Vol. 672 No. 3
97 Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the number of new film and television projects that have begun since the amendments to section 481 tax relief; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2259/09]
At the outset, I extend my congratulations to all of the team behind "New Boy" on its Oscar nomination last week in the best short film category. In that regard, I congratulate the Irish Film Board, IFB, which funded the production. I also extend my congratulations to the other Irish nominees, Mr. Martin McDonagh and Mr. Nathan Crowley. I also heartily congratulate Mr. Colin Farrell and Mr. Gabriel Byrne on their Golden Globe wins. In a truly amazing month for the creative community in Ireland, I am sure the House will join with me in congratulating Mr. Sebastian Barry on winning the Costa Book Award last evening.
Primary responsibility for the support and promotion of film making in Ireland in respect of both the indigenous sector and inward productions is a matter for the IFB, which is funded through my Department but is independent of the Department in its operations. I have no role to play in the day-to-day conduct of its business. My Department's primary operational role in supporting the film sector relates to the administration of elements of the section 481 tax relief scheme. The scheme is kept under regular review in conjunction with the IFB and the Department of Finance and any enhancements necessary to retain or regain competitiveness are addressed as appropriate.
The most recent amendments in 2008 related to extending the scheme until the end of 2012, increasing the overall ceiling on qualifying expenditure from €35 million to €50 million for any one production, increasing from €31,750 to €50,000 the annual investment limit for each individual taxpayer and an increase from 80% to 100% in the amount of the investment that can be offset for tax purposes.
Amendments relating to the increase in the ceiling on qualifying expenditure and the increased percentage in the amount of investment that can be written off for tax purposes have not commenced yet. These amendments are awaiting the approval of the European Commission because, as the Deputy knows, they involve State aid. This approval is expected shortly. Accordingly, no film or television project commenced under the new amendments in 2008. However, in 2008 a total of 38 film, animation and television projects received approval for section 481 funding, an increase of four projects when compared to 2007. The film and television production sector is the core activity of the Irish audiovisual industry, which employs approximately 7,000 people and was worth approximately €550 million to the economy in 2007. Its importance to Ireland's smart economy is essential.
I join with the Minister in congratulating all of our successful actors and films and Mr. Barry. Yesterday evening was a great tribute to the traditional value of the arts and is to be welcomed and recognised.
While I welcome the increase by four in last year's number of start-up films, are any plans in place for 2009? What is the status of the supports available to Ardmore Studios, the major studio in Ireland, to encourage and promote film making? In a previous reply, the Minister stated that the IFB was conducting a review of audiovisual productions. If the report is available to him, will he comment on it and inform the House of what the overall review entailed?
I thank the Deputy for her compliments for all of our artists who have been successful in the past month. This year's pipeline is very strong. Although we have not signed off on the changes to section 481, the market has been made aware of the position. I expect that the amendments will put Ireland back at the centre in terms of attractiveness to the film industry.
Some years ago, we set the tone with some innovative approaches to bringing major film productions into Ireland. We were not only matched by other countries that saw our approaches' value, but surpassed. In recent years, we have needed to consider what we have been doing and what we can achieve. This year's changes to section 481 have been warmly welcomed, as they are what the industry wants. On the basis of its advice, the changes will add to Ireland's restoration greatly and increase the number of productions that come here.
I am informed that this year's pipeline looks good and that there is potential for much business to come our way. I am sure that, like all industries, the film industry is not immune to the economic climate, but the situation looks good.
I want to be associated with the congratulations offered to our successful authors and those films that have done so well in recent months. I read Mr. Barry's wonderful book and recently saw "In Bruges".
It is a great film.
From an arts point of view, it is interesting to see two quintessential Irish works travelling so well. The story of the girl in The Secret Scripture could only occur in Ireland and the dark humour of “In Bruges” is very Irish.
Yes.
Continuing investment in the arts would seem to be a good idea. While section 484 has been enhanced——
481.
Yes. Those enhancements are slight. Given the industry's genuine problems, a cap of €50 million means that large American movies will never be produced here. Many individual investors must also be gathered together because of the cap on the amount that each individual may invest.
That is why we have changed it.
The amount is not significant.
I am informed that it is more than enough. The industry is happy with the amount.
Allow the Deputy to continue.
I am positively interacting with her.
The industry is worried that the provisions will be set in stone until 2012. Is that correct? I was not clear on the matter.
