asked the Minister for Finance in respect of the archaeological excavation carried out at the Church of Saint Mel in Longford in 1967: (a) where the objects found in the excavation have been lodged; (b) the amount of State grant paid towards the excavation; (c) if he has received any report on it; (d) if a report has been lodged in accordance with section 23 of the National Monuments Act, 1930; (e) if the objects found may be inspected by the general public; (f) if they have been adequately conserved; and (g) if a report on the excavation has been published.

The few portable objects found in the excavation at the site of the Church of St. Mel at Ardagh, County Longford are retained in University College, Dublin, where they can be inspected by the general public. They did not need conservation.

A grant of £3,600 was made towards this project by the Commissioners of Public Works. A report has not been lodged in accordance with section 23 of the National Monuments Act, 1930. The excavator furnished the commissioners with a report but no report has been published on the excavation.

What action does the Minister propose taking in view of the fact that the report was not lodged in accordance with section 23 of the National Monuments Act, 1930? Furthermore, can the Minister say how the public may gain access to these objects in UCD, whether they are on continuous public display, or are in a drawer somewhere?

They are on display in UCD.

Where?

I do not know.

Is there a place for exhibitions in UCD?

They are in UCD at present.

On display?

Where they can be inspected by the general public.

How may they be inspected? The Minister is responsible for the information——

I have given the Deputy the information; I presume they may be inspected with one's eyes.

Are they available in a public place, for public display, or are they a private collection——

They are available for public inspection in UCD.

How may they be seen?

With one's eyes.

With or without notice; does one have to give notice if one wishes to see these objects?

I have given the reply, that they are available for public inspection at UCD.

With or without notice?

If the Deputy wants information regarding times and places then he should put down a question to that effect, but they are available for public inspection there at present.

What action does the Minister propose taking in view of the fact that the provisions of section 23 of the 1930 Act have not been complied with?

The excavator is not obliged to publish a report of an excavation.

That is not what the section is really about. Section 23 is about reporting within six months of the finding of objects and the Minister has stated already that the provisions of that section were not complied with. I am asking what action he proposes to take in the matter.

It is not easy to take any action.

Why not?

Because it is for the Garda Síochána and the National Museum, that they must report under section 23.

Has the matter been reported to the authorities who are competent to take action?

But it is understood that the archaeologists in question read a paper on the subject at the Royal Irish Academy.

I am asking about the reporting within six months of the finding of objects, not the publication of a scientific paper. I am asking the Minister what action he proposes taking about the failure to report the objects being found.

None at present.

21.

asked the Minister for Finance in respect of the excavation at the Cork old walled city mediaeval site in 1974, towards which a State grant of £58,000 was paid; (a) the number of objects of archaeological importance discovered and where they are lodged; (b) to whom they belong; and (c) if they are open to public inspection.

Upwards of a quarter of a million objects were discovered during the course of archaeological excavations carried out at two sites within the boundaries of the old walled city of Cork between 1974 and 1977. They comprise worked leather, wood, metal objects, pottery, botanical and zoological material. The finds belong to Cork Corporation.

Conservation work is still being carried out on some of the finds and these are lodged in University College, Cork. The bulk of the artefacts are at the Cork City Museum where they are open to public inspection.

22.

asked the Minister for Finance in relation to an archaeological excavation at Carrownaglogh in County Mayo, towards which £34,900 in State grants were paid between 1969 and 1977: (a) the number of objects of archaeological importance discovered, where they are lodged and if they may be seen by the public; (b) to whom they belong; (c) if an annual report on the finding of the objects in question was lodged in full accordance with section 23 of the National Monuments Act, 1930, and, if so, when; and (d) if it is proposed to give any further grants towards the excavation.

The archaeological excavation at Carrownaglogh, County Mayo, revealed no archaeological objects.

No decision has been made to give further grants for the excavation and I have requested the Commissioners of Public Works to bear in mind the record of archaeologists in furnishing reports on archaeological excavations when considering the making of grants for such purposes in future.

Would the Minister consider it usual or otherwise that an excavation carried out at an expense of £34,000 should disclose the findings of no objects whatsoever over a period of almost a decade?

If there was nothing there they could hardly find anything. And one could not know until one started to look whether or not there was anything there.

Would the Minister consider that the continued giving of renewed grants each year to an excavation which was not finding anything was correct?

They consider that.

Why do they keep giving grants?

They consider that before they make any allocation of further funds.

Then why do they keep on giving grants?

As the Deputy knows, they give grants in many instances for excavation around the country. Prior to the beginning of the excavation surely one cannot know whether or not there are going to be finds.

But the grants were given each year for a period of eight years.

Arising out of the Minister's reply, in which he said that no archaeological objects were found, can he indicate from the reply written for him if any archaeological information about the settlement pattern was found during that period as distinct from specific objects?

Yes, considerable evidence of human activity has been discovered on the fossilised landscape under the bog which has revealed a landscape totally different from that visible on the peat bog land of the present day. Extensive areas of stone walled enclosures, cultivation ridges and evidence of field clearance show how extensive were man's everyday activities in this region. These features give a good picture of what a farming community was like in Neolithic times, in the years 2,500 B.C. to 1,900 B.C. and are of international significance.

