Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 30 January 2013
7. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht the progress he has made in achieving shared services and board structures with the National Library and National Museum; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4489/13]
View answer8. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht if the proposed National Museum and Library Advisory Council will have any specific remit to develop the existing genealogical resources which exist across cultural institutions under its authority and beyond into a shared, centralised genealogical facility which may enable citizens and tourists to access all such available resources; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4258/13]
View answer10. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht the timeframe for his plans to merge the National Archives and the Irish Manuscripts Commission into the National Library; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4488/13]
View answer17. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht the reasons for his decision to remove the autonomy and independence from the boards of the National Library and the National Museum by merging them into an advisory council operating within his Department; if the savings he has outlined will be achieved in view of the fact that the members of both boards are now working pro bono; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4512/13]
View answer22. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht the way he intends that the National Museum and Library Advisory Council will adequately meet the needs of both the National Library and the National Museum in terms of fundraising, attracting philanthropic donations of works and day to day management of both institutions; the intended role of his Office in the functioning of the new council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4257/13]
View answer44. Deputy Kevin Humphreys asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht if there is a timetable for the public service reforms to the operation of the National Library and National Museum; if he will consider a separate advisory council for each body with a statutorily independent director, in view of the fact that each will operate pro bono as currently proposed for joint advisory council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4267/13]
View answer45. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht his views on the report commissioned by IMPACT in relation to the proposed merger of the National Archives into the National Library; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4264/13]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 7, 8, 10, 17, 22, 44 and 45 together.
The Deputies will be aware that, as part of a range of reforms agreed by the Government under the public service reform plan, it was decided that the existing National Archives of Ireland, NAI, governance model will be applied to the National Library of Ireland, NLI, and the National Museum of Ireland, NMI. The National Archives Advisory Council will be retained, with a reduced membership operating pro bono. A single statutory NLI and NMI advisory council will operate pro bono in place of the existing boards. Overall board membership will be reduced by approximately 60%. It is anticipated that this model will achieve significant savings and increase efficiencies across the institutions. The NAI will operate, as it does at present, with a statutorily independent director and a similar statutory model will be put in place for the directors of the NLI and the NMI. The Irish Manuscripts Commission will be brought within the administrative ambit of the NLI.
The reform measures being undertaken by my Department with regard to the NLI and NMI will not remove the autonomy and independence of the two bodies. While it is proposed under the measures approved by the Government to replace the existing boards with an independent advisory council, the autonomy and independence of the directors of the institutions will be given a clear statutory underpinning. While there will be a pragmatic sharing of services, organisationally the NMI, the NLI and the proposed advisory council will not be within my Department. It is envisaged that the advisory council will have no role in relation to the day-to-day management of the two bodies but will specialise in fund-raising, fostering philanthropic relations and donations and providing advice to the Minister, including in relation to genealogy if considered appropriate. The advisory council will be appointed by me under statute. As I have said, the proposed model is similar to that already in place in the National Archives, the success of which has been widely recognised in this House and further afield.
I have already advised the House of the robust shared services model that will be deployed across the three institutions, through my Department in the case of corporate support services and by formal inter-institutional agreement in the case of operational services. Regular meetings have been taking place between my Department and the directors and staff of the relevant institutions in respect of these matters. Options relating to shared human resources, information technology and financial services are being examined at present. It is proposed that a number of measures will be implemented on an administrative basis, pending the enactment of enabling legislation. The institutions are developing the requisite agreement with regard to shared operational services. Significant progress is being made on the draft legislation required to bring the new arrangements into being. I anticipate I will be in a position to seek Government approval for the heads of a Bill in the near future.
The Deputies will be aware that overall savings of €20 million in enhanced service efficiencies and value for money were targeted in the public service reform plan. In that context, it is expected that savings of approximately €1 million will be made initially across the institutions involved in the reform programme which are funded from my Department's Vote group, with further savings to be identified as the various cost-saving measures are implemented. However, the real benefit from the rationalisation of State agencies will be a less crowded administrative landscape. This will result in greater democratic accountability, less duplication of effort and clearer lines of responsibility for the citizen. Finally, I should clarify that the report commissioned by IMPACT related to an assessment of an earlier proposal to merge the National Archives of Ireland into the National Library of Ireland. Such a merger is no longer proposed.
I thank the Minister for his response. I am conscious that a number of Deputies want to speak about this matter. It is with considerable frustration that we are returning to this issue today. I am sure the Minister is frustrated that this issue is not going away. Fianna Fáil is committed to the principles set out in the Arts Act 2003, which established the arm's length principle in legislative form. We are concerned that the slash and burn approach, which has not generally been a characteristic of the Minister's political approach, may well lead to the achievement of false economies. There is a risk that these changes will save little financially while delivering a major cost to the State in terms of its cultural institutions.
It is clear that the abolition of the boards and of Culture Ireland, so that these areas can be brought under the direct control of the Minister, is a departure from the arm's length principle. The Minister, Deputy Deenihan, is respected and trusted by people in the arts and heritage sectors, and rightly so. He will not always be the Minister, however. We cannot be certain that the person at the helm in the medium and long terms can be trusted to ensure the arm's length principle is observed. In the event of a Cabinet reshuffle, the Minister's important brief might be taken by someone in respect of whom we could not be confident that an arm's length approach would be demonstrated.
I do not believe for a minute that the Minister, in his heart, is committed to this initiative. I commend him on what he is doing in the area of the development of shared services. We should be doing the same thing in many areas of the public service. What procedures has he put in place to ensure the integrity of the National Library of Ireland and the National Museum of Ireland, as two separate and distinct cultural entities, will be maintained? What steps has he taken to that end?
