Vol. 394 No. 2
asked the Taoiseach when a consultant was appointed to examine the organisation of the Chester Beatty Library, Dublin 4; the cost involved; the terms of reference proposed; when the consultant presented his report; if he has received a copy; the length of time spent to date by the trustees deliberating on the report; and when he will see decisions taken on the matter.
2.
asked the Taoiseach if he favours a fixed term for the duration of membership of the trustees of the Chester Beatty Library, Dublin 4.
3.
asked the Taoiseach if he will introduce legislation to provide for the modernisation of the mandate of the Chester Beatty Library, Dublin 4.
4.
asked the Taoiseach when he fulfilled his undertaking of 25 October 1989 to convey to the trustees of the Chester Beatty Library, Dublin 4, the thrust of the remarks and anxieties expressed by Deputies on that occasion; the manner in which he fulfilled the undertaking; and if he has yet received a formal response from the trustees on the matter.
5.
asked the Taoiseach the total amount of the subventions made by the State to the Chester Beatty Library, Dublin 4, in the past ten years.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 5, inclusive, together.
The manager of the public affairs department of the Electricity Supply Board offered his services, free of charge, to the trustees of the Chester Beatty Library, in December 1988 to carry out a management study of the library. That offer was accepted by the trustees of the Chester Beatty Library in January 1989.
The terms of reference agreed between the consultant and the trustees included a study of the following aspects of the library: organisational structure, staffing, funding/budgeting, commercial sponsorship and marketing-exhibitions. I have not yet received a copy of the consultant's report which was presented to the library in March of this year. I understand that the report has been considered on a preliminary basis by the library's trustees, who will consider it in further detail.
As I have already advised the House on a number of occasions, the trustees are independent in the exercise of their functions under the will of the late Sir Alfred Chester Beatty. That will empowers the trustees to fill vacancies except in three cases — the director of the National Library is ex-officio a trustee, and the President and Taoiseach each has a right to appoint a nominee. Appointments have been made without expiry dates but my personal preference would be for a fixed term. The mandate of the library is entirely governed by the will of Chester Beatty. To attempt to amend that mandate would require legislation and possibly also an application to the courts. I am reluctant to pursue that course of action at present.
I undertook in the House on 25 October 1989, to convey to the trustees the gist of the remarks and anxieties then expressed by a number of Deputies in relation to certain difficulties being experienced in the Chester Beatty Library. I then also indicated that I would ask for the expedition by the trustees of their consideration of the consultant's report. These points were conveyed in a letter, dated 17 November 1989, addressed by my private secretary to the chairman of the trustees. The chairman, Mr. Justice Brian Walsh, was then abroad but he replied in letters dated 27 November and 1 December 1989. I have his assurance that the substance of my undertaking will be brought to the notice of the next meeting of the trustees, which will be held on 14 December.
The total amount of the subventions made by the State to the Chester Beatty Library over the past ten years amounts to £1,932,330.
Would the Taoiseach agree that it is not satisfactory that an organisation which has received almost £2 million from the State, and whose principal source of income is from the State, should be governed essentially as a private organisation with little or no public accountability? A report was furnished to the library in March, but the Taoiseach has not yet received a copy, although he is responsible for the funding of the body. On that basis, would he consider, in addition to having conveyed the gist of our remarks on 17 November, conveying also to the trustees his clear view that the report should be furnished to him forthwith, the system of appointing trustees be altered so that there will be a greater input by Government on the number of places on the board and that the term should be fixed and, if necessary, there should be legislation to govern the subject, if agreement cannot be reached by voluntary means?
On the question of the report, I would be glad to accept the Deputy's suggestion, however, I would like to consider carefully the other matters which the Deputy raised. As the Deputy knows, this priceless collection was left to the State by will and on very specific terms, and I would like to consider carefully the implications of intervening and whether it would be desirable to introduce legislation to change the situation. It might establish a precedent that would have detrimental effects down the road, but it is something that I will consider.
Would the Taoiseach agree that this is the third occasion in recent times that this matter has been raised in this House and that on each occasion he has been extremely sympathetic to the points being made by Deputies and has said that he will take up the suggestions made with an equally forthright approach, but that he does not seem to be taking any clear directive role on his own account? Would the Taoiseach agree, for example, that it is not to his credit that a report which was in the hands of the trustees since last March has not been presented to him and that he had not sought it until it was suggested by this side of the House and that this negligence on his part — I do not want to use a word that strong but something approaching negligence — is not in line with the importance of the institution concerned and the need to ensure that £2 million of public money is spent to good effect?
I do not accept the Deputy's approach at all. This is a situation which is governed by a will made by a very generous donor and I think we are honour bound to respect the terms of that bequest. This attitude has been adopted by all my predecessors and I do not think it is necessary for this House or, indeed, for me as a principal of this House to intervene of necessity in situations of this type. I do not think that the situation is of such a nature that it calls for alarmist intervention of that kind.
Deputy Quinn rose.
If Deputy Bruton is offering, I shall call him.
Would the Taoiseach agree that as he is providing the money that is funding the Chester Beatty Library he is accountable to this House for that money? The Taoiseach said he does not propose to introduce legislation at present but would he agree that that implies that in other circumstances he might introduce legislation and that, therefore, he has something to answer for?
I do not think that the situation at this stage calls for any exceptional intervention on my part.
I do not agree.
Accepting the independence and contribution of the trustees down through the years, but also taking into consideration the major contribution from the Exchequer, is the Taoiseach worried that the Chester Beatty Library as administered at present, is not being utilised to the full as far as scholarship, culture and tourism are concerned and does he propose to take any action on the matter?
Both matters are for the trustees. I can only repeat, that unless we want to completely disregard the wishes of the generous donor, we should leave these matters to the trustees. A matter which would be of concern to me and to this House is the question of security, and as I understand the situation at present, there are no particular concerns in that regard.
Access.
I now call Deputy Quinn.
Would the Taoiseach agree that there have been various administrative problems in the operation of the library and that various efforts have been made to reach consensus in trying to resolve them? If the Taoiseach is so aware would he indicate to the House, having regard to the sensitivities involved, if he has received a request for financial assistance to resolve these administrative difficulties? Is he or his Department in a position to proceed positively to respond, because if those difficulties were removed many of the other issues to which Deputy John Bruton referred could be resolved without recourse to legislation?
I will confine myself at this stage to saying that if any assistance on my part, or on the part of my Department, could help to ameliorate the difficulties to which the Deputy refers, I would be glad to offer that assistance. At this stage it is not clear that any such help would be of assistance.
May I say finally——
May I call Deputy FitzGerald?
I want to ask the Taoiseach whether, in view of the fact that the trust provides for appointments on the nomination of the President and the Taoiseach and that there is a Taoiseach's nominee, he has kept in touch with developments there through the Taoiseach's nominee?
Yes.
Can we now proceed to another question?