And they did not have petrol then either.

Hardly worth the money.

23.

asked the Minister for Finance if there are sites in Dublin or any other urban area where major building developments are planned which are of a similar archaeological significance to the Wood Quay site and if so, the arrangements, if any, being made to have them excavated or, where necessary, declared to be national monuments.

I am not aware of any urban sites, where building developments are planned, which are of similar archaeological significance to Wood Quay.

Is the Minister aware that his office, in conjunction with the National Museum, have been carrying out a survey of archaeological sites in urban areas since 1977? Can the Minister indicate the general areas that have been discovered to be of archaeological significance in Dublin?

I have no information of any in Dublin. There are ones in Waterford, Naas, Tuam and Athenry.

Would the Minister agree that the publication of the findings of this study which has been going on since 1977, even on an interim basis, would be useful so that developers wishing to develop in a particular area would have advance notice that there may be archaeological matter in the area where they are proposing to develop?

That is a separate question altogether.

24.

asked the Minister for Finance in respect of each of the 15 licensed archaeological excavations towards which a total of £57,700 in State grants was paid, but which in reply to Question No. 319 of 12 October 1977 it was stated that there was no record of a report of the finding of archaeological objects in accordance with section 23 of the National Monuments Act, 1930: (a) if he is satisfied that no archaeological objects were in fact found, and (b) if not, the action he has taken to secure compliance with the provision of the section.

I assume the Deputy is referring to Question No. 314 of 18 October, 1977. (a) I am satisfied that no archaeological objects were found in three of the sites. (b) The Commissioners of Public Works wrote to each of the archaeologists concerned in 1977 asking for a report in the matter. Since then, as indicated by the Minister for Education in reply to Question No. 21 of 23 May 1979, reports have been received of the finding of archaeological objects at five of the sites. The Commissioners of Public Works will continue to press the excavators of the other seven sites to furnish reports of any archaeological objects found.

Does the Minister consider it to be satisfactory that these archaeologists who have excavated seven sites at public expense—even though they have been asked to do so for the last two years—should not have furnished any report to the Office of Public Works on what they have found; if he considers that this matter should be left in the realm of mere correspondence between the Office of Public Works and the archaeologists in question?

Yes, one could be disappointed with the return of information from archaeologists; there is no doubt about that. But every effort is being made by the authorities concerned to obtain this information.

Could the Minister give an assurance that none of the archaeologists in question who failed to furnish this information will be given grants to carry out archaeological excavations in the future?

As I said in reply to a previous question, that is a matter that will be taken into account before any grants are allocated.

I asked the Minister for an assurance that they will not get grants.

That is a matter that will be considered.

The Deputy may not ask several questions without the permission of the Chair and even sitting down when the Minister is replying. It is not in conformity with the orderly dignity of the House to behave in that manner.

I did not intend any disrespect to the Chair.

I am not suggesting that, but the practice shows a certain lack of decorum.

25.

asked the Minister for Finance in respect of each archaeological excavation licensed by him in 1978 and 1979: (a) the location of the excavation, (b) the purpose of the excavation, (c) the archaeologist involved, (d) if a grant from public funds has been or is to be made available towards the cost of it, if so, the amount, and why the grant is being given, and (e) if any guarantees have been obtained by him as to the conservation, lodgment in the National Museum and public display of any archaeological objects found in the excavation or as to the publication within a reasonable time in a suitable scientific journal of the results of the excavation.

As the reply to (a), (b), (c) and (d) of the question is in the form of a tabular statement, I propose, with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, to circulate it with the Official Report.

As regards (e) an applicant for an excavation licence under section 26 of the National Monuments Act, 1930, undertakes that any finds shall not be removed from the custody of the owner—or from his own custody should he retain such finds with the consent of the owner—except for the purpose of examination by the Director of the National Museum, until the expiration of 31 days from the date on which he has made a report as laid down in section 23 of that Act as amended by section 13 of the National Monuments Act, 1954. He further undertakes to furnish to the Director of the National Museum, within six months of the completion of the excavation or such longer period as may be agreed on between him and the Director, a stratigraphical record on which will be fully set forth the position and description of all finds made as a result of the excavation, together with the location of the finds and the name of the person in whose possession they are at the time of furnishing the record.

I consider that this is as far as one can go in the matter of guarantees regarding finds.

I am advised that it would be unreasonable to require as a condition of the granting of a licence that the applicant guarantee publication of the results within any given time in a scientific journal. The amount of information that the excavation will disclose cannot be assessed until it has been completed; and when the excavator has prepared his report he may not succeed in persuading any scientific journal to publish it.

Following is the statement:

Details of Excavation Licences issued by the Commissioners of Public Works in 1978, 1979

What guarantee is there for the adequate conservation of the objects in question?

I am sure there are many safeguards if conservation is required.

The question was about guarantees. What are the guarantees?

As I said in the reply, this is as far as one can go in regard to guarantees.

There is nothing in the reply about conservation. Can I ask the Minister to answer the question he was asked?

I have answered it.

The Minister has not.