from various institutions — some of whom are well known to the Minister and have been appointed to State boards, presumably in appreciation of their assistance in achieving his goal — and others at international level——

Mr. Lawlor

They are organising fund-raisers.

Mr. N. Treacy

——put forward various negative proposals regarding the project.

When I was Minister of State with responsibility for the Office of Public Works I received 300 letters, typed on computer, from various countries in opposition to the proposal. This was organised to impede a decision with which the democratically elected Government of this country wanted to proceed.

The advice available to me at the time was that these people had a certain agenda. One man took up the matter with the National Heritage Council, a non-statutory body at that time, and recommended we should not proceed with the development. That led to the resignation from the council of one of the most honourable public servants on this island at the time. A latent effort was made to scuttle proposals to proceed with the project.

I was told it might not be advisable to meet these people but I felt it was my duty to do so. On an Easter Monday in a hotel in the Minister's constituency I met four of those eminent scientists and professionals and we discussed the matter for four-and-a-quarter hours. I listened to their objections and put forward my point of view. They told me pollution from the treatment plant was their only concern and I assured them that a dual system costing £300,000 would be installed. I also assured them that the Office of Public Works, the Department of the Environment and Clare County Council were adamant that the project would not damage the environment, the ground water systems, the natural lakes or the ecology of the area. Furthermore, I told them that if we were in any doubt about the treatment plant we would hold the effluent in tanks and, in co-operation with the local farmers, have it removed from the area.

I trusted those eminent people, some of whom grasped an opportunity to espouse their position from a rostrum in the Minister's constituency. I thought it peculiar that the affairs of another county should be imposed on a public that was far removed from them. The following day The Irish Times carried a lead story stating that the Minister met a group of people, admitted there was a major problem and that the effluent would have to be removed. Obviously, the more commitments one gave and the more honourable, open and accessible one was, the more one was obstructed. That resulted in even more people jumping on the band wagon. There were latent commercial interests in Clare, although small in number, who did not want investment there. Similar objections were raised with Ionad na Blascaodí, the Blasket Island Centre in beautiful Kerry. I met the people involved and told them there was no reason to worry, that the Office of Public Works would do an excellent job and that the investment was fully justified. I am delighted that some of the objectors are today employed in the centre and agree it was a great investment. I told them that would be the outcome because I was certain from the advice available to me it was the right thing to do.

Some groups believe that the interpretative centre for the Burren should be located in Leminagh Castle, the great historic seat of Máire Rua O'Brien. I visited that area on three occasions where I met Deputy Killeen and others. I also met members of the Burren National Park Support Group, to whom I pay special tribute. They are honourable, decent people who took tremendous flak from a small group of national and international people who stated at meetings that it is unacceptable to allow mass tourism in County Clare, that this area should not be open to ordinary people but only to certain groups such as scientists and others, that the ordinary people of this nation have no right to education and information on what is unique to this country. I abhor that attitude. Nobody has a right to place a boundary on any area or to deny access to it.

I regret that, as a Clare man, the Minister let his people down. He produced three reports, which I read, by eminent consultants, some of whom I know well. The Minister changed the name of the centre from Mullaghmore to Gortlecka and proposes to proceed in a different manner. I heard Deputy Bhamjee say that the roads should not be widened. That is a silly statement.

The desecration of the heart of the Burren is a tragedy. Investment has been made, but the project has not proceeded. The Minister should admit he is under threat of losing EU funds. Unless this matter is rectified quickly the European Commission will instruct the Government that funds will not be available. How much compensation will have to be paid if the project does not go ahead? It is unacceptable that the Minister decided not to proceed with this project in the Burren, in the heart of County Clare, which is unique and has such a heritage history, culture and tradition. That decision was made for the sake of a small agenda by a small group of people who believe they are better than others, for the sake of a short-term political agenda by a party or a group within parties who want to obstruct the progress of a nation.

It is a sad day when we are discussing a national park that should be a gem internationally. In the interests of our nation, particularly County Clare, the Minister should rise above the negativity that surrounds him. The Minister of State, Deputy Carey, has let down his county and his constituents. While centres are built in various parts of the country, the Minister is unable to persuade his Government colleagues to proceed with this project. This opportunity should be taken for the people of Clare. The Minister has a duty to his county and country to proceed and not to waste further public funds on unnecessary reports when it has been proven conclusively for 23 years that this park is fully justified and has the support of 98 per cent of the people of Clare.

Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht (Mr. M. Higgins)

I thank Deputies who contributed to the debate, which for the most part has been constructive and helpful. A number of points raised will be of value. I have long paid tribute to workers at all levels in the Office of Public Works. I recall doing so in the Seanad in the period 1973-77. As regards being familiar with their work, I visited Glenveagh on perhaps a dozen occasions ten years ago when work was starting there. Almost every year I visit the Patrick McGill Summer School and was there only last week. I am familiar with the work of the Office of Public Works.

In this case a significant court decision was made, and my proposals must satisfy the court. It was necessary to establish a consensus, and it was indicated that could be best done by bringing forward the proposal in a certain context, hence the three studies, which have been very valuable. I hope progress will be made in that way.

I take the points made by Deputy de Valera and others about the importance of consultation. We have negotiated with farmers in North Clare, through the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry, the National Parks and Wildlife Service, Teagasc and others, a scheme for interpreting land management, a model that will probably be used in other parts of the country. That was brought about in co-operation with the IFA and other agencies. On the points made by Deputy Hughes, particularly relating to sheep farming, I met west of Ireland representatives of the IFA last week.

I wish to give as much information as I can on the points made. On the proposals for Kilfenora, a matter raised by Deputy de Valera, it is important that the organisation in Kilfenora, Comhar Cumann na Bóirne, is deeply involved in the development of proposals. I will keep an open mind on this matter and will not dictate what should be done.

The Deputy was correct in raising the question of stealing artefacts. I would like to have more staff available to help protect portable artefacts in the countryside but to do so would require much public expenditure. At the end of the day it will be impossible to guard totally against the actions of determined speculators. I am at one with the Deputy and I will seek severe sanction in this regard. There is already international co-operation on two matters for which we will seek jail sentences. We may have to go the same road as other countries and bring some important artefacts into safe custody. That is not something one likes to do, but it must be considered in the case of vulnerable artefacts. It is a very drastic solution and I would be very slow to take it on board because I see artefacts as part of our heritage.

The contributions of the Clare Deputies were helpful, constructive and positive and emphasise that there is much on which there can be agreement. In the case of Deputy Killeen's contribution, he isolated the part on which there is disagreement. There is no attempt by me to suggest casuistry or confusion about Gortlecka. This is simply the townland involved. It is the site of what had been the proposed interpretative centre. I am not suggesting anything other than that.

On the specific question, which is an interesting one, concerning the cost of archaeological digs, it is true that the principle that the developer must pay is a good one in relation to carrying the cost of the archaeological impact on sites. I am sympathetic, however, to cases where hardship would arise and I am willing to examine them in a general context because it is appropriate to invite a person to take responsibility for something provided the person has the means to exercise that responsibility. Cases of hardship are obviously very different from a developer who will make a speculative gain from a development. I will consider that point without sacrificing the general principle that the developer must pay and, if resources allow, I will be sympathetic to assisting the cases mentioned.

Deputy Quill gave the cost of the works at the Gortlecka site as £3.5 million. I am sorry to have to correct her but the figure is approximately £2 million. In relation to the question of the European funding, requests for progress reports have been made from time to time by the European Union. There never was a request——

Mr. N. Treacy

There were warnings.

Mr. M. Higgins

——for a return of funds or a suggestion about the cancellation of funds.

Mr. Lawlor

There will be; it will come.

Mr. N. Treacy

There has been a warning and the Minister knows that.

Mr. M. Higgins

I can give Deputy Treacy the facts, and I will deal with his contribution shortly.

A number of Deputies referred to the REPS and NHAs. A small working group consisting of officials of the NPWS, the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry and the IFA examined the special conditions in the Burren and came to an agreement on the parameters that should apply. That is to be welcomed.

Deputy Hughes raised a question of a similar nature in regard to the blanket bog in the west. He referred also to the proposed Mayo national park which will be bigger than he suggested. In that case the management plan will be launched shortly. There will be a period of discussion, similar to the case of the Burren, and a decision will be made on implementing the national park in Mayo.

I respect professionals but I also respect the process of consultation. I differ fundamentally with Deputy Treacy who used the phrase "those who know best". We would have avoided a great deal of conflict in County Clare if that kind of thinking had not prevailed.

Mr. N. Treacy

That is the problem with the Minister's people. They are academics.

Mr. M. Higgins

The problem is that there is a certain abuse contained in such a view.

Mr. Lawlor

By whom?

