I reassure the Deputy that I fully accept that his Parliamentary Ques tion No. 273 of 16 May 2000 was not intended to reflect in any way on the staff of my Department or the quality of their work.
My reply to that question dealt with the structures in place at present within my Department to maintain national monuments in State care for which there is an ongoing maintenance and conservation programme. Thus, in so far as these monuments are concerned, I could not accept that many of them are in an advanced state of disrepair, or in urgent need of attention. Where a need for urgent attention is identified, my Department prioritises the works necessary to ensure the conservation of the monument in question.
Many national monuments, principally due to their age exist as ruins and were vested in the State in that condition. This should not however be interpreted as a sign of my Department's inactivity or neglect. A great deal of work, most of which would not be obvious to the general public, is carried out by my Department to minimise the risk of further decay. Conservation rather than full restoration is the essence of my Department's role in relation to national monuments.
The Deputy suggests in his question that there are not enough people working on national monuments. Whilst I accept that no Minister will probably ever admit to being totally happy with his or her staffing allocation, the Deputy should note that the expenditure by my Department on the conservation of national monuments and historic properties increased from £10.787 million to £12.464 million between 1997 and 1999.
However, I do accept that when vacancies arise, it can be difficult in the present climate to attract people with the required specialist skills, but this is not a problem unique to my own Department. That said, I do not see a public/private approach as being appropriate given the very specialist nature of works involved. The Deputy will appreciate also that the expertise required to carry out conservation works to national monuments is not widely available in the private sector, and in any event, the condition of our national monuments does not warrant such a major change in policy.
