The 6th World Archaeological Congress (WAC), Tara
and the M3
national | history and
heritage | feature
Sunday June 29, 2008 23:01
by Maggie Ronayne, Archaeology Dept, NUI Galway & GWS Ireland - Global
Women's Strike, Ireland
Ireland at
globalwomenstrike dot net
087 7838688
The privatisation of Irish archaeology and
corruption on the road schemes
Cultural Destruction
How the issue
of a discussion at WAC 6 on Tara and the M3 arose and an update on the
situation.
The issue of a debate on Tara and the M3 at the World
Archaeological Congress, which takes place next week in Dublin, arose
after Tara campaigners requested that I investigate whether such a
discussion could be facilitated at one of the sessions dealing with
ethics. I wrote to WAC asking for a session on campaigns against cultural
destruction as a counterbalance to the programme as it was, which included
several pro-developer, pro-private sector archaeology themes as well as
the shocking presence at the congress of the US military.
Related Links: World
Archaeological Congress Tara
stories on indy
I requested that in the tradition of WAC, such a session be open to
all involved in fighting cultural destruction and suggested a fee waiver
for campaigners due to the prohibitive costs of attending.
WAC replied agreeing to include public discussion on the case of
Tara and the M3 during the debate in the ethics forum on Thursday 3rd
July. Tara was to be one of two cases examined in detail by participants
in this forum.
WAC suggested I contact one of the co-organisers of the forum if I
wished to be involved myself. I replied repeating my concern that any
campaigners could participate if they so wished. I reiterated my request
for a fee waiver and also asked, following a request from Tara
campaigners, about a crèche so that those who are normally excluded, like
campaigners who are the mothers of young children, could participate.
There was no response.
Later I wrote to the session organizer to whom WAC had referred me,
and received an email which included the following:
‘…the format of the session is not a debate, nor is it even going
to be specifically about the cases that the ethics forum participants
studied in preparation. We've revised the format of the forum in response
to dialogues with stakeholders, members of the WAC Executive and the WAC
Committee on Ethics, as well as in relation to what information would be
most beneficial to WAC. With that in mind, our forum will be a panel
presentation/discussion of recommendations to give to WAC on considering
ethical cases in general, so that future cases can be
avoided/prevented/considered in constructive/non-painful ways.
Our forum participants did study two real cases studies in
preparation for this, but the public panel will be process-oriented and
future-focused… in shifting the public panel format off of the specific
cases, we hope to maintain our focus on this process, minimize further
pain for stakeholders, and also avoid our participants and the forum
itself from being pigeonholed politically as "for" or "against" a
particular issue…’
Following subsequent confusion on whether there would still be a
discussion on Tara at this forum, my department sought clarification from
this session organizer and was told in a second email that:
‘…We will not be detailing the specifics of either case we studied.
As I've attempted to explain in both emails (to you and Vincent
[Salafia]), our process-driven and future-oriented recommendations are
*informed by* the case studies our participants have been studying, but
the public forum will not be focused or commenting *directly* on those…
specific stakeholders were contacted by us earlier to submit to the
participants position statements that would be taken into consideration
along with the published material on the case studies we chose… there was
(and still is) a process in place for which we were gathering direct
statements from interested parties - that's just not the focus of our
public forum (we have never wanted the forum to be a soapbox for any side
of any of the issues)…’
She added that the ‘stakeholders’ selected by WAC for this
pre-congress study and who submitted documentation included the NRA. We
understand that UCD is now telling journalists there will be discussion of
Tara in some sessions though there’s no information on the format or level
of participation. So we don’t know if there will be substantive
discussion– it’s anyone’s guess.
Whatever the case may be, most of those who have spent years trying
to oppose destruction at Tara will not be able to participate. WAC chose
which grouping in the movement it wanted to participate and by means of
this action, the prohibitively expensive entry fee and emails such as
those above, WAC appear to have effectively closed the discussion down.
said to other campaigners, to archaeologists opposed to the motorway or
whose field, like in my own case, is professional ethics and active
opposition to cultural destruction: you can’t speak. The campaigner they
have chosen to participate in the debate credited WAC for organising a
Tara/M3 discussion rather than those who insisted on such a
discussion.
