On the cormorant, we have a significant challenge in terms of data on many species, be they birds, plants or insects. Fishing and angling groups and gun clubs are on the ground day in and day out and they could be of use to us in gathering data on cormorant numbers. That would be most helpful. That is something we will give consideration to. We have a huge challenge with invasive species. Deer numbers were raised here before and a significant cull will be required to manage deer numbers and bring them back to susta…

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Teachta as an gceist tábhachtach seo. The management of Ireland's upland areas is a responsibility shared by many, including land users, landowners and various bodies and agencies tasked with its management. As Minister of State, my focus in this regard is on the protection of nature. Sustainable grazing is an important nature conservation measure. My Department's NPWS farm plan scheme and the EU LIFE Wild Atlantic Nature project are examples of how locally targeted and adapted agri-environ…

I agree wholeheartedly with everything the Deputy said. We need farmers. We need landowners on our land in uplands. Conservation grazing works and it has an important role to play in nature restoration. The Department is currently conducting a review of wildlife legislation. This is an extensive review on a multi-year project taking in every facet of our wildlife laws. It will examine closely the effectiveness of our legislation in protecting wildlife and regulating activities that adversely impact on wildlife and …

The current Title of the Bill is advised by and agreed with the Office of Parliamentary Counsel. It has been drafted to accurately reflect the broad content and scope of the Bill. Many elements of archaeological heritage such as monuments, archaeological objects and underwater cultural heritage are clearly provided for under the various parts of the Bill. The selection of one of these items for incorporation into the Title of the Bill might be construed as somehow lowering the relevance of the other, equally import…

The term "archaeological heritage" as drafted in the Bill and by making reference to the term "relevant things" provides for an extensive set of structures, sites, objects, deposits, constructions, features and wrecks. While acknowledging the importance of linking the Bill to the Valletta Convention, in this instance, using the term "archaeological heritage" as defined in Valletta would create several problems. For example, the version used in the Bill specifies that sites and structures, etc., must be of archaeolo…

The term "archaeological heritage" is already provided for as part of the definition of archaeology in section 2. The existing definition is considered a more complete and comprehensive version for the purpose of this Bill than the version proposed under this amendment and for that reason I am not in a position to accept this amendment. While I note the Senator's points about Valletta it is the case that Valletta is given effect through this Bill. The number of times Valletta is referenced in the Bill does not mean…

These amendments have been grouped together as they all relate to similar matters, mainly the incorporation of cultural interest into the Bill. Regarding prescribed monuments, the parameters for their definition are intentionally narrow. This contrasts to the parameters for registered monuments that are intentionally broad. The rationale for this derives from the intended purpose of each system. A prescribed monument must be easily definable given that corresponding provisions exist relating to the reporting of its…

Cuirim fáilte roimh na daltaí agus na múinteoirí freisin. It is difficult to see the necessity of this proposed amendment. The Bill has been purposely designed to ensure the relevant aspects of Valletta are given effect. These are supporting finds of archaeological heritage, protection of monuments or the prevention of illicit excavations. Following the pre-legislative scrutiny the Long Title of the Bill has been amended to state that one of the purposes of the Bill is to give further effect to the Valletta Convent…

I appreciate that the Senator has given such consideration to this. That is really important. However, I have been clear in my response that I am absolutely certain the Bill will require licensing authorities to adhere to Valletta. There is nothing in this Bill that violates the objectives of the Valletta Convention. That is its strength. The Bill is strong enough to adhere to that, regardless of who is in the Minister of State position in future Governments. The Bill has strength in relation to the Valletta Conven…

I will come back to the Senator on that point. However, I think it is the appropriate format. I can come back to her with a more comprehensive answer.

The use of the word "may" here is intentional and is considered necessary from a drafting point of view. Using the word "shall" could jeopardise the proposed system of prescribed monuments by way of an interpretation that all possible classes of relevant things must be prescribed. This could lead to legal challenges to the regulations made on the basis that the Minister had not gone far enough in terms of the classes to be prescribed. The concept of prescribed monuments is a fundamental element of the Bill and prov…

As I said, the use of the word "shall" could jeopardise the proposed system of prescribed monuments by way of an interpretation that all possible classes of relevant things must be prescribed. It could lead to legal challenges to the regulations made on the basis that the Minister may not have gone far enough in terms of the classes of monuments prescribed.

On buildings specifically, there is a mechanism within local authorities, using the record of protected structures, to protect buildings. It is a different basis for protection and the power lies as a reserved function of local authority members. Usually, those building protections come about as recommendations from the national inventory of architectural heritage. That is the mechanism. Local authority members have the power to add or remove buildings from the record of protected structures.

They also have the power to add to the records.

A different sort of protection applies to wrecks. This Bill forms a separate basis for protection. For local authorities and the record of protected structures, there are different mechanisms to prescribe protection.

Buildings are worthy of protection. Buildings that are over 100 years old are routinely put onto the record of protected structures by local authorities.

Pardon?

The Senator is probably confusing the terms of this Bill and the powers of local authorities and elected members to place buildings on a record of protected structures. That is a reserved function of elected members. It is a completely different process.

I am. It is clearly defined in the Bill. We discussed the matter on Second Stage. We are satisfied.

I am uncertain as to the suitability of drawing an Oireachtas joint committee directly into the implementation of the enacted Bill. There may be a misinterpretation here regarding the deletion of particulars from the register of monuments. Examples of the particulars referred to in section 17 could include landowners' information, geographical areas, technical details or descriptions of monuments. Given that there could be in excess of 180,000 registered monuments, a requirement to seek approval from the joint comm…