Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 6 Jul 2006

Vol. 623 No. 3

Priority Questions.

State Boards.

Jimmy Deenihan

Ceist:

1 Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism if he intends to implement the recommendations of the Dalton report in full; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27233/06]

Jack Wall

Ceist:

2 Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the action he proposes to take arising from the report of the Dalton inquiry into certain events within Bord na gCon; if he intends to make changes to members of the board arising from the conclusions of the report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27234/06]

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.

Not more than 12 minutes are allotted for both questions.

In assenting at its meeting on 4 July to the publication of the Dalton report, the Government also approved my proposals for the implementation of the main recommendations made by Mr. Dalton. These address, inter alia, the need for the creation of an independent doping control structure for the regulation of greyhound racing; a comprehensive review of existing legislation governing the operations of Bord na gCon to bring legislation into line with best current practice; changes concerning the tenure of the chairman and members of the board, with each now to be restricted to a maximum of two terms of five years in the case of the chair, and three years for board members; and an increase in the size of the board from seven to nine members.

It is my intention to progress the drafting of amending legislation as rapidly as possible. I will engage fully with the board of Bord na gCon in carrying out this change agenda and I am certain I will have its full support in this process. I will also request the board to review its corporate governance procedures and to address issues of low staff morale, which were also highlighted in the Dalton report.

The implementation of the report's recommendations will be of benefit to the greyhound industry, bringing it in line with best current practice for State boards, and will bring about a greater stability in this important sector. I am grateful to Mr. Dalton for conducting his inquiries in a sensitive and thoroughly professional manner.

I express my gratitude, and that of my Government colleagues, to Mr. Taggart for his many years of service to the greyhound industry. As Deputies will be aware, Mr. Taggart has advised me that he will step down as chairman of Bord na gCon with effect from tomorrow. His outstanding achievements in transforming the greyhound industry will long be remembered.

I join the Minister in acknowledging the contribution Mr. Paschal Taggart made to the greyhound industry since being appointed by the rainbow Government back in the mid-1990s. Whereas I welcome the publication of this report, I find the process that was carried out in publishing it to be unacceptable. First, the letter that was sent by the chief executive officer to the Minister's office back in January was leaked to the press, by whom we do not know. In April, the conclusions and recommendations contained in the report were leaked to Jody Corcoran, a high profile journalist with the Irish Independent, and to The Sunday Tribune. We had the report’s conclusions and recommendations back in April.

Does the Deputy have a question?

When the Minister was asked in this House why he had not published the report earlier, he said it was because he wanted due process. Was there due process when these leaks were carried out? In most cases they were very selective. As regards the report's recommendations, I produced a Bill two weeks ago which was rejected by the Minister. I was accused of pre-empting this report. Does the Minister accept that the same independent regulatory process is being recommended in the Dalton report? I said it would be because it was included in one of those leaks.

I have previously raised the absence of female board members in Bord na gCon. Has the Minister ever appointed a woman to that board? There are certainly no women on the board now. This came out very strongly in the report.

Does Bord na gCon have a rule book and a list of prohibited substances?

I ask the Deputy to be brief because we will run out of time for the Minister's reply.

I will conclude but this is very important. Does Bord na gCon have a rule book, like they have in England? Will the Minister classify steroids as being a prohibited substance, as recommended in the report?

Yes, I believe that due process was administered. In so far as I was concerned, I followed up on my promises to the letter all the way from the time when Mr. Dalton was first appointed to the date when the report was published. I repeat that neither I nor my departmental officials were responsible for any leak, anywhere, at any time.

I do not know.

Who is the mysterious individual?

How in the name of goodness could I possibly know who leaked it?

There should be an inquiry into it.

The Deputy is asking the wrong person.

There should be an inquiry into it.

If Deputy Deenihan wants to call for an inquiry, that is his business. I am afraid, however, that I must be practical about it. I know very well from past experience that an inquiry would not get us too far. In any event, I followed due process from the moment that Mr. Dalton was appointed right to the day the document was published. There can be no question but that neither I nor my departmental officials were responsible for any leak at any time during that period.

With regard to the question of Deputy Deenihan's Bill, he complains about leaks, which is fair enough. It appears, however, that his Bill has resulted from the leaks because one of the leaks related to the question——

I read it all in the newspaper in April.

——of a doping control agency. That is what Deputy Deenihan's Bill suggested.