Meanwhile the article published in the academic journal Public
Archaeology to coincide with the World Archaeological Congress in
Dublin is circulating. It discusses the privatization of archaeology,
corrupt development and the movement against it, looking at the case of
Tara and the M3 in particular. It can be found at the link below.
As it says at the end of the article, 'if privatized archaeology in
the service of corrupt development is adopted as the model globally, it
will be used in the Third World to cause the deaths of millions of people
in wars and US-backed ‘democracy and development’ projects... Already
there is an attempt to use WAC to approve a global, privatised archaeology
modelled on recent development in Ireland.'
,%20Tara%20and%20the%20M3%20-%20Indymedia%20Ireland_files/72_54_1_1_5_0_0_0_0_0_bobby_sands_memorial_candle_for_sat_7_june_08..jpg "Three Memorial Candles to be auctioned as one item.")
printable
version
make this your indymedia front page
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (10 of 10)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10When it comes to reading scary things about what is going on at Tara I thought we had seen the worst -but this is the worst yet!!! Thank gawd there are people like you and Jo Ronayne who are brave enough to expose this scandal. Many of us felt all along that what is happening at Tara has global significance and now the true horror of it is just beginning to be realised. I am in shock. Bless you.
WAC, not to be confused with We Are Change.
WAC 6 represents the last chance saloon for those who have opposed the route of the M3 through the landscape of Tara. WAC is quite a leftie construct; the only global organisation representing archaeologists, its members have been fashioning a code of ethics for the profession for many years. That archaeologists should require a code of ethics may come as a surprise to some, but survival in the present crisis of capital is getting a bit more difficult and sometimes corners have to be cut.
Participation on the WAC mailing list is global and open to all (although there are few enough posts from the DPRC and central Africa). Participation at a higher level appears to be relatively democratic, something along the lines of a dictatorship of the doers, with doubtless a few junior academics with ambitions hanging around. English and Spanish are the main languages used.
WAC is a good thing. It's an emerging ethical voice in a profession that's changed beyond recognition in the 40 odd years I've been involved in it.
It seems that a public meeting of WAC's ethics committee was being organised, with the Tara controversy a central point of discussion. Stakeholders were consulted and some bright spark had the idea to invite TaraWatch to the party.
This had the potential to turn into an entertaining, though perfectly pointless exercise in auld bleather, with besuited NRA officials on one side (have you heard the American NRA spinner on the wireless talking about the toll-free M50? I digress...) and Salafia's beragged coterie on the other,roaring at one another in front of an audience of the great and the good.
You couldn't make it up, unless you were perhaps too cynical for your own good. Then you might just realise that Salafia and co are being brought along to demonstrate to the assembled internationals what a bunch of lulas they are, those roads protesters.
Archaeologists for their part should have been in the game sooner. They should have recognised the idiocy of constructing a motorways with a beautiful circular car park, elevated over the canal, the railway and the M50 at one end, and a DoENI field track at the other.
Campaigners never recognised the more fundamental political issues at stake, stuff like ecology and global warming sure, but additionally sustainability and lack of a fast rail connection from Kells into Dublin. And what about the workers? What about their quality of life?
The academics though, have had a good war. Led by Newman and Fenwick in UCG they suffered from a bad attack, but played consistently well throughout. Newman's essay 'Misinformation, disinformation and downright distortion: the Battle to Save Tara 1999-2005' inUninhabited Ireland, (Galway 2007) is an obvious starting point or anyone wanting to understand both the planning context and the archaeological issues at play.
Hopefully enough of the participants will make a bit of noise and at least get some clarification on what would appear to be, as they say at home in Lanark , a pulled session.
Otherwise, the WAC programme appears quite interesting. You won't be going of course unless you're an archaeologist or a rich digger-licker, but quite a few of the papers to be presented are available on line.
There's free booze of course, if you know where to look. We'll be footerin around the Congress and reporting political developments as they happen on Indymedia.
Might there be any point in trying to raise the SHOCKING situation relating to the completely avoidable type of heritage site destruction outlined at http://www.indymedia.ie/article/83306 I wonder?
