andMr. Donnellan asked the Minister for Finance why full compliance with the provisions of the National Monuments Acts and of licences issued thereunder is not amongst the conditions imposed in respect of each grant of public funds towards archaeological excavations.

Grants for excavations are paid to the excavator to meet expenses, including wages of workmen, as incurred, and the conditions imposed in respect of them are of an administrative nature to regulate the payments.

Conditions of the type referred to in the question are more appropriate for consideration in connection with the licensing of archaeological excavations under section 26 of the National Monuments Act 1930.

Does the Minister of State consider it a satisfactory situation that in the past ten years approximately a £¼ million has been paid out in grants towards excavations and that in the majority of these cases the objects found by the excavators, although they have been recipients of public money, have not been lodged in the National Museum and that to the best of present knowledge there is no assurance as to their safety on the part of any public body? Is the Minister of State further satisfied that grants should be paid to such excavators where in 16 such cases it transpired, from a reply to a recent parliamentary question, that reports had not been lodged with the appropriate statutory body? In view of these omissions, would the Minister of State not agree that there is an urgent need to review State policy in relation to grants-in-aid for archaeological excavations?

I have given careful consideration to this matter. At present, I am quite satisfied that reports are made and that the people concerned are fulfilling their obligations.

Does the Minister of State not agree that it appeared on the record of this House in response to a parliamentary question—the reference is Question No. 314 of 18 October 1977—that in 16 cases reports were not lodged with the appropriate authority under section 23 of the National Monuments Act? In other words, people received money from the State to do a job and they did not report on it. How can the Minister of State say he is satisfied that reports are being lodged when the record of this House contradicts what he has said?

A careful watch is at all times kept on reporting.

Could the Minister of State tell us if he is satisfied that it is appropriate to give money to excavators to dig up objects when the people concerned who have received public money to dig objects out of the ground where they were perfectly safe and would remain there for generations to come have not fulfilled their obligations, and that there is no assurance that these objects are lodged in the National Museum? Is the Minister of State satisfied that the Government should have spent approximately £¼ million in grants-in-aid for excavations in the absence of such an assurance?

Discussions are going on with the officials of my Department regarding the overall position of grants. Furthermore, the matter of applications for licences is also being considered.

The Minister of State had had an adequate opportunity to consider this matter since it was first raised in the Dáil. We are entitled to expect a decision from him now instead of being told that the matter is still being considered. Is he or is he not satisfied with the present situation?

As I said, careful consideration is being given to this matter at present by myself and the officials in my Department. There is a check on all aspects of this matter.

Is the Minister of State satisfied?

Yes, I am satisfied.

Would the Minister of State agree to insert in future licences a condition that the licensee must lodge all objects found in the course of the excavation in the National Museum?

The 1977 licence states that a licensee shall furnish to the Commissioners of Public Works a report on the excavation and the results thereof. He shall also deposit with the commissioners three copies of any publication by a learned society or any newspaper, periodical or journal containing an account or description of the excavation. That condition has been fulfilled.

Would the Minister of State agree that in future a condition of the granting of any licence should be that the objects found in the course of the excavation be lodged in the National Museum for safe keeping?

I will have to consider that matter.

Could the Minister of State say whether he is prepared to exclude from future consideration for grants persons or organisations who have not fulfilled the reporting requirement in the past?

Yes.

Does the Minister of State not consider it important to ensure that any valuables discovered during excavations should be deposited in the State's Museum, otherwise they may well be exported and lost to the nation?

The matter is being reviewed and I am keeping the whole matter under consideration.

I have asked the Minister of State for his own opinion and I do not want the opinion of some civil servant.

My opinion is that it is correct that the matter should be kept under review.

In the meantime very valuable treasures may be lost to the nation because of the conditions of the licence.

This risk did not arise only in the last month or so.

I agree but two wrongs do not make a right.

I agree and the Deputy has been told that the Minister is considering the matter.

He is considering a lot of things but doing very little about them.

The Deputy and his party were in Government long enough and did little about the matter.

I did not have responsibility.

That is not my fault.

22.