Mr. M. Higgins

One can avail of professional expertise without the cost of an adequate and properly structured public consulatation process. That is what will take place in Mayo.

Deputy Hughes's contribution was positive and helpful and there was little difference between his views and mine on the questions of achieving sustainable farming. The question arose, however, in regard to deciding the parameters and the principles to be applied in achieving that, particularly in relation to commonages.

The question of incomplete roadworks was referred to by Deputies de Valera and Killeen. It is a matter for Clare County Council to consider their contractual relationships in that regard. I cannot intervence in the matter. I dealt with the question of European funding raised by Deputy de Valera.

I fundamentally disagree with the contributions by Deputies Lawlor and Treacy. Deputy Lawlor made a number of suggestions which are simply unsustainable. We can debate in future our efforts in relation to waterways and canals but if it is so obvious that all this work should be done, why was it not done by previous Governments? What is the objection to commissioning a study, having consultations on it and engaging, as I did, local communities and then putting an implementation group in place to begin the work? We have done that.

Mr. N. Treacy

A study has been published.

Mr. M. Higgins

We have had a widespread acceptance——

Mr. Lawlor

It is in the written statement.

Mr. N. Treacy

A study was published.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister has a few minutes to reply to the debate. Interruptions must cease.

Mr. M. Higgins

The Deputies can shout as much as they want.

Mr. N. Treacy

We do not want the Minister to mislead the House by saying he is the first person to commission a report.

Mr. M. Higgins

I am not misleading the House. I never said I was the first person to publish a report.

Mr. N. Treacy

I said "commission" a report.

Mr. M. Higgins

Deputy Treacy was given the opportunity to make his contribution.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

There are four minutes remaining. Let us have no further interruptions.

Mr. M. Higgins

In relation to Clare, the world and its mother knows there has been a court case.

Mr. Lawlor

Initiated by whom?

Mr. M. Higgins

I will have to go back to court with whatever proposal is suggested and those procedures are well known.

Mr. N. Treacy

Initiated by the Minister.

Mr. M. Higgins

Deputy Treacy's scandalous attack on academics is unworthy.

Mr. Lawlor

What about the attacks the Minister made on the Office of Public Works people?

Mr. M. Higgins

The only unhelpful part of this debate has been the attempt by Deputies Lawlor and Treacy to ressurect the points of conflict and to cast a slur on the character of people who work in a public way like everybody else. These people are distinguished scientists, teachers, academics and others interested in this issue.

Mr. N. Treacy

A select few.

Mr. Lawlor

They are no better than the people in the Office of Public Works.

Mr. M. Higgins

I want to suggest also——

Mr. N. Treacy

The Minister can continue to represent the academics; we will continue to represent the people.

Mr. M. Higgins

I hope the comment Deputy Treacy just made is widely reported. That kind of division in society is precisely what we do not want. There is now an opportunity in Clare——

Mr. Lawlor

No thanks to the Minister.

Mr. M. Higgins

——for everybody who had previously been divided to come together to produce a proposal to the court which can be implemented for the benefit of the people of Clare. I hope that proposal will be accepted by people from every perspective.

Mr. Lawlor

We agree.

Mr. M. Higgins

They will be doing that after a period of consultation previously denied them——

Mr. N. Treacy

That is not true.

Mr. M. Higgins

——by those who suggested they knew best.

Mr. Lawlor

The Minister said he was instructing the Office of Public Works to lodge a planning application. Where is the consultation in that?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Lawlor must not interrupt.

Mr. M. Higgins

I will answer that question directly. They will provide a service they would provide for any Minister in a Government Department.

Mr. Lawlor

The Minister is talking rot.

Mr. N. Treacy

They did that the last time too.

Mr. M. Higgins

They are competent to do that and they are the obvious people to ask. The position is as follows. The heritage service, formerly the responsibility of the Office of Public Works, is now part of the Department of Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht and it is involved in the proposals for the Burren. The Office of Public Works is the building agency for Government Departments and it has been asked to prepare plans, as an architectural service, in the same way it provides such service to every Government Department.

I welcome what I believe to be an undercurrent in the debate, best represented by the contributions from the Clare Deputies, namely, the anxiety to take as a fresh starting point the report which provides a framework in which we could move to a consensus on what will not please everybody, or any one side, but which may emphasise the fact that we can take the long view of ecological responsibility and, at the same time, have local community involvement and sustainable development in the short-term.