Like the other Deputies who have spoken, I would like to afford a welcome to this Bill. In my case it must be a limited welcome. In so far as it succeeds in directing the attention of Members of the House and through them, one would hope, that of the general public to matters artistic and cultural, we must all welcome it.
However, having said that, I should point out to the Taoiseach that this Bill is going to come as a grievous disappointment to many people, particularly to those who are involved or even interested in the artistic and cultural life of our nation. For some time past there has been a widespread feeling that some positive move must be made in artistic and cultural matters. It has been felt on a fairly widespread scale that the existing legislation is no longer adequate for our purposes as a modern developing and expanding society and that something comprehensive and forward-looking was needed. It is against that widespread feeling among the general public that this Bill must be looked at.
I hope I will not be accused of political partisanship in this regard, but I would like to say that many people would expect more from the present Government. We have been treated to a fairly intensive propaganda campaign to the effect that they are a Government of liberal intellectuals and that we can expect, apart from economic and social miracles, very considerable advance from them in the cultural fields. If that were the general expectation, I am afraid that there will be severe disappointment with this Bill. The Bill is very limited in scope. What surprises me is that the Taoiseach, with all his heavy responsibilities, should find it worthwhile to waste his personal time, the time of his Department and that of the Oireachtas with what is so comparatively limited.
I will speak later on about the structure of this piece of legislation itself. At this point I want to emphasise that all this particular piece of legislation purports to do is to make relatively minor changes in the structure of An Chomhairle Ealaíon. I would hope that we would continue to refer to this body as "An Chomhairle Ealaíon" and not, as we are always unfortunately inclined to do, slip into the error of referring to it as "The Arts Council". All that the Taoiseach is setting out to do is to enlarge the membership of the council and to make relatively minor changes in the structure. One minor change is that we will now have a full-time director and part-time chairman. There is also a very minor and limited provision with regard to local authorities participating in the general work of the council.
The first thing that strikes one about this piece of legislation is that no extension of activities by the new body is envisaged. We have had the long Summer Recess. There was plenty of time for somebody to give a great deal of thought to this piece of legislation in general terms. I am disappointed that the Bill was issued only shortly before we resumed. I, personally, have not had the time to examine it as thoroughly as I would have wished and to discuss it with as many people as I would have wished. The Taoiseach must be held culpable —I say this in purely parliamentary terms. He did not give us time to get our teeth into this legislation, which I regard as fundamentally important. After the long Summer Recess, we got it only a week ago and we are expected to take it today and to discuss it.
There is no extension of activities envisaged by the new comhairle. There is not a single function added to those which were attributed to the existing body. The comhairle has not been set any new objectives or targets. More important, it has not been given any new powers. The piece of legislation which was brought in in 1951 was admirable at that time. Everybody in the House, on whatever side, would pay tribute at this stage to the then Taoiseach, Mr. J. A. Costello, for having brought in the Bill in 1951. At that time it could have been regarded as a very significant step forward in our affairs.
The functions which the 1951 Act allocated to the council which it was establishing were very limited in scope. It might not be any harm if I were to enumerate them. Their first objective was to stimulate public interest in the Arts. Their second objective was to promote the knowledge, appreciation and practice of the Arts. The third objective was to assist in improving the standards of the Arts. The fourth objective was to organise or to assist in the organisation of exhibitions within or without the State of works of art and artistic craftsmanship. The fifth objective was the function of advising the Government, on which the Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach has spoken. I agree with what he had to say about the way in which Government Ministers have neglected to make full use of that power. The sixth objective was to co-operate with and assist other persons concerned either directly or indirectly with matters relating to the Arts.
Those six functions were very fine in their time. In 1951 they could have been regarded as a fairly significant step forward. I do not think they are adequate today. The Taoiseach should avail of this opportunity to re-cast them completely, to go into them in some detail and to add to them because it does not require any great attention to see ways in which they could be expanded. I think they could be made a lot more precise and a lot more clearly defined as well as being expanded in scope. In so far as there is nothing of that nature in this Bill I find it very disappointing. Furthermore, one has to look at the financial side of the piece of legislation. Admittedly it is a natural function of Opposition Deputies to encourage the Government to spend more money in all possible directions. It is equally the duty of a responsible Government to hold the scales as evenly as possible between various conflicting demands.
