I move amendment No. 1:
In page 3, subsection (1), line 16, after "Arts" to insert "Council".
This is the third Arts Bill in the history of the State. The first Arts Bill, in 1951, was introduced by the then Taoiseach, Mr. Costello. At the time it was probably the first Arts Bill in the world. It was seen as a very positive start. It resulted from a report by Dr. Thomas Bodkin which was scathing about the lack of provision for the arts. The 1973 Bill was different. The 1951 Bill allowed for seven members and the 1973 Bill, 17 members. The 1973 Act gave power to the Arts Council to be the prime policy mover and copperfastened its independence.
I welcome the fact that all the members of the committee received the book Dreams and Responsibilities by Brian P. Kennedy on the history of legislation on the arts in this country. One principle running through that book and the debate is the principle of an arms length relationship. I have an amendment on this topic, which we will address later.
Pressure was exerted by various sectors of the arts fraternity for a change in legislation because the arts are organic and are changing and reaching out to new areas all the time. Technology has greatly changed the entire arts perspective. It started with the PricewaterhouseCoopers report in the 1990s, followed by a good consultation paper, Towards a New Framework for the Arts, which was widely distributed. Arising from that, about 230 submissions were received andTheo Dorgan was commissioned to report on these.
Despite all the consultation, and the thought that has been invested in arts policy and its legislative framework since 1961, the Bill before us is not as expansive or inclusive as I thought it would be. I propose, therefore, that we call it the Arts Council Bill rather than the Arts Bill. There is precedent for that in other countries' legislation. For example, in Australia, there is the Australia Council Act, 1975; in Northern Ireland there is the Arts Council Order, 1995; in New Zealand there is the Arts Council of New Zealand Act, 1994; and in Canada they have the Canada Council for the Arts Act.
The Bill focuses on how the Arts Council works, its relationship with the Minister and how that has changed since the 1973 legislation. It introduces the idea of standing committees that would have a legislative basis. It has nothing to do with the major cultural institutions like the National Concert Hall, the Museum of Modern Art, the National Theatre, the National Gallery, the Chester Beatty Library or the National Museum. It also has little to do with the Irish language, which hardly receives a mention. I have tabled some amendments that seek to include the Irish language in the Bill.
The Bill makes no reference to individual artists. I have tried to make provision for these people in a later amendment.