Vol. 531 No. 1
14 Mr. Deasy asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage Gaeltacht and the Islands if she is satisfied that her Department employs sufficient staff to ensure listed buildings and archaeological sites are adequately protected; and, if not, the measures she will take to rectify the matter. [4944/01]
When I assumed office in June 1997 the situation was far from satisfactory in relation to the protection of the architectural and archaeological heritage. On the architectural side, there was no framework in place for the structured protection of buildings of value. I acted immediately, therefore, on the report of the interdepartmental working group on strengthening the protection of the architectural heritage, published in 1996. This involved, inter alia, establishing within my Department a new division dedicated to dealing with the protection of the architectural heritage. The division has responsibility for compiling the national inventory of architectural heritage, NIAH, in which an estimated 1 million structures ultimately will be recorded. The NIAH is used as the basis for my recommendations to local authorities on what structures ought to be included in their records of protected structures.
The division provides expert advice in the form of guidelines on acceptable works to structures included in the record as well as advising on proposed developments which impact on protected structures. A total of 15 staff have been recruited to this new division and I am satisfied that good progress has been made in establishing the framework. Nevertheless, there is still much work to be done. Survey work on the NIAH needs to be stepped up in order that information can be fed to the local authorities sooner. In this regard, my Department recently enlarged the pool of consultants available to do this work.
The protection of the architectural heritage is primarily a matter for planning authorities and my role is mainly advisory. Local authorities need to establish their records of protected structures without further delay. They can employ their own conservation officers to assist them in their regu latory role. While some have been appointed to date, there must be more appointments and a much greater take-up of such posts if the new measures are to be effective and consistently applied.
On the protection of the archaeological heritage, I can also report good progress. The archaeological service of my Department had been experiencing difficulties as it sought to grapple with the increasing impact on archaeological sites and monuments arising from the upsurge in building activity. Matters came to a head in early 2000 when the backlog of work became so intolerable that the issuing of new licences had to be suspended for a number of weeks. At the same time, my Department's capacity to deal with underwater archaeological issues had to be suspended as the existing contract for the provision of this service came to an end.
The appointment of an additional eight archaeologists has been authorised to ease this pressure of work. Long-standing contractual difficulties in relation to a further 17 archaeologists employed on contract in my Department have also been resolved.
Additional InformationThe net result of these initiatives is that the cadre of archaeologists within my Department has more than doubled in the past year with 40 archaeologists now employed. I am satisfied that there has been a major improvement in the staffing levels for the protection of the built heritage and the matter will be kept under review.
I appreciate the candour of the Minister's reply. There may have been an improvement from a zero position, but the Department still does not have a fraction of the required number of staff to ensure valuable national monuments are not interfered with or destroyed. Does the Minister recall that in recent months a report in a newspaper stated that every ten years approximately 10% of the country's archaeological sites are destroyed? This is a shocking figure. While the Minister has recruited a number of staff to oversee the preservation of historic and valuable sites, enough is not being done.
A question please, Deputy.
Does the Minister see a point where she will have sufficient staff to ensure these sites are protected? Such sites are protected in Britain and other countries in western Europe. The Greeks, Italians or British would not allow such sites to be destroyed at the rate of 10% every ten years. I ask the Minister to redouble her efforts to ensure sites are protected.
I am aware of the survey conducted by the Heritage Council to which the Deputy referred. The protection of sites is one of the most important aspects of my job. That is the reason I wanted to ensure, in terms of the architectural side, a framework was put in place for the protection of buildings. The Deputy will be aware of the legislation the Minister for the Environment and Local Government and I introduced in that regard.
Ireland is lucky that 120,000 archaeological sites are afforded legal protection under the provisions of the National Monuments Act, 1994. Eight archaeologists were appointed to specifically consider this work. There were long-standing contractual difficulties involving 17 archaeologists employed on contract in my Department.
The Minister referred to the major role of planning authorities in this area. The problem is that planning authorities are overwhelmed with the volume of applications for planning permission. I am sure they find it difficult to carry out this extra work. This increases the necessity to recruit additional archaeologists and others to help protect sites.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Ar an gcéad dul síos ba mhaith liomsa freisin mo chomhgáirdeas a ghabháil leis an Aire Stáit nua. Tá súil agam go mbeidh saol geal-gháireach aici mar Aire fé mar a bhí mar chúl-bhinseoir agus aithníonn cúl-bhinseoir cúl-bhinseoir eile. Go n-éirí léi.
I share Deputy Deasy's sentiments about the protection of our heritage and archaeological sites. Does the Minister accept that people can automatically question the value of certain sites? Deputy Deasy said that planning is over run. When planning authorities receive an application with an objection from Dúchas or an individual and they suggest to the applicant that he or she should employ an archaeologist to supervise the work, the cost involved can be too prohibitive for the individual concerned. Does the Minister accept the system could be abused if the authorities get over-fussy?
As usual, Deputy Browne has stolen some of my thunder. Following from the Minister's initial reply, does she agree that many archaeological sites were marked on maps a long time ago and were inserted without any major study of them? While I favour the protection of archaeological sites, many young people who apply for planning permission are faced with a request from Dúchas to the planning authority to carry out an archaeological dig which can cost up to £2,000. This is an added financial burden on the young people involved. Will the Minister make representations to the Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, to allow these charges to be tax deductible?
We will have no heritage left if some of my colleagues have their way.
Deputy Deasy is part of our heritage, if the Minister wants him out.
Due to the preferred options now declared for many motorways as a result of the plans for our road network, where those proposed routes transgress archaeological sites will the Minister see off the wishes of the National Roads Authority and the local authorities to protect those sites?
I am amused by some of the views expressed from the benches opposite because, as Deputy Deasy said, different points of view are being expressed by Members on the opposite benches on the protection of our heritage—
(Carlow-Kilkenny): That is grossly unfair.
There is obviously a difference of approach. Deputy Deasy wants to ensure there is no destruction of the sites and—
(Carlow-Kilkenny): No, so do we.
—others are attempting to say that archaeological digs are costly and cause further delays and inconvenience. Heritage officers have been appointed to a number of county councils and they will play an important role in co-ordinating and ensuring further awareness. They will also play an important educational role. The planning laws are a matter for the local authorities. They are not an issue for me other than that my Department might be asked, through Dúchas, for its point of view on particular sites.
A great deal of the development taking place is due to the Celtic Tiger, which has put a further strain on the archaeological side of the Department. As a result, I decided to adopt a strategic rather than an ad hoc approach. We needed to ensure there was a balance between development and the protection of our heritage. To bring that about the NRA and the Department have devised an effective code of practice on how these matters should be examined in advance to avoid delays. This practice will be adopted by other groups as it is a good way to proceed. I intend to encourage other bodies to adopt it.