I suggested the Bill in 1997.

It was not sufficient and, unfortunately, we could not take that Bill on board. It is my intention, in accordance with the Government decision, to implement the recommendations the Government has agreed. I appointed a woman to the board of Bord na gCon, Ms Helen Nugent from the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism, and, unfortunately, she subsequently resigned. We will move on to bring in new legislation. The Greyhound Industry Act 1958 is out of date in so far as modern conditions are concerned. The membership of the board will be increased. We will provide that the chairman may serve for no longer than two terms. We will also make similar provision for ordinary members.

I too wish to be associated with the previous speakers in regard to the work Mr. Taggart did during his 11 years stewardship of Bord na gCon. Does the Minister accept that the Dalton report, even with its limited terms of reference, is a damning indictment of mismanagement, inadequate corporate governance and unsatisfactory controls against doping and poor staff relations in the organisation and has led to Mr. Dalton stating that morale is at a very low level? Does he accept that urgent steps are needed to restore confidence among those involved in the industry, be it the staff of Bord na gCon, the owners or those who patronise it? What steps does the Minister intend to take in providing a new chair and filling vacancies on the board, bearing in mind the gender factor, as raised by Deputy Deenihan?

There are five recommendations under the heading of corporate governance, all of which we will seek to implement. In so far as the whole question of doping is concerned, the report makes it clear there should be an independent agency governing this matter. We are taking that recommendation on board. With regard to the issue of morale within Bord na gCon, naturally following all the traumatic events that have occurred since the dismissal of Mr. Tynan, there is a difficulty. However, it is a difficulty we shall resolve. Prior to this difficulty erupting, morale in Bord na gCon was quite good. The board of Bord na gCon, together with the Government, has succeeded in transforming the industry right across the country. Much of this was due to the work of the chairman and the board and could not have been done without substantial Government funding, particularly since 2001, when the horse and greyhound racing fund was set up.

A Cheann Comhairle——

We were almost eight minutes into the question before I could call Deputy Wall and we have to give him a chance.

I wish to ask about certain information to which Mr. Dalton has referred that was not within his remit to comment on but has been passed on to the Minister. It relates to the development of Shelbourne Park. I listened to the debate in the Committee of Public Accounts today on that matter. What mechanism will the Minister put in place to restore confidence in that aspect? Did he receive the PricewaterhouseCoopers report much discussed at the Committee of Public Accounts? We know what has been determined by Mr. Dalton in a limited reference. Given its huge significance throughout the country, will there be wide-scale investigation of this industry to include all the people and all the tracks involved and the benefits to local communities in those areas as well as nationally?

I remind the Minister that the Bill I proposed the last day was the one I had ready for publication in 1997, just before we left office, and that was not pursued by the Government.

Our intention is to introduce new legislation which should come before the House in the not too distant future. Everybody will acknowledge that the base Act of 1958 is out of date and does not apply to modern conditions. There is a need for a revamp of the legislation in so far as it affects Bord na gCon and the entire sector. On the question of how we will achieve this, I will follow the recommendations in the report as closely as possible. If there are any further points that occur to Members or others that appear to be a good idea we will examine those suggestions carefully.

With regard to the matters outside the scope of the investigation which were drawn to Mr. Dalton's attention on the basis that they might merit further examination, these issues have been brought to the attention of the Comptroller and Auditor General who, I understand, will examine them.

Sports Capital Programme.

Catherine Murphy

Ceist:

3 Ms C. Murphy asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the way in which the population criteria was used to arrive at the decisions in view of the recent sports capital grants allocation and the fact that Kildare received the lowest per capita allocation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27236/06]

The national lottery-funded sports capital programme allocates funding to sporting and to voluntary and community organisations at local, regional and national level throughout the country. The programme is advertised on an annual basis.

All applications received under the programme are assessed on an individual basis by my Department in accordance with a detailed set of assessment criteria as specified in the guidelines, terms and conditions that accompany the application form for the programme. Following the assessment process, each application receives a score, which gives its order of priority within its own county.

The assessment process takes into account factors such as the existing level of facilities in an area, the number and quality of the applications received, the amount of funding being sought by each applicant and the strategic positioning of major facilities that may be required as well as the most recent census of population figures. Every effort is made to achieve a balanced geographical spread of funds throughout the country, while also affording priority to projects in areas of social and economic disadvantage. In relation to the 2006 sports capital programme, a total of 1,338 applications were received nationally, of which 1,211 were for projects classified as local and 127 as non-local, that is, projects which were categorised as national, regional or municipal and multi-sport.

