Vol. 429 No. 8
10 Mr. Connor asked the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht his views on whether the funding available to the National Gallery for new acquisitions and other development is adequate; and the proposals, if any, he has to improve the situation of the Gallery.
The funding available to the National Gallery for acquisitions in 1993 is £100,000 and the 1968 wing of the gallery is being refurbished at a cost of £6 million to the Exchequer. This work is expected to be completed by 1995. Moreover, the Office of Public Works has recently handed over houses at 88-89 Merrion Square to the National Gallery and refurbishment is at present taking place. The acquisition of these two houses by the Gallery will facilitate the relocation of its administrative staff from its core building and the release of significant additional exhibition space within that building. The Deputy will appreciate that total Exchequer assistance being provided for the gallery is significant by any standards.
As was indicated in the Programme for a Partnership Government 1993-1997 the current and capital funding needs of our national cultural institutions i.e. National Library, National Museum, National Gallery, National Archives, etc., will continue to receive a high priority so as to enable them in many cases to complete modernisation and refurbishment programmes.
The Minister said that the funding available to the National Gallery for acquisitions is significant, but I do not agree. In terms of value of collection, our National Gallery compares with the Uffizi museum in Florence, which receives the equivalent of £6 million per year for acquisitions, and the Rijks-museum in Amsterdam which receives the equivalent of almost £8 million for acquisitions. By that comparison the funding of our National Gallery is hardly significant. There is also the difficulty in the National Gallery——
I am anxious to proceed with questions. Ceisteanna, le do thoil.
I am coming to the question. There are hundreds of pictures not exhibited in the gallery due to lack of space.
I am still awaiting questions.
This is the question. The Minister referred in his reply to making available further space for administrative staff at 88-89 Merrion Square. Will these premises be used for exhibition purposes?
The Deputy misunderstood my reply which I thought was sufficiently clear. The acquisition of additional buildings for administrative staff will result in the availability of further space for exhibition within the core building of the National Gallery. The Deputy is as aware as I am of the riches available to the galleries in Firenze to purchase additional works of art. Would that they were available to us here. I have given a commitment that in the next couple of years the needs of the gallery will be generously provided for. It is important that staff are brought together in the two buildings, making the gallery administratively effective. The State is spending more than £6 million on this project, a very significant investment by any standards. As the Deputy will appreciate, the gallery will then have more space for exhibition purposes. He is quite right to draw attention to the challenge faced by the Government to provide additional resources to ensure greater availability of our rich collection. It is always appropriate in answering questions of this kind to acknowledge our indebtedness to the donors in the private sector whose generosity has enabled us to build up the national collection.
Are plans for the development of the National Gallery included in the comprehensive package referred to earlier in relation to the Structural Fund?
The heritage initiative to which I referred, which covers proposals in the five areas for which I have responsibility, includes development plans for all our great national institutions, including the National Gallery. It is my hope that these proposals will result in better facilities for the staff. I am very impressed by the number of people who visit the National Gallery — more than 1.5 million in any one year. It makes great sense, not just for tourism-related reasons, to make available every possible assistance to the gallery.
If having provided additional exhibition space it emerges that works of art remain in rooms that are unopen to the public, will the Minister initiate a policy of putting such works on touring exhibitions and lending them to galleries such as the Crawford Gallery in Cork and to galleries in Galway, if that city is not already saturated with artistic works, Waterford and other provincial cities and towns? That works of art are left behind closed doors, unavailable to the general public, is a great waste.
I was very pleased to have an opportunity to meet the board of the Crawford Gallery in Cork. They expressed in great detail their needs in terms of the building and exhibition space there. While there is wide international recognition of the importance of Galway as a major city for the arts, all its needs are not met in terms of institutional provision.
Nobody believes that.
I have to make sure that its needs are met in terms of colleges of music, municipal art galleries, theatres and so on.
I am sure it features well in the new package.
In spite of being tempted by Deputies opposite, I must not stray into matters local. One difficulty that will be addressed is the indemnification of works of art and in that context I will address the issue raised by the Deputy in relation to touring exhibitions. Procedures for indemnification of foreign visiting collections have to be put on a statutory basis. When doing so I will take the opportunity to ensure that the maximum number of people see these great cultural riches as part of their normal education.
As the Minister knows, in a few years time the money made available by way of the Shaw bequest to the National Gallery will be used up. Has the Government any plans to make provision for the resulting shortfall? While the additional exhibition space is welcome, it will necessitate the recruitment of additional security staff. Will the Minister give an assurance that this will not be subject to the recruitment ban in the public service?
That is a separate matter.
The Deputy approaches this matter with great strength of conviction — his party has been more hostile to recruitment in the public service than I have ever been. I have always supported the provision of good employment in the public service, particularly in the cultural area.
We now see the colour of the Minister's money.
I assure the Deputy that in three or four years' time when people contrast what has been done in the areas for which I have responsibility with the many paper promises given by people who affected an interest in matters artistic and culture, I will be happy to be judged by that contrast.
I will call Deputy Cox but I am concerned about the obvious lack of progress at questions today. It is unsatisfactory from any standpoint. Let us try to expedite matters.
I will be brief. The Minister invites one to look in four years' time at his glowing legacy but I prefer to look forward, specifically with regard to the question of national collections, be they in museums, art galleries or wherever. Aside from the question of touring exhibitions, has the Minister any plans in his submission for Structural Funds for the permanent location outside Dublin of parts of national collections which are incapable of display within the facilities available in the capital city?
I am anxious to assist you, a Cheann Comhairle, in making progress. The submissions I have made, which I obviously cannot discuss in detail, include such capital provision as would facilitate what the Deputy is suggesting. In relation to future capital provision, one has to take into account regionalised expenditure. People are entitled to see what national resources are available to them without great difficulty. This requires capital provision in a regionalised way and I have looked at that.