That is what is currently in place.
All of the incentives in question have been up for grabs for several years. There is a feeling in the industry that it is living from year to year and does not know what will occur. The industry, one of the few that is still successful, is important to Ireland and we should cherish it.
I agree with the Deputies. When people discuss the film industry, they often consider it in a small box to one side. However, a considerable portion of the knowledge economy and our creative energy lies within the audiovisual sector. It is from where all of the people in question are coming and where the creative genii lies. Actually, I should have said "genius".
Genii, too.
It employs more than 7,000 people compared to fewer than 1,000 five or six years ago. The amount of talent available in Ireland is recognised worldwide. I am told that €50 million will attract some large movies. Exceptional blockbusters might rightly cost more, but we may be able to catch some films up to the €50 million mark. The indications I have received are that 100% tax relief and the €50,000 cap will have a substantial impact. There is much confidence in the industry generally about what may be attracted to Ireland this year, notwithstanding the stresses under which this industry, like others, is being placed.
98 Deputy Seán Barrett asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism if he has had discussions with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform or the Department of Foreign Affairs regarding the impact the cost of visas is having on tourism here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2330/09]
100 Deputy Kieran O’Donnell asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism if he has received representations from the tourism bodies regarding the impact on tourism here of the non-Schengen area visa arrangements; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2395/09]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 98 and 100 together.
As the Deputy will be aware, immigration policy is primarily a matter for my colleague the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and its implementation is a matter for the relevant authorities, including the Garda National Immigration Bureau and the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service.
The Department of Foreign Affairs is currently responsible for setting visa fees. However, the Deputies will be aware that, under the terms of the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill currently before the Oireachtas, this responsibility will transfer to the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I am advised that the cost of visas for Ireland is broadly in line with costs internationally and is a necessary charge to cover the cost of processing the visa application.
New and developing markets, such as India and China, are potentially of significant importance to Irish tourism. Visitors from these markets stay twice as long as the average holidaymaker, have the highest spend per visit, have a higher propensity to travel throughout the island of Ireland and make significant economic contributions to many elements of the tourism sector. Obviously, to fully exploit the opportunities presented, Ireland needs to be competitive on all fronts. Visitors from these countries typically require visas to enter Ireland. I am advised that the ability of potential visitors to secure the necessary visas in an efficient and cost-effective manner, when compared with our competitor destinations, is an important element of our competitiveness.
Tourism Ireland, which is responsible for marketing the island of Ireland overseas, conducted a review of new and developing markets, including India, China and 17 other markets. This review, completed in late 2007, highlighted the potential for increased tourism from Asia and the Middle East and set significant targets to attract a total of 475,000 visitors from new and developing markets by 2013.
Tourism Ireland has been in communication with my Department with some ideas for discussion in respect of the implementation of immigration policy and issuing of visas, in so far as this impacts on the promotion of inbound tourism, which may be what the Deputy is driving at. My Department has engaged with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform on these issues. Discussions to progress these matters are ongoing.
The Deputies will appreciate that migration and border controls are complex and sensitive, affecting not only tourism of various kinds but also labour market policies and inward investment within the overall context of sovereignty. However, I am confident that, working in partnership, the immigration authorities and the tourism bodies can ensure that the visitor experiences of Ireland compare with any of our competitors.
Perhaps the Minister would reiterate which Department is currently responsible for setting visa fees.
The Department of Foreign Affairs but the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform will shortly take on that responsibility.
This issue has been raised with me by a number of tourist bodies. I accept the Minister's statement that our visa costs are roughly in line with those of other countries. However, in our case, it is an added cost. As the Minister stated, people visiting Ireland from China, India or the Middle East may come here as part of a tour that commences in Paris and moves on to London. These people are required to pay €60 for a Schengen visa which allows them entry into Paris, €100 for a visa to gain entry to London and a further €100 in visa fees to gain entry into Ireland. All of this adds to the overall cost of one's journey. Many people believe they have seen Europe once they have seen Paris and visiting Ireland may not be the most important issue on their minds.
We are disadvantaging ourselves. We should either reduce the visa fee or abolish it. Which is of greater value, the revenue derived from visa fees or the revenue from extra business? In terms of tourism, any growth in this area is likely to come from countries such as China and India and the eastern world rather than from western world.