I recently announced provisional grant allocations under the 2006 programme in relation to the local applications totalling €53.745 million to 719 projects and I will announce the provisional allocations for the non-local projects in the near future, for which five applications were received from Kildare.

Of 28 applications from County Kildare for local projects this year, 17 were provisionally allocated funding totalling €1.41 million. My Department has written to the remaining 11 applicants enclosing a copy of their assessment and explaining why they were unsuccessful on this occasion, in order to assist with any future applications which they might submit. Ten of these applicants failed to meet basic minimum qualifying conditions as outlined on the application form and the guidelines, terms and conditions of the programme.

A salient point, of which the Deputy may not be aware, is the reduction in the number of applications received from Kildare this year compared with previous years. The overall number of applications from Kildare this year was down by 25% on the number of applications made in each of three previous years, 2003, 2004 and 2005. The Deputy will appreciate that the programme can only respond to the applications received from any particular county in any particular year. A reduced number of applications, taken with the quality of those applications and the amount of funding sought, affects the overall level of funding allocated to a county.

Nevertheless, sports capital funding to County Kildare amounts to €59per capita since 2003 and the national average over that time is €60 per capita. Since 1998 a total of over €23.4 million in sports capital funding has been allocated to County Kildare. This means that the county, with less than 4.2% of the population, has been allocated over 5.2% of the total national funding since 1998.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.

I am satisfied that County Kildare has been treated more than fairly in the administration of the sports capital programme and I believe that the Deputy will agree with me that the funding provided has made a major difference to the range and quality of the sports facilities available throughout the county.

I have looked at our applications for the past four years. Is the Minister saying it is all down to expertise which is particularly good in certain countries? For example, County Kerry has done extraordinarily well over a number of years. If we compare that county with Meath, a county with almost exactly the same population, in 2002 County Kerry got almost four times the amount. The same happened with regard to swimming pools. Kerry got funding for four swimming pools, but there are some counties that got no funding allocation. The same happened also with regard to arts grants. Six counties, including Kildare, got nothing under the access programme since 2002. What is the reason for this? Why do some counties do disproportionately well? Kerry does exceptionally well.

Is the Minister aware there is a particular difficulty in developing areas? In places where many houses are built it takes time for the area to function as a community and it is more difficult for such growing communities to make an application for funds as they are not established. Counties like Kildare, Meath and Fingal are disadvantaged in that regard.

I see no rationale for the census of population having a bearing on this. If it does not have a bearing, what is the basis for allocations to a county? Is whoever represents the county the key factor in terms of how well a county does in terms of lottery grants?

Last year Kerry finished in the middle of the table, but this year it did not. The grants announced to date represent grants for local clubs, not grants to major regional infrastructure projects which are normally in more urbanised centres. When the regional grants are added in, the picture will probably change. While the number of applications from County Kildare was down this year by 25%, the number of applications from Kerry was quite high.

Department officials do their best in terms of what are limited funds and use certain criteria in coming to an assessment of the scores. The criteria include the extent to which the projects increase active participation and result in improved standards of sport, the need to achieve an equitable geographical spread of funds and an equitable spread over different sports and community groups while prioritising designated disadvantaged areas, the financial viability of the project and the extent to which applicants have consulted with other clubs, community groups, schools, the local authority and the national governing bodies in order to prioritise proposed improvements and facilities.

With regard to the disbursement of grants for various disciplines, in the round they are far more equitable than the Deputy imagines.

Tourism Promotion.

Jimmy Deenihan

Ceist:

4 Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the timeframe for the merging of regional tourism authorities with Fáilte Ireland, in view of the refusal by the north-west RTA to wind up the company; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27535/06]

As I have advised the House on a number of occasions this year, most recently on 31 May, individual actions and measures relating to tourism promotion or development at regional level are day-to-day functions of the State tourism agencies.