An effort has already been made to point out the difficulty in question to Prime Minister Brian Cowen TD, in a section of a letter to him sent through the registered post on May 9th 2008, the text of which can be viewed at http://www.humanrightsireland.com/PrimeMinisterCowen/9May2008/Email.htm
As can be seen at the above address, the e-mail version of the letter in question was copied to President George W. Bush (receipt of which was acknowledged by the Whitehuse).
Also, was it just a coincidence I wonder, or some kind of VERY sick joke in VERY poor taste, that July 4th happens to be the day on which the United States of America celebrates its Independence Day?
TaraWatch
Suite 108
The Capel Building
Mary's Abbey
Dublin 7
Minister John Gormley
Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government
Customs House
Dublin 1
30 June 2008
Dear Minister Gormley,
I am writing to you, to inform you of what I believe to be a material change in circumstances, in relation to the Hill of Tara and M3 motorway.
Yesterday, an article and an editorial that appeared in yesterday's Irish mail on Sunday, which quotes a published academic paper by Maggie Ronayne, Department of Archaeology, NUI Galway: 'The State We Are in on the Eve of World Archaeological Congress (WAC) 6: Archaeology in Ireland vs Corporate Takeover' in Public Archaeology, Vol. 7, No. 2, Summer 2008, 114-129.
The article quotes Ro Ronayne, a former contract archaeologist for the National Roads Authority (NRA), who held a number of archaeological licences for test-trenching sites along the M3 motorway. In the paper, she claims that she, and a number of other licence-holders, were forced to change findings in reports, and also had reports changed without their permission, by the NRA. These reports were in turn presented to the Minister for the Environment, Dick Roche, who relied upon them in making his decision on whether or not to grant full excavation licenses, on sites which I alleged were national monuments.
As you are aware, I took a High Court action, to judicially review the Minister's directions of May 2005, which ordered the excavation and demolition of 38 archaeological sites between Navan and Dunshaughlin. The action was taken against the Minister for the Environment, Meath County Council, and the Attorney General, and not the NRA. However, the NRA immediately filed a motion to be considered a notice party, and were added to the action by Justice Smyth. They then immediately began an intensive cause of action, which involved a high volume of correspondence, motions, and expert affidavits. Justice Smyth ruled against me, saying that there were no national monuments present, and I was liable for approximately 600,000 euros in costs to the Government, and also was liable for my own costs, which were in the hundreds of thousands. I was forced to withdraw my Supreme Court appeal, due to my inability to pay these exorbitant costs. It now appears that the NRA evidence was fabricated, and that there were indeed national monuments present.
Currently, I am taking legal advice, but I wanted to write to you immediately, and call on you to review the matter, and take prompt and decisive action, in regards to the above claims by Ms Ronayne. The second leg of my argument in the High Court was that there is one single greater Tara national monument, which the motorway traverses. This claim was also rejected by the Judge, in large part due to the NRA evidence. While the 38 sites have disappeared, the motorway is still a long way from the completion date of 2010, so this is still very much a live issue. I still maintain that the M3 is passing through the middle of the Tara national monument. The area of that monument is equivalent to the area that you are proposing should be a UNESCO World Heritage Site. We have written to UNESCO and informed them that we believe it would be a breach of the World Heritage Convention for them to inscribe Tara, without requiring a re-routing of the M3.
Assuming the claims by Ms Ronayne are true, and I find no reason to doubt that, the core responsibility for dealing with those claims, rests on your shoulders. One of the other claims I made in my case was that there is a constitutional imperative for the Minister for the Environment to protect the national heritage. That duty has been affirmed by the Supreme Court, in the Dunne case, over Carrickmines Castle, and does exist. It imposes a positive duty on you to act in the best interests of preservation.
When you took office, you stated that you had received advice from the Attorney General, that you could not undo any of the previous orders of the former Minister, Dick Roche, concerning Tara, unless there was “a material change in circumstances”. I believe the revelations by Jo Ronayne, combined with the observations of Maggie Ronayne, constitute such a material change in circumstances, which not only provides you with an opportunity, but imposes upon you a duty, to act in a positive manner and take whatever measures necessary to protect the entire Hill of Tara landscape and archaeological complex.