Another disincentive in this regard is that people who apply for visas in, say, China and so on, must collect them from their nearest consulate or embassy. This is all very well if one lives in Ireland where no journey is more than 300 km. However, having to travel thousands of miles to collect a visa is a huge disincentive. The Minister referred earlier to a review in this regard and it is important such a review takes place. Also, this requirement is a particular barrier to children travelling here from Chernobyl, many of whom are required to travel to Moscow to collect visas, which is a huge imposition on them. Thousands of children come here every year from Chernobyl.
I ask that the Minister consult on this matter with the Departments of Foreign Affairs or Justice, Equality and Law Reform to see if anything can be done in terms of how this system works and the actual cost in that regard, a self-imposed barrier which should be abolished.
In my view — I believe Deputy Mitchell agrees with me — is that those markets have huge potential. I have no doubt in my mind about that. The more wealth created in the Middle East, Asia, India and China in particular the greater will be the numbers of people travelling here. If we are to attract directly into Ireland the volume of visitors which I believe are available, we will have to change our mindset in terms of how we operate this system. Departments, and those operating the system, are up for that. There is a greater understanding now of the requirement to reduce complexities in this area and equally of ensuring a proper balance in terms of cost and so on. The fee is largely to cover administration of the visa application. There is no excess involved.
I accept that.
Clearly, the potential for growth in terms of visitors from China, India, the Middle East and from Australia, if we can get direct services into Ireland, is enormous. The system will shortly become the responsibility of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform which will take a fresh and streamlined approach to ensuring it is as efficient and as accessible as possible to those wishing to legitimately visit our country.
What is the timescale in terms of the introduction of changes and so on?
I believe legislation on the matter is currently before the House.
99 Deputy Pat Rabbitte asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the progress on the amalgamation of the National Gallery of Ireland, the Irish Museum of Modern Art and the Crawford Gallery; if legislation will be required to enact the amalgamation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2255/09]
136 Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism when the National Gallery of Ireland, the Irish Museum of Modern Art and the Crawford Gallery will be amalgamated; the amount that will be saved as a result of this amalgamation; his views on whether this amalgamation is feasible and practical; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2249/09]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 99 and 136 together.
Primary legislation will be required to give effect to the Government decision to combine the three galleries referred to, while retaining the separate brand identities and niches of the Museum of Modern Art and the National Gallery.
As I stated in my reply to Questions Nos. 76, 77 and 84 of 19 November 2008, the corporate, legislative and accommodation positions of each of the institutions is being examined with a view to the drawing up of a plan of action to give effect to the Government decision. My Department is also investigating the functional and logistical requirements of each institution and the adjustments that will be required. The challenges are detailed and multifaceted and it would be premature at this point to give definite dates.
A consultative process with the directors of the institutions referred to above is under way under various headings, including governance, shared management structures, unified support services and resources.
I wonder about the rationale behind all of this. Is it simply a cost saving exercise? Amalgamation of the Crawford Gallery in Cork, the Irish Museum of Modern Art and National Gallery appears, in many ways, a little odd. The Minister referred earlier to cultural tourism. I accept he has replied to this issue on a number of occasions but perhaps he will comment on whether co-ordination of the three cultural institutions will in some way dilute that value.
I agree with the Deputy. If the outcome of this were to dilute the value of the institutions, I would not proceed with the process. There are obvious synergies between the three galleries referred to. For instance, a question arises as to whether 40 board members are needed. That is probably not necessary.
Equally, I accept there are important brand issues between the institutions. The Museum of Modern Art is a distinct brand that has currency worldwide. Every country has a museum of modern art. People have their own expectations in terms of what constitutes a museum of modern art as opposed to a traditional national gallery. This is not about cost savings though if it throws up cost savings, we welcome them. Given the importance of cultural tourism to the whole tourism product and its increasing importance into the future, we are seeking to enhance the quality and ability of the three products to continue to be successful as a draw at home and internationally.
I put it to the Minister that were it not a cost saving exercise this amalgamation would more than likely not be taking place. That they are located in three different areas, the Crawford Gallery in Cork and the two other galleries in different parts of Dublin, means there is no real rationale for amalgamating them. I appreciate what the Minister is saying about the board members, and I tend to agree with him that smaller numbers at board level can be quite effective. I have no problem whatsoever with a reduction in the numbers, but aside from that, I understand that significant legislation will be required to bring about this amalgamation. Can the Minister indicate what sort of timeframe is envisaged?