In this case the Taoiseach might have said much more than he has said about the funds which are to be made available to the new comhairle. If he even expanded them in proportion to the increase in membership it would have been something. Not alone has he not given any positive indication of making additional financial provision available to the new comhairle but I, with some experience of the construction of ministerial speeches, find what he has actually said in his speech somewhat suspicious. His speech seems to me to be diverting attention from the fact that he is not undertaking to make more than the existing £100,000 available directly to the new comhairle. He mentions the omnibus figure of £500,000 which is being made available in some form or another for cultural activities and the very fact that his speech makes reference to that figure seems to me to indicate that he is shying away from any positive commitment to increasing the actual £100,000 which is at present being made available to the comhairle as such.
It is very easy for Deputies on this side of the House to urge additional expenditure by the Government in desirable directions. Perhaps that is one of our legitimate functions, but I do think that if £100,000 or something in that region was appropriate two or three years ago a much greater figure should be envisaged by the Taoiseach now particularly as he is making a change. Apart altogether from the fact that the situation as such would demand a status increase in expenditure on artistic and cultural activities, the very size of our budget here now offers scope for a far greater expenditure in this direction. If the amount of the grant to An Chomhairle Ealaíon were looked at in relation to the overall total of Government expenditure a much more generous appropriation would be made either this year or certainly in the next financial year when the new comhairle will have got going.
My approach to this piece of legislation and my disappointment in it is dominated by the fact that I believe, and I am sure many Members will not be surprised to hear me say this again, that the implementation of an enlightened comprehensive policy for the Arts with adequate financial provision enshrined in it is an essential part— I use the word "essential" deliberately—of modern progressive government. It has become more widely accepted by the general public and, indeed, in this House, that it is no longer enough for a Government to cater simply for the material needs of the community and to be indifferent, if nothing worse, to spiritual and cultural requirements. I have used the phrase before and I do not hesitate to use it again that I do not think we can any more have a situation in which we have economic planning but cultural laissez faire.
It is not for a member of the Opposition to put forward anything like a detailed comprehensive policy for the Arts because we have not got the resources to put together such a policy in anything like appropriate detail. I think we can fulfil our obligation by urging the Government to give this area increasing attention. Here I would like to be presumptuous enough to give advice to the Taoiseach and that is not to permit himself to drift into a frame of mind in which he is prepared to let matters like this be put on the long finger because of pressing present-day difficulties, problems and troubles. It is true that some of the great reforms of modern times have been conceived and, indeed, have been planned at times of the greatest difficulty. One thinks of the great inauguration of the welfare state in Great Britain which was prepared and brought to planning fruition while Britain was engaged in a major world conflict. If I may be presumptuous enough to say to the Taoiseach that even though the temptation to say: "Artistic and cultural matters will have to wait" is probably very great, nevertheless I do not think he should permit himself to fall for that particular temptation. He should regard a comprehensive programme for artistic and cultural matters as an essential part of the programme of his Government.
Such a comprehensive policy for the Arts would involve, first of all, of course, adequate financial provision. It would require a great deal of thought. It would involve some way of co-ordinating all the teaching bodies and institutions which are engaged in cultural and artistic fields and it would have to be tailored to our particular circumstances and the needs of our particular community. It should not be just a pale reflection of what some other countries are endeavouring to do. In the framing of any such policy for the Arts a number of very important questions about An Chomhairle Ealaíon would have to be faced up to and they are not faced up to in this legislation. The basic question which has to be answered is: what precisely are An Chomhairle Ealaíon expected to do?
Do we visualise them as just another body taking their place in the cultural field and making their own contribution, or do we expect them to exercise some form of guidance or even some control over all the other bodies and institutions involved? This is very fundamental and it should certainly have been considered in deciding what functions the new comhairle will have: whether they are simply to carry out their activities parallel to all the other bodies which are there, or whether they will exercise some guidance and control over them.
Another aspect of the matter with which, perhaps, I am unduly personally preoccupied is whether or not one Arts Council is enough. I gave a great deal of thought to this matter and I arrived at the conclusion that one Arts Council was not enough. I am quite prepared to state at this point of time, looking back and relieved of any pressure of responsibility for taking the decision, that I might change that view. At the time it seemed to me that the ideal answer was to have three different bodies: one body which would deal with writing, literature, drama, poetry, and so on; another body which would deal with painting and sculpture and the ancillaries; and a third body which would deal with music, ballet and that sector.
I must admit that I came to that conclusion, influenced unduly perhaps, by the fact that the existing Comhairle Ealaíon, as they were at that time, seemed to me to be pre-occupied with one limited sector of artistic endeavour. They seemed to be very pre-occupied with modern abstract painting, very much to the exclusion of the rest of the cultural field. I thought the solution to that sort of situation, and perhaps the way to prevent it arising in the future when some other comhairle might be equally pre-occupied with music to the exclusion of the other activities, was to have three separate bodies, each specifically directed towards its own particular field so that no major area of activity would be neglected. Three bodies with three separate budgets was what I had in mind.