In my opinion, your constitutional imperative is to immediately place a Temporary Preservation Order on the entire Hill of Tara archaeological complex, and to undertake a public enquiry into exactly what has transpired, with regards to the archaeological assessments used to justify the current route. While I may have legal remedies available to me, it should not be left to private citizens to protect sites such as Tara, by risking life and limb entering the Courts. Protecting Tara is your primary responsibility, and this change in circumstances offers you an opportunity to use your ministerial powers to the fullest.
Yours sincerely,
Vincent Salafia
[Please write your own letter to the Minister, at minister@environ.ie]
See also: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/tara-campaigners-in-bid-to-have-m3-motorway-ruling-struck-out-1423211.html
Irish Mail on Sunday articles: http://www.tarawatch.org/?p=720
We have been contacted again by WAC.
They are setting up a new panel discussion on the M3, to be held this Thursday. We have been invited to make a 10 minute statement, and participate in the panel.
We were also informed that WAC would be interested in passing a resolution, in the plenary session on Friday, regarding the future of the Tara complex.
We will begin wording the 10 minute statement, and a proposed resolution. Input welcome from all quarters.
Please join discussions at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hilloftara/ to have your say
Great that someone is exposing it! There are some decent archaeologists left! Private archaeology - has inferences
I don't like. For instance, was the looting of the National Museum, Bagdad, for Private interests? And now the same military at
this conference. Very sinister. And wondering: yes, for the last 12 months, I've wondered about the significance or
coincidence of 4 July when Baronstown was destroyed.....
Write to the papers and to the Ministers demanding that those responsible for presenting false evidence on the Archaeology reports to be brought to Justice and that they face the full rigours of the Law.
minister@environ.ie
minister@transport.ie
PDF Document by Jo Ronayne. NB Pages 8 and 10 of this document which are of particular interest.
I, like a great many others I believe, very much welcome the renewed efforts now being made regarding the protection of Tara's heritage sites, and wish all concerned every success.
However, I would suggest that the heritage protection problems connected with Tara are just a part, albeit an extremely important part, of a much larger problem -- so far COMPLETELY unresolved, and COMPLETELY unaddressed even -- that involves systemic corruption in all three of the main branches of our present Government (i.e. Executive, Legislative and Judicial).
The matter of unconstitutional (i.e. unlawful) legislation lays at the heart of this ballooning government corruption problem, and unless the unconstitutional legislation in question is successfully challenged (and rooted out) through the means outlined at http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/government-in-ireland/irish-constitution-1/unconstitutional_legislation_and_decisions , I fail to see how any individual person, or any group of people (the World Archaeological Congress Group included), can do anything worthwhile -- at the present time -- to actually stop the ongoing destruction of some of our most important heritage sites.
The immediate problem of course (as I see things), is the fact that our senior "public servants" continue to successfully block anybody who tries to remedy the unconstitutional legislation in question using the procedures outlined at the above government web site address, as they have been doing for the past several years.
If there are any truly independent-minded and responsible Republic of Ireland lawyers around who have what it takes to stand up for our Constitution (i.e. Bunreacht na hEireann, the "Basic Law" of our soverign nation state), using the strongest and most direct means lawfully available to them to smash through the corrupt "senior public servant" blockade referred to above, now would be a very good time for them to show themselves.
Hoping to get the necessary equivalent type of legal results via the World Archaeological Congress may, I fear, turn out to be be yet another "false dawn", which will end in yet more disappointment for a great many people: IF, that is, the WAC efforts are not backed up, on a parallel basis, with "home" action of the kind mentioned in the paragraph just above.
I believe we (the people of the Republic of Ireland that is) have to solve our own extremely serious problems with government corruption, and while organisations like the World Archaeological Congress may well be able to help us, they cannot do it for us: anymore than they can eat our breakfasts for us.
As the government web site address I provided above (for remedying unconstitutional legislation problems) appears to have suddenly stopped working, anybody interested in this extremely important subject may find it useful to look through the following much more general Google list:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Unconstitutional+Legislation%2C+Ireland&btnG=Google+Search