In saying 40, by the way, I was not casting any aspersions, and neither is the Deputy, on the quality of the board members who are in place. I was simply commenting on the size and unwieldiness in some respects of such large numbers.
Not at all, absolutely.
Some countries have gone down this road quite successfully, in terms of having one overarching body, one national board, for example, the national galleries of Ireland, within which are the various other bodies such as the Irish Museum of Modern Art or the Crawford Gallery, in Cork. I am waiting to see the outcome of this exercise, and on that basis we shall decide what legislation is necessary. However, I would prefer to get this right rather than opt for some simplistic cost-saving exercise.
101 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the steps his Department has taken towards meeting the commitment contained in the programme for Government to promote sport in schools; the work his Department has facilitated with the Department of Education and Science; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2270/09]
The five year Agreed Programme for Government includes a series of commitments, in respect of sport, for achievement in the period to 2012. I am pleased to say that action is being taken in a progressive manner in these areas to ensure these targets are met in the lifetime of the Government.
As Deputies will be aware, many of the commitments on the promotion of sports in schools are a matter for the Minister for Education and Science. However, two specific commitments relate to the operation of the sports capital programme — the promotion of greater sharing of school and community sports facilities, making it a condition of the sports capital programme that facilities be made available to schools where appropriate; and encouraging more schools to apply for funding under the sports capital programme by collaborating with their local sports clubs or community groups.
Under the 2008 sports capital programme, schools making joint applications with local sports clubs were required to provide evidence of formal agreements with local clubs that guaranteed the clubs access to school facilities for at least 30 hours per week throughout the year. In assessing applications, extra marks are awarded to sports clubs that can show that they are allowing local schools to use their facilities.
I will be discussing with my colleague, the Minister for Education and Science, how his programme for the provision of sports halls in schools and the sports capital programme might be dovetailed to provide greater value for money and enhanced facilities both for schools and the local community users.
Work on the development of a national sports facility strategy is at an advanced stage in my Department. The aim of the strategy is to provide high level policy direction for future investment at national, regional and local levels. An inter-agency steering group was established to oversee this work and includes representation from the Department of Education and Science. The work of this group has included discussions with the Department of Education and Science on how its policy on the provision of sports hall facilities and my Department's policy for the provision of sports facilities might be complementary.
In addition, the Irish Sports Council, which is funded by my Department, has a statutory role in encouraging the promotion, development and co-ordination of sport. Through the Irish Sports Council, the national governing bodies of sport and the local sports partnerships, there are many programmes being funded which aim to increase participation in sport by children and young people. I would like to take this opportunity to compliment the people who are involved in this work on the ground in introducing our children to sport that will complement and enhance both our school and community sport programmes.
Unfortunately the situation in many schools at present is that children receive relatively little physical education time. I appreciate this is primarily a matter for the Department of Education and Science, but it is very important that the level of co-operation the Minister is talking about is progressed, in terms of the shared facilities. It is crucial, given the current economic climate, that the facilities which are available are shared, and shared easily. A major inhibitor in terms of sharing facilities seems to be insurance. I am not sure what the Minister's role could be in this, but it is very important that this is facilitated in every possible way. Schools which have facilities should make them available to outside groups and also community groups with sports facilities should make them available to schools. However, insurance is one of the key factors that presents a significant inhibitor in this case.
All Members will be aware of such problems within their local communities. Given the resources that have been provided through my Department and others in recent years, there is no doubt that the facilities available have been increased and enhanced enormously in recent years, and they should be maximised. There is nothing worse than seeing facilities being used a couple of times a week and remaining empty for the weekend, when others would like to use them. That is one of the issues we want to see resolved. We should like to see closer co-operation and co-ordination between local communities, schools and indeed local clubs to get better value in terms of usage from the facilities. We are trying to achieve this and it is one of the things I am examining.
Until one gets fully into the job, one does not always realise what is going on. I was at a number of venues throughout the country with the local sports partnerships, run either by the FAI or other organisations. The work they are doing, particularly with disadvantaged children, is remarkable. Having an iconic figure such as Packie Bonner involved in that programme and visiting schools has an enormous impact on children in terms of their desire to participate in some of these programmes. Where disadvantage and the number of young girls, in particular, participating in sport, is lower than we like to see, some really good programmes are being run in co-ordination with the Irish Sports Council and some of the national governing bodies. On the capital side, we clearly would like to see and will try to continue to get, more synergy between education, in its purest form, and sports, in terms of the use and maximisation of facilities.