I have previously informed the House of my full support for the proposed changes in regional structures and the establishment of five new regional development boards for tourism. As the Deputy is aware, this initiative emerged from a major study of regional tourism structures undertaken by PricewaterhouseCoopers at Fáilte Ireland's request and supplemented by the work of a small independent group, chaired by Mr. John Travers. The PWC report highlighted the need for a much wider brief for regional tourism, with more emphasis on its strategic rather than administrative role and contributing more directly to national policy. It recommended a greatly increased emphasis on targeted marketing, product development and enterprise support and suggested establishing an integrated linkage between regional tourism strategy and national policy and exploiting avenues to leverage increased resources. I am confident the new regional tourism arrangements, with enhanced functions being put in place at local level, will enable tourism to grow in the regions to a greater extent than at present.

In the case of four tourism regions, namely, the south-east, south-west, west and midlands-east regions, the resolutions necessary to allow the reorganisation to proceed have been passed. I have also given my consent, on foot of a request from Fáilte Ireland, to the delegation of increased functions from the authority to the four new development boards for these regions.

The position with regard to the north-west tourism region is that the regional tourism authority has adjourned its extraordinary general meeting until 19 July. I understand Fáilte Ireland is in contact with that authority.

My officials met the chief executive of Fáilte Ireland as recently as last Monday, 3 July. At that meeting Fáilte Ireland advised that it is still working towards the end of summer target as the date when the change in regional structures will be delivered. This is in line with the target I gave to the House previously.

The chairperson and chief executive of the Irish Tourism Industry Confederation conveyed the full support of the industry for this initiative when I met them earlier this week.

In the event of the north-west regional tourism agency refusing to wind down its company, is any legal process open to Fáilte Ireland or the Department to direct it to wind down? If it does not wind down, will the whole process cease or can the other four authorities go ahead? Will the Minister clarify what the position will be if it refuses to wind down at the meeting?

The Minister's reply indicated that the role of the RTAs has been greatly diminished and they have been stripped of their main role of tourism promotion. He said they will have a strategic role. What exactly does "strategic role" mean? Nobody has yet explained what they will be doing.

Neither the Minister nor Fáilte Ireland require the consent of any regional tourism authority to enable that authority to be disbanded. Even if the authority votes to stay in situ, the State tourism authority, Fáilte Ireland, can go to the High Court to ensure the policy is adhered to. However, as in all matters such as this it is always best to try to find a solution which does not require a stricture or imposition. Therefore, I had a meeting this week with the chairperson of north-west tourism to discuss the particular difficulties it appears to have with the concept.

I explained to the chairperson that far from this being a diminution of the powers of the regional tourism authorities, it is quite the reverse. I have been concerned in recent times about the growth of tourism numbers in large urban centres relative to what is happening in the regions. I know there are various factors involved, including people taking shorter breaks, a major increase in low price access to the country, people going to urban centres for shorter periods of time and short notice bookings. Nonetheless, there is a disparity which is a cause of concern. Therefore, I have given far greater powers to the regions under this initiative than ever before.

When I say that their powers will be more strategic, I mean they will be less administrative. For the most part, everybody would agree that regional tourism authorities have been involved in administration. They did that well, but I want to see them involved strategically in tourism, targeted marketing, product development and enterprise support. I want them to have a more active role in terms of attracting people into the regions than they have ever had.

This method, which follows closely on a report commissioned from PricewaterhouseCoopers will enable us to do that. I am also confident the problems with regard to north-west tourism will be resolved and that by the end of the summer we will have the five new development boards in place.

Arts Council.

Michael D. Higgins

Ceist:

5 Mr. M. Higgins asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism if, in the public interest, he will seek and publish information from the Arts Council giving the full list of pictures jointly purchased by the Arts Council and CIE under the art partnership scheme; if he will further indicate and publish the names of such pictures from this collection which were subsequently given to the CIE group of hotels; the location of all of these items of art which constitute an important part of Ireland’s cultural heritage; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27235/06]

The Arts Council is a statutory body under my Department's aegis. It is the principal channel through which State support is directed to the arts. It is understood from the council that there are 143 works in the collection in question, which were jointly funded under the Arts Council's joint purchase scheme. These include works by Gerard Dillon, Patrick Collins, Louis le Brocquy and Basil Blackshaw. These were purchased primarily in the 1960s and 1970s, at a cost then to the council of £7,233. The total cost of these works at the time came to £14,466.71.

The Arts Council is aware of the issues arising from potential sale of these works and is in contact with CIE and the chief executive officer of the Great Southern Hotel Group in this regard.

