The Coalition Government's decision to break up Dúchas, the Heritage Service agency within the Department of the Environment and Local Government, is politically short sighted and potentially damaging to our long-term interests. The explanation offered - that it would "optimise organisational resources" by transferring regulation and policy development to the Department itself, while allowing the Office of Public Works to deal with conservation management and built heritage matters - represents a step backwards into an uncaring past.
At the moment, the Heritage Service has responsibility under national and European law for the protection, conservation, management and presentation of Ireland's natural and built heritage. Its function is to maintain and manage national parks, wildlife, national monuments and historic properties. By abolishing the agency and splitting those functions and responsibilities between the parent Department and the Office of Public Works, the Government may indeed save money, but the cost to our heritage and wildlife will probably be substantial.
Dúchas has been something of an unwanted child within government since Ms Síle de Valera became minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands in 1997. It upset the European Commission by its response to environmental protection directives and by failing to identify a sufficient number of conservation areas. It antagonised farmers and their organisations by setting low sheep stocking rates in mountainous areas to allow vegetation to recover; by identifying areas of conservation for wildlife species and by designating extensive areas of special sensitivity. Its contribution on planning and development matters upset some powerful interests.
A reshuffling of Cabinet responsibilities last year saw Dúchas transferred to the Department of the Environment, as the Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands was broken up. Two weeks ago, it was decided to abolish Dúchas altogether and reassign its functions. No professional group or firm of consultants had been asked to advise on that development and its likely consequences. The decision will deprive the State of an integrated heritage service and Labour Party spokesman, Mr Eamon Gilmore, accused the Government of shooting an environmental watchdog to clear the way for uninterrupted development.
The antagonism generated by Dúchas resulted directly from its mandate to protect and preserve our heritage. At times it was criticised for being diffident; at other times, too assertive. But it was visibly attempting to fulfil its responsibilities. And, if things went wrong, it could be held to account. It had also begun to produce quality brochures. The ordinary citizen and interested tourist was able to access information provided by Dúchas about heritage sites and wildlife. Added value was being provided and there was a growing sense of this being a "heritage island". Dúchas has delivered as an integrated heritage agency. It should be retained.