I concur with the Minister's complimentary comments on those who are involved in this initiative to bring shared facilities to communities and schools. I want to ask him in particular about the swimming project at Skerries, which has been in place for ten years, with funding available from the Department, which could not be availed of. Will he confirm that the funding has now been transferred to the pool project at Balbriggan, an area which is sorely in need of facilities?
When the situation changes and the Skerries project is ready, perhaps he could look upon it favourably, once the economy has turned around.
That is worthy of a separate question.
The Deputy will be a Minister by then.
I am trying to be as flexible as I can, because I want to see——
As I am, myself.
Does the Leas-Cheann Comhairle want me to answer?
Absolutely.
I am trying to be as flexible as I can. The answer to the Deputy is "Yes", as I wanted to facilitate that. It was quite clear, within the area, that one project could not proceed. I did not want the area to be entirely without a pool. Quite clearly the other project was ready to run, and I thought that was the sensible approach. I must compliment all the local councillors and others involved because a unanimous approach was needed and that is what emerged from the local community. I am very pleased about that.
In the years to come we shall obviously be opening a second access programme on swimming pools, and I am clear——
Less of the "we".
Who knows what the next Government will be?
The intention is, certainly, to continue with that programme. It has been fantastically successful. To go from nothing to more than 50 swimming pools around the country is great and is having a massive impact. In the Deputy's area of special interest, health, the impact on children and young adults, as well as older people, is just phenomenal. We are very pleased with the programme and want to complete it in the next year or two.
Can I take it as confirmation that the project funding will transfer to Balbriggan?
The process is in place, and I do not have an issue with it.
I agree that the swimming pool programme is great. The tragedy is that it cannot continue this year, at any rate. The reality is that it is not 50 new pools, but nine. The rest were refurbishment projects. Just to clarify, the figure might be nine or 11, but it is nothing like 50.
I am not long in the Department, and I have opened nine already myself.
They may have been refurbished.
No, they were all brand new.
The Minister should go back and check it.
If there were refurbishments in some cases, one could not possibly call them such. They were literally——
I am just saying it is not adding to the total sum of swimming pools around the country. It would be wrong to say that.
——entirely new. I would not consider €15 million on a project a refurbishment.
102 Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism when the Natural History Museum will reopen; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2379/09]
110 Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the progress that has been made to secure emergency funding for the refurbishment of the Natural History Museum; the reason no refurbishment was progressed in the 18 months from the time of the first accident in this building; the expected timeframe for the reinstatement of this building; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2257/09]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 102 and 110 together.
An extensive refurbishment and redevelopment plan has been drawn up for the Natural History Museum at an estimated cost outside the scope and capacity of current budgets. In view of this cost and the extensive nature of the proposed plan and, as the reopening of the Natural History Museum is a priority, the Office of Public Works, at the request of my Department, is at present examining alternative approaches to facilitate reopening of the Natural History Museum at the earliest possible opportunity.
The National Museum of Ireland has commenced work on the documentation of exhibits in the Natural History Museum. The opportunity to address this work, which is provided by the closure of the museum, will be fully utilised. I also understand from the National Museum that it will display some of the natural history collection in the Riding School, Collins Barracks, from the end of April 2009. The style of the exhibition is intended to reflect the familiar vintage exhibition, using popular exhibits and some furnishings relocated from the Natural History Museum.
The Minister should not start me on Collins Barracks. I will stick to the Natural History Museum. It is more than 18 months since the stairs collapsed in the Natural History Museum and it was closed. Some €15 million was put into the national development plan for essential improvements in the Natural History Museum, namely, a small extension, a lift and a little coffee area. The lift was essential from a health and safety point of view to bring people to the second floor toilet. This was planned long before the stairs collapsed. The reason we were told 12 months ago that the work on the museum could not even begin was that the repair of the stairs was to be incorporated into the extension and refurbishment work. Now we are being told the refurbishment and extension work will not happen. Where is the €15 million? Is it gone? Can we take it that this will not happen? When can we realistically expect the work on at least making the museum safe to begin?
