Ultimately there are people on both sides of the equation giving their side a bad name. On the one hand, I get phone calls from people asking "is there any heritage in my area? My neighbours are putting in for planning permission and I want to stop them!" On the other, many developers ignore heritage issues until they become a problem, at which point they'll raise their eyebrows and they'll probably start giving out about 'tree-huggers'.

It's a question of attitudes on both sides really. We're running a conference on 11 and 12 October called 'Projects, Policies and Practice . . . Beyond Either/Or'. It will feature a panel of international and Irish speakers who will explore how heritage and development can co-exist. Usually the heritage people go to conferences about how wonderful heritage is, and the developers go to conferences about maximising their returns. They usually don't go to the same place, so hopefully this is a step in the right direction.

We need to be creative. It's important we think of future heritage.

What are we leaving for future developers and activists to fight about? There's a building in Barcelona by a very important architect.

It's a protected structure yet they're turning it into an art gallery. It's a massive modern intervention at the front of the building. I went over to see it and it works very well.

Now, I seriously question whether we would be permitted to do that here. Or take Sorrento Terrace. It's absolutely beautiful, but you couldn't get that built now . . . a terrace overlooking a scenic area?

There'd be uproar. Yet all of these buildings are protected structures.

You cannot touch them without permission because they're deemed so important.

We need to look at and debate things like this. We need a change of attitudes about what's good and bad. A lot of the problem is due to the fact we have a developer-led system. There aren't enough really well designed buildings to give people con"dence that new developments could be beautiful.

Heritage isn't just about what we did in the past but also what we're leaving for the future.

To do this properly we need people to cooperate. If you give all heritage 100% value (and some people do), then you can knock nothing down. What can we do in those circumstances? Decide we've stopped? That everything's been built?

And there are developers who are actually proud to be philistines! They'll actually say to you "I'm a Neanderthal. I don't care about heritage, and I'm proud of it!" But where do they go on holidays? To industrial estates?

Basically we have to lose the entrenched positions and engage with one another. It shouldn't be seen as a battle between the treehuggers and the gombeen men. That's just too convenient for everyone involved.

People need to change their attitudes. Some see development as a 'problem' and others see heritage as a 'problem'. And I don't think either is true. There are ways of developing into the future while still retaining the good things that you have from the past. We just need to discuss the issues more and find them.