In that context, I have asked the following questions of the Arts Council. What part of CIE's collection was passed on to the Great Southern Hotels and where are these now? Which parts of the collection were jointly purchased by the Arts Council and where are they now? Which paintings were or are now owned by CIE and where are they now? Which paintings in which the Arts Council has an interest were not offered to the State and where are they now?

The Arts Council has given my Department preliminary responses to these questions and I have asked that its efforts to establish the full facts of the matter be redoubled.

On my instructions, my Department also brought the matter to the attention of the chief executive officer of the Dublin Airport Authority in early June and asked for a full report on the matter. I understand that potential vendors are obliged to notify such intended sales to the State so that first option on such items may be exercised by the State collecting institutions. The Dublin Airport Authority has responded to my Department confirming that it will consult in full with it and the Arts Council before any decisions are taken. The DAA has also confirmed that it will comply fully with all State guidelines. I have also asked the aforementioned questions of the Dublin Airport Authority and await its full response.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.

These works of art are part of our national heritage and belong, in effect, to the people. They should not be disposed of for short-term pecuniary gain and should be returned to the national collecting institutions and the OPW, who will retain them in public ownership for continued public viewing and enjoyment. The sale of these works is totally at variance with the original intent of the scheme, that being to provide a platform for Irish artists to display their works. It was never the intention of the scheme that the public bodies involved would seek to commercially exploit these works.

I am grateful to the Minister for his reply. Will he indicate when he anticipates being in a position to publish the lists referred to? The full list of what was acquired by CIE under the purchase scheme at the end of the 1960s and 1970s is contained in the appendix to the excellent exhibition of CIE's own collection, Art on Wheels.

There is a problem. The reason the full list must be put in the public realm arises from the fact that these paintings are a crucial part of the cultural heritage. In the appendix, a painting by Jack Yeats entitled Something Happened in the Street, is listed as national loan exhibition 1945, returned in 1973 and Arts Council subsidy refunded. Where is that painting now?

My second question relates. Have any of the pictures that were 50% assisted been offered for sale, either in Ireland or outside the jurisdiction? With reference to the second part of his reply, who owns these pictures which are 50% assisted by the Arts Council and the other 50% paid for by a semi-State body, Irish Rail, which in turn disbursed them to the Great Southern Hotel Group? Are they not in the ownership of the State? Why could that ownership not be transferred to public galleries?

The scheme introduced in 1953 suggested the purpose of the scheme is to have them on display to the Irish public, to introduce Irish artists to the public, and so forth. The purposes of that scheme cannot possibly be met by a sale to private collections.

I refer to the list of the Great Southern Hotel collection, of which the paintings in the Arts Council assisted purchase scheme may only be part. Where are these paintings? I put it to the Minister that it is in the interest of pointing out to the Dublin Airport Authority that they are not its paintings to sell. For the Dublin Airport Authority to say the OPW would be given first option is saying to the Irish people that they will be given first option on purchasing half of that which they own themselves already.

The issue of public scrutiny which is involved is that if I and my colleagues had not raised this issue, would we have known where this heritage was? I am dissatisfied with the reply stated publicly that paintings were removed from the Great Southern Hotel for appraisal and storage and were not being prepared for auction. My information is not so, that people were asked to tender for appraisal, storage and preparation for sale.

This is an urgent matter. It is urgent that the full list is provided. We must be given the full list of those purchased by CIE to go into the CIE hotels. What happened those paintings that were on exhibition in the four hotels that were sold, in Kenmare, Mulrany, Sligo and Bundoran? Was the 50% returned to the Arts Council and will the files in that matter be made available to the public?

This matter was first brought to my attention by people working in the Parknasilla Great Southern Hotel. Subsequently I read that Deputy Higgins had also raised the matter. Following upon the discussion I had with some staff members in the Parknasilla Great Southern Hotel, I wrote to the chief executive of the Dublin Airport Authority, advising him of the wonderful collection that was in the Parknasilla Great Southern Hotel. I stated to him that some of that art had been removed recently with a view to its possible sale on the market. I pointed out that there was a circular from the Department of Transport some years ago which specified that in the event of art valued at more than €10,000 being put on the market by a State entity, the State through either the OPW or the national collecting institutions, must be given first option on that art.