I hope the Natural History Museum will re-open this year. That is the plan. Obviously this is not in terms of the major investment which is part of the OPW budgets. If Deputy Mitchell puts down a question to the Minister responsible for that, I am sure she will get the answer. I am anxious that it does not remain closed. If we cannot proceed with the big project, let us do the next best thing. Can we get the facility opened? Can we get the visitor numbers back rolling through the property, make it safe, secure and presentable for the visiting public?
I accept all that, but there is a conservation issue in terms of the heat and lighting controls in that building and this must be addressed. It is an issue of conservation, cost control and safety. Is the €15 million gone? That is my question. The Minister's predecessor, Lord have mercy on him, promised a safety audit before that building would be reopened, and that is essential to establish confidence among the staff, never mind the visitors. Will that be done? Is the Minister satisfied the building can be reopened based simply on the repairs to the stairs?
The Deputy's questions are important and I suggest she will get a fuller and more correct response from the Minister responsible if she puts down a question to him. The budget for that project was in the OPW. It still has budgets, although they are scaled back like everybody else's.
Is the Minister telling me has not even spoken to the OPW? Ultimate responsibility lies with him.
I set out the situation in some detail. Of course I have spoken to the OPW, but the specific question the Deputy is asking me is not in my budget. I am directing her to where the answers to those specific questions lie. I am not trying to be evasive. I do not have that specific information. If Deputy Mitchell has put it down in the question I would have given her the answer.
The Minister knows nothing about the Natural History Museum.
Of course I do. I am the one who is getting it open, not keeping it closed.
What has the Minister done? He has not even spoken to the OPW and does not know what the plans are.
It is very disappointing that this project has not been given a firm commitment. It is probably one of the most interesting and attractive tourist attractions, particularly for school children. Only this morning my colleague, Deputy Tuffy, told me her four year old daughter is very interested in dinosaurs and fossils and that she would particularly like to see them available. We have some other ideas on that.
Bring her in here.
The natural history aspect of it is particularly significant. Are we happy about the conservation of the exhibits, given that this project is to be put on the long finger indefinitely? What happened to the part of the exhibition that was supposed to go to County Mayo?
I think it went.
Did it go?
In April of this year an exhibition will be put on in the Riding School in Collins Barracks and that will be warmly welcomed by those who want to visit this type of exhibition. They will use the popular exhibits from the Natural History Museum. In light of the economic circumstances, if it is not possible to proceed, I do not want the place to lie dormant. I want the Natural History Museum back in its home next door and that will be possible, albeit not on the basis of a totally refurbished building. However, it will be of a standard that will be safe and accessible to the public; otherwise, it could not possibly be opened.
103 Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism if he has instructed all of the bodies under his aegis to produce annual output statements; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2264/09]
As the Deputy will be aware, annual output statements were introduced in 2007 as a mechanism for Dáil scrutiny of the annual Estimates of expenditure of Government Departments, as part of the Government's ongoing budgetary reform measures. The output statements link budgets to performance targets and, from 2008, they report on progress made in achieving the targets set the previous year.
Since 2007, and in accordance with the Government-approved template, the annual output statements of the Department have detailed budgets and associated targets over the three main programme areas of tourism, sport and arts, culture, film and archives. Responsibility for the implementation of policy across these three sectoral areas rests primarily with the relevant agencies under the aegis of the Department.
Accordingly, although budgets and targets for each of these agencies have not been separately identified in the Department's output statements, their performance-related budgeting is implicitly contained under each of the programme headings, reflecting the joined-up nature of policy implementation between the Department and its agencies. In its report on the Irish public service, the OECD was complimentary about the annual output statement approach, which is recognised as central to the core requirement for a more integrated, performance-centred approach to the management of resources. Nevertheless, the OECD called for enhancements to the output statement approach and this call has been reflected in the task force report, Transforming Public Services. In accordance with a recent decision of the Government, various specific proposals for enhancements, as recommended by the task force, will be implemented in the output statement for 2009 currently being prepared by the Department.
With specific regard to the recommendation of the task force that all State agencies should publish output statements relating the resources allocated to them with target achievements, I understand the Department of Finance is currently examining this recommendation with a view to issuing guidance to Departments and agencies on the modalities of its implementation. In particular, it is important to ensure consistency and complementarity among and between agencies and Departments. Accordingly, I have not as yet instructed the agencies under the aegis of the Department to produce their own output statements, pending the finalisation of arrangements at a central level.