As I say, I am quite prepared at this stage to withdraw from that point of view and perhaps to go back to the ideal of one central Arts Council. Particularly if they were to have any sort of controlling or co-ordinating function with regard to other bodies, we would almost certainly have to have one Arts Council responsible to the Government. Even if you are to settle for one body, some machinery must be built into that body, whether it be a subcommittee structure or something of that nature, which will ensure that the body as such will never be permitted to become totally absorbed in promoting one particular sector of the Arts to the exclusion of the others.
Some Deputies have spoken about the question of the new Comhairle Ealaíon remaining the responsibility of the Taoiseach and his Department. That is another decision which should be thought about. I am not sure if it has been on this occasion. I am not sure whether a positive decision to leave the responsibility for An Chomhairle Ealaíon with the Taoiseach's Department has been taken, or whether it is just a question of leaving things as they are. In my time I favoured transferring responsibility for An Chomhairle Ealaíon from the Taoiseach's Department to that of the Minister for Finance.
I think Deputy Collins was guilty of an error of judgment when he said that no Minister can approach the Minister for Finance with the same authority as the Taoiseach. With the exception, I would have added, of the Minister for Finance himself. It was not simply because the Minister for Finance was the financial authority that I thought of transferring responsibility from the Taoiseach's Department to that of the Minister for Finance. I do not believe that the Taoiseach's Department is an appropriate home for a body of this sort.
I must say I am delighted that the present Taoiseach has gone to the trouble of bringing in this legislation even though I am critical of it as such. I hope it augurs well for the future that he is interesting himself in this area. To that extent I very much welcome this development. If, in spite of all the other pressures which are upon him, he is to take a very active interest in cultural matters and in the new comhairle, every Deputy in the House will commend him for that. Apart from whatever personal interest he may bring to bear on the situation, a body of this sort attached to the Taoiseach's Department is at some disadvantage. The Taoiseach has an overall co-ordinating responsibility, very often a responsibility to hold the balance between different Departments with conflicting priorities. In that sort of situation it is not difficult to visualise a body like An Chomhairle Ealaíon, attached to the Taoiseach's Department, to some extent being neglected.
I wonder even at this late stage, if the new comhairle are to be left in the Taoiseach's Department, whether the Taoiseach would not consider some similar type of arrangement to that which he has already brought into being in relation to the Government Information Service, in other words, leaving the comhairle attached to his Department but perhaps allocating direct responsibility for their promotion and development to a particular Minister who would not be as pre-occupied with all the broad spectrum of problems as the Taoiseach is. I am prepared to admit that perhaps this is a sort of administrative matter on which one Deputy's opinion is as good as another's, but I have put that forward as my view for consideration by the Taoiseach if it is not too late and if positive decisions have not already been taken by the Government in that regard.
One other aspect of the work of An Chomhairle Ealaíon which I might mention is the fact that the comhairle administer a number of funds which are subsidiary to their main financial operations, the most important of those being Ciste Cholmchille. I believe that the existing council has not been active enough in regard to these funds. I believe Ciste Cholmchille offers a vehicle through which a very important impact could be made on our cultural life.
I should like to see the new Comhairle promoting this positively. They should bring it to the attention of the public and invite contributions from well-disposed individuals, and commercial firms. In any Government approach to the Arts there should be some thinking given to the role of the private patrons. In this House we are concerned with institutional assistance to the Arts. In modern times that is the most important aspect of the matter. There is still, and always will be, a role for the private patron. No matter how efficient our social services become there will always be a satisfactory, beneficial role for private charities and so also, I believe, in the artistic sphere. No matter how adequate the institutional arrangements we make are, there will always be a role for that particular personalised assistance.
The private patron can give that which no official body or institution can give. The comhairle in its thinking about the Arts—Deputy Collins also touched on this aspect—should give some consideration to the encouragement of private patronage. That particular area is full of loopholes. Many countries have walked into serious difficulties through their taxation provisions in trying to do something in that area, but I still think that with careful consideration systems of encouragement of private patronage could be devised which would not be in any way against the public interest. On that line of country these subsidiary funds which An Chomhairle Ealaíon administers could possibly be brought into much greater use.