I also stated that I understood that receipt of this notification was acknowledged at the time by the commercial State companies, including the then Aer Rianta. I also pointed out that I understood that some of those paintings may be jointly owned by the Arts Council and that the paintings included some by Arthur Armstrong, Norah McGuinness, Daniel O'Neill, George Campbell, Gerard Dillon and others. I asked what was the intention of the Dublin Airport Authority in respect of those paintings and whether it was the intention to put those paintings on the market and if so, what plans existed to give the national collecting institutions first option on what I regarded as these heritage works.

I received a reply from the Dublin Airport Authority, dated 16 June in which it was stated that some paintings had been removed by art specialists de Vere in order to have them properly valued, these being the precise words used. The reply also stated that as a natural matter of course the Dublin Airport Authority would comply fully with all relevant State guidelines and would consult the relevant Ministers and the Arts Council as necessary regarding the future of thepaintings.

Deputy Higgins and I have discussed this issue in which we both have a great interest. These works of art are part of our national heritage and belong to the people. They should not be disposed of for short-term pecuniary gain and they should be returned to the national collecting institutions and the OPW which will retain them in public ownership for continued public viewing and enjoyment. The sale of these works is completely at variance with the original intent of the scheme which was to provide a platform at that time for Irish artists to display their works. God knows they had little enough places to display their work or customers to which to sell them.

It was never the intention of the scheme that the public bodies involved should seek to exploit these works which are part of the heritage of this nation and which in truth and in justice are the property of the Irish nation. I have set in train an inquiry through the Arts Council and through the Dublin Airport Authority to ascertain which of these are jointly owned by the Arts Council and CIE as it then was, which of these have been disposed of and where they are located. These relevant questions have been put into the process which I hope will yield the necessary results. Like Deputy Higgins I am extremely sceptical that the list on the catalogue is exhaustive which is impossible to believe.

It is important that I thank the Minister for his very full reply. I am glad we share the concern about what should happen to these pictures. We should also consider those paintings of regional significance, such as those of Maurice McGonigle, for example, in the west of Ireland, and others that would be appropriate to Dublin. We should consider how best the purposes of the 1953 scheme might be achieved by the paintings being placed for public view. It is of interest that the Heritage Council has offered to be of assistance in this regard and we should use its expertise.

We should establish the provenance of the paintings involved, especially in light of the other implications which arise. That is another question which I am happy to have the Minister investigate, namely, regarding any paintings which may have been offered for sale within the jurisdiction or outside it. I gave the particularly worrying example of the last painting listed in the appendix, the Jack Yeats work, Something Happening in the Street. A remarkably similar painting was offered for sale in Christie’s many years after it is noted here as being returned to the Arts Council in 1973. That was in the 1980s.

I am very happy with the Minister's reply and I suggest he use the resources of the Heritage Council. I put it to him that it is in all our interests that we bring the matter to as speedy a conclusion as possible. The Minister would agree.

The Arts Council has engaged the visual arts specialist consultant, Oliver Dowling, to establish beyond reasonable doubt the location and provenance of works purchased under the joint purchase scheme with a view to providing conclusive answers to the questions outlined earlier.

The Arts Council does not have a conclusive list of works from CIE's collection that were passed on to the Great Southern Hotel group. I sincerely hope this will be addressed in the context of the current project. The list provided by the Arts Council to the Department is the outcome of research into the CIE collection, which was undertaken by Jane Eckett in 2006 and based on the Arts Council's record of the scheme.

It represents the complete body of works purchased through the joint purchase scheme by either CIE or the Great Southern Hotel group. They are listed as a single collection and the Arts Council is establishing the distinction between works published by the Great Southern Hotels and those purchased by CIE.

On its part, the Great Southern Hotel group has transferred a number of works to de Vere-Whyte's for safe keeping. Some 54 works have been transferred in total, of which approximately 30 are from the original CIE collections. Inaccuracy in various painting titles leads to some confusion. For example, de Vere-Whyte's list Anne Yeats's Eggs in a Basket and this might correspond with what is on the Arts Council record as Anne Yeats’s Eggs in a Hat. One man’s hat is another man’s basket.

The Arts Council, in co-operation with the Great Southern Hotel group, is establishing the provenance and location of the remaining works. The current research will establish if, and to what extent, works were sold on. However, the organisations and agencies that purchased works under the joint purchase scheme were not contractually obliged to offer works for sale to the State.

Barr
Roinn