I welcome the progress in this area but have one key comment on it. Here we have agencies getting State money, but very much at arm's length from us, the elected representatives. While some of these agencies come in to committees and we have an opportunity to question them, not all of them do so. When we want information on a particular agency and put a question to the Minister, we are referred back to that agency. It is very difficult to track what is happening with them. The key point is that we need more direct access to and input from those agencies so we can see what is going on.
To some degree I agree with Deputy Upton. I have a view on many of these agencies. While the Deputy might think it is difficult to get information, I often find it hard, as the responsible Minister, and that is not healthy. As politicians we peddled a line for years, and others peddled it on our behalf, that everything has to be so-called "independent". Nobody is independent. Everybody has a specific point of view, to which they are entitled. I believe in far more ministerial responsibility and direct involvement with many of the agencies.
Many of the agencies can make the case in a very public way for funding. That is fine and I have no issue with that, but dare not any Minister question how this funding is distributed. I have issues with that; I do not like it. It is wrong that I, as an elected representative and appointed to Government as the Minister responsible for this area, sometimes find out what the agencies are up to through the national media. They show no courtesy towards the Department regarding what they are doing. I agree that there are issues which have gone beyond what the House might have intended in terms of answerability. A better balance must be found between independence as some people like it and responsibility for the substantial resources given to many of these agencies, which is taxpayers' money. Some feel that they are answerable to nobody. I do not accept that and I do not like it.
Will the Minister use his good offices to progress this matter? We would all welcome that and it would be in the interest of transparency and accountability for us to have access to that information. I am pleased to hear his reply and hope that he will move in the appropriate way to advance this matter.
This will not be popular in many quarters but after 20 odd years in this House I believe that the people on all sides of the House are more than capable of being responsible for taxpayers' money. I do not accept that outside agencies are more responsible than we would be.
104 Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the level of funding allocated to the ACCESS programme under the national development plan which has been depleted to date; when he expects the next round of the programme to be announced; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2333/09]
The Arts and Culture Capital Enhancement Support Scheme, ACCESS, is a key element in the Government's regional arts strategy and has greatly improved access to and participation in the arts for many nationwide. The scheme has been widely acknowledged as a significant intervention in the provision of quality cultural spaces.
Facilities funded to date include integrated arts centres, theatres, galleries, studio, and creative and performance spaces. In this manner my Department provides the bulk of capital funding for building and refurbishing arts facilities around the country, mainly in the not- for-profit sector, while the Arts Council provides the ongoing revenue support for many of the facilities.
A total of €81 million has been included under the National Development Plan 2007 to 2013 for ACCESS. In 2007-08 grants totalling €42.7 million were allocated under the ACCESS II scheme and since the commencement of the current NDP €15.3 million has been drawn down.
While there are no plans to announce a further round of funding under the arts capital projects during 2009 the matter will be kept under review in the context of available resources.
The NDP is an historic document at this point but it allocated in the region of €83 million to the ACCESS programme. Am I correct in that?
It is €32.5 million in the current round.
That is the current round but in the NDP there was just over €80 million. I understand there was €32 million and then €10 million. Is that correct?
Yes, it was approximately €80 million.
Around the country people are asking what is to happen to the other €40 million. Is there to be an ACCESS III programme as included in the arts and culture plan?
I am not in a position——
I have not yet called on the Minister to respond.
The ACCESS programme has produced wonderful venues and arts centres around the country but unfortunately in many cases they are struggling. The Minister is aware of this and following the cut in the Arts Council funding the touring programme will contract, which means the venues have less opportunity to generate revenue. The Minister gives them capital revenue and when the council has the funding it gives them current revenue but there is no money for mini-capital projects such as painting, lighting, heating and sound systems and because the centres cannot generate the revenue themselves they are deteriorating for lack of maintenance. If there is any money available it should be put into these mini-capital projects to preserve what we have invested in and to offer the opportunity for some construction work around the country.
I intend, as soon as humanly and economically possible, to open the next round of ACCESS. It will not happen this year but I have not given up on opening up the third round of a successful programme. I take the Deputy's point with regard to the excellence of the facilities and the need to find mechanisms to keep them alive and operating and to deal with normal maintenance. If issues arise in that connection I will examine them.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