The Minister mentioned a figure of €1 million in savings for the whole process. From listening to the Minister, it seems he is a bit tentative about this. In conclusion, I again make the point that when the possible savings are balanced against the very significant risk to these vital institutions, it is a risk that is not worth taking at this point.
I remind the Deputy that although he was not part of that decision, his own party proposed to merge the National Gallery, IMMA and the Crawford Art Gallery into one institution.
We never agreed it.
Heads of legislation were prepared. It also proposed to merge the National Archives with the National Library. I certainly did not go ahead with that proposal.
I listened to Members in the House and it came across strongly that people were very happy with the National Archives, the way it is governed and run and its independence. I listened to people and I adopted that same governance model for the National Library and the National Museum. In addition, I will ensure there is curatorial independence in the legislation I am bringing in, which we will all get a chance to discuss, and that this independence will be strengthened. At this time, the director of the National Archives would no doubt accept she has total independence in her job. All the director gets from my Department is co-operation and help. I certainly think this will work in the case of the National Library and the National Museum.
The Deputy referred to Culture Ireland. The new Culture Ireland has now been nominated and set up, and it actually had its first meeting yesterday. There is no change. It will still be at arm's length from me and the Department, and while it is chaired by an independent chairperson, it is more inclusive. For example, it includes the IDA, Tourism Ireland and other State agencies in order that we can maximise the opportunity to send people abroad to perform, supported by the taxpayer. I am convinced it will work.
I appeal to people to give this proposal a chance. We are looking for change. When this Government took office, we were going to be a Government for change. We have looked at many State institutions and we have proposed a lot of rationalisation, which will be applied. Apart from the National Library and the National Museum, the other cultural institutions were left as they were. They will be sharing resources, and I thank the Deputy for supporting that, but it was very much a minimalist approach.
I too have concerns that what we do should have an eye to the medium and long term rather than the immediate environment in which we find ourselves. What concerns me greatly is that the major focus of attention here is on cost-cutting and efficiency. While I do not have a difficulty with looking to achieve a more efficient service for people who use our cultural institutions, I am very concerned that what is done should be compatible with each of the institutions concerned. Some of what each of the institutions does as a core function is not completely compatible with the other institutions. There are real opportunities here if we can look at the governance of these institutions in the first instance and how the philanthropic side can be given an advantage. I welcome the fact that the National Archives and the National Library are not being combined. As an example, the Public Record Office in Belfast was to move from the Lisburn Road to the Titanic Quarter and was due to close for eight months. In that case, however, it was planned to resource those who might want to check records while the buildings were closed and a huge effort was made to digitise records. Not only was a fantastic new building opened in the Titanic Quarter, but it has the advantage of having all of the material digitised so that the service is much better both for those using the building and for those who do not have to use it because they can get the records online.
I wonder whether the Minister shares my concerns that, by looking only at the issue of efficiency, we are losing an opportunity to plan for the medium and longer term with regard to investing in our institutions. While I realise money is tight, some of this brings a return even in the short term. I cannot understand why there is not a user-based approach to the institutions and why it is exclusively, or almost exclusively, looking at saving money and efficiencies.
I am sure the Minister is well aware of the fact there has been near-universal rejection of this proposal by stakeholders in both institutions. Surely the views of those working in this area should be taken into account. Professor Diarmaid Ferriter and Dr. Pat Wallace have said it is a mistake, and Dr. John O'Mahony, the chairman of the board of the National Museum, has called it cultural cannibalism. People are under the impression that it is a bit of a Civil Service coup to deprive these institutions of their independence and autonomy.
With regard to the notion that we will save €1 million in costs, as other Deputies have said, the Minister himself does not even seem convinced that it might save that amount. I see that one of the reasons given for the move was that the State might be better at securing philanthropic investment. I would suggest that if the State can tap into philanthropic money, we should do so and use loads of it to help the vulnerable. However, I believe we should leave the arts to those who are best qualified. It is very important that their independence and autonomy is retained.
I do not know if the Minister has sat down with these people. I plead with him to reconsider the matter and to sit down with all stakeholders. Surely their views matter.
In response to Deputy Mick Wallace, there is general agreement within both institutions on this approach. The chairman of the National Museum obviously expressed his views. Professor Diarmaid Ferriter resigned from the board of the National Library but - this is something I welcome - he did not resign from the advisory council of the National Archives, so obviously that is an expression of support for that type of governance. That is the exact governance I am now putting in place for the National Library and the National Museum. I am convinced, in case anyone thought otherwise, that this will save money which we can then put into digitisation.
Deputy Catherine Murphy is well informed in this whole area and I value what she says. The point is that we have had to cut costs across all Departments. That is the position this Government was landed with, and we all know the country is challenged at present. However, what is happening here will, I believe, strengthen the cultural institutions. I notice that no one recognised the fact that last week I announced the biggest investment ever, as I understand it, in a national cultural institution in this country - that is, the National Gallery, which is 75% closed at present. This is a major investment that is good not only for culture but also for jobs, which are all specialist jobs. If people are insinuating that the Government is not supportive of culture, they should look at such examples.
With regard to digitisation, I agree with the Deputy.
We must conclude.
I will finish shortly. The National Archives, for example, digitised the 1901 and 1911 censuses. Through that, it has received over 700 million hits on its website, so there is real interest out there in archival material. The more we can digitise, the more we can reach out to our diaspora and others interested in Ireland throughout the world.
