I find your observations on the Irish situation quite interesting.
I'd just like you to know that the statutory regime of archaeology of several European countries (e.g. the Netherlands, France, Italy, Greece and Cyprus), not only Scandinavian, is in many respects stronger and more effective than the Irish one.
A "polluter pays" system which provides funding for the excavation of up to 100% of a site considered archaeologically significant.
A broad relatively generous definition of archaeological significance, extending into the postmedieval/early modern period and later, rather than a narrow chronological definition of what is considered archaeologically significant. Note the excavation of nineteenth century settlements on recent road projects.
Full open area excavation of archaeological sites affected by development.
How does this situation compare with Cyprus, Greece or Italy? What percentage of archaeological sites are excavated, how do they define archaeological significance and who pays?