Many Deputies have spoken of the difficulties in selecting suitable people for membership of the new comhairle. With Deputy Faulkner, I would agree with the idea that the Taoiseach should make all these appointments. Perhaps I am not yet far enough removed from Ministerial occupational myopia but I still think that to a very large extent there is nobody better fitted to make impartial and objective appointments to this type of body than the Minister concerned. Deputy Faulkner endeavoured to say that he did not disagree with the appointments being made by the Taoiseach, nor do I. In spite of the difficulties involved in making suitable selections, I feel sure the Taoiseach will avail of advice and will not have any great difficulty in procuring a suitable panel to act on the new comhairle.
I should like to refer to what the Taoiseach said in his opening speech when he mentioned that he hoped the new council could be made representative of all branches of the Arts, including the visual and literary arts, drama and music, and that different areas of the country are properly represented. The Taoiseach has set for himself a very ambitious programme and I feel sure he will make every effort to meet the requirements which he has laid down in the selection of these people. I urge him to be adventurous. This is a case where it is necessary to meet imagination with imagination.
The new Comhairle Ealaíon will be operating in the realm of the imagination. If I had the responsibility I hope I would not be afraid to appoint a practising artist—I use the word "artist" in its broadest sense—to the new comhairle. I hope the Taoiseach will be courageous in that regard. Admittedly, there may be some difficulty, but it is worth taking a chance, and putting some creative people on the new comhairle. We know artists are given to grouping themselves together in self-defence. I hope any such difficulty can be overcome and the Taoiseach by selecting carefully can put a reasonable leavening of practising artists on the new comhairle.
The new comhairle will be faced with the central dilemma which is always there. The wisdom with which they are selected by the Taoiseach will have a great deal to do with the way they tackle that dilemma. That, to my mind, is simply in what direction should their main effort be made: should they make the resources available to promote public exhibitions and performances which can be seen by the general public and appreciated by them and where they can be seen to be getting value for the money they are spending, or should they tackle the much more dangerous task of endeavouring to finance individual creativity, a process which may never result in any realisable or visible concrete results? This is the central dilemma which faces anybody operating in this area.
The easy thing is to mount the public exhibition and the public performance or, indeed, as the last council were inclined to do, to buy the painting. As somebody put it to me very succinctly; you can hang a painting on the wall for everybody to see but you cannot do that with a poem. I hope the new comhairle will be courageous in this respect and will advert to the need to subsidise individual creative activities even if the result of that subsidisation may never be seen in a concrete positive form.
I should like to mention some of the problems which I have come across as an individual Deputy and to which I would direct the attention of the incoming comhairle with a view possibly to doing something about them. In recent times I found myself being approached frequently by young people or their parents, young people who are particularly talented in some artistic field and who wish to go abroad to further their studies and to have access to training which, unfortunately, is not available in this country. There does not seem to be any machinery or any vehicle whereby talented young people of that sort can be subsidised for going abroad to procure further training in their particular art.
I know that is a very difficult field and the problem of selection would be a very complicated one, but certainly it is an area to which I think thought and attention should be given, because there are quite a number of our young people today who are in need of such subsidisation. They have the talent. They have proved by winning scholarships or otherwise that they are of international potential standard, and they just have not got the resources to go abroad to get the further advanced teaching they need. If a way could be found in suitable cases of helping them, that would be something that would be very beneficial in the long run.
Another experience I have had as a Deputy is of well-meaning organisations coming to me who want to mount exhibitions or performances of one sort or another. They have all the good will in the world and very often they have the talent, but they have not got the exhibition-mounting expertise. Perhaps the new comhairle would give some thought to having a team, not necessarily a very large team but a few people at least, who would be available to voluntary organisations to instruct them in the mechanics and techniques of putting on exhibitions or performances. It need not be very costly because these voluntary organisations are always full of enthusiasm. They have the finance and everything else, as I say, except the experience of the actual mechanics of putting on exhibitions or performances.
I am sure nobody will be surprised if I mention very briefly in this context the provisions which are now incorporated in our income tax code whereby earnings from creative activities are exempt from personal taxation. I have been, and I am sure other Deputies have been, approached from time to time as to the administration of these provisions. I have never had any concrete evidence that these provisions are not working satisfactorily, but I wonder if the Taoiseach when he comes to reply would feel it appropriate at this stage—perhaps he would not but, if so, well and good—to say a word about the way in which these provisions are being administered and whether or not there are any complaints from practitioners as to their being denied the appropriate exemptions.
Finally, I repeat what I said at the beginning, that I welcome the Bill in so far as it does direct our attention to matters artistic, and I also very much welcome the fact that the Taoiseach, in bringing it in, is obviously going to interest himself in this area. However, I do express disappointment as to the serious limitations of the Bill and hope that, perhaps, on some other occasion a much more comprehensive and far-reaching piece of legislation for the promotion of artistic and cultural endeavour will come before us.