We now go on to the item on the Adjournment of the House which is the condition of the paintings in the possession of the National Gallery of Ireland. Senator David Norris.
Adjournment Matter. - National Gallery Paintings.
I thank the Cathaoirleach. I wish to raise the matter of the condition of the paintings in the possession of the National Gallery not, I may say, too far from here. I believe it is a matter of some concern and, indeed, of national importance. I would like to say at the outset that I am very grateful to a journalist, Mr. John Armstrong, for drawing the attention of the people to this problem. The article that appeared in The Irish Times of Friday, 15 January 1988, will certainly cause very considerable concern to all who hold the reputation of Ireland dear in matters of international culture. I have here the article which has to one side of it a very startling photograph, a picture of the portrait of Henry M. Lawrence by John Dicksee in which the entire top one-third of the painting has actually melted away. I will return to that later because this is a direct and attributable result of the conditions obtaining in the National Gallery of Ireland. I would have to say that I would like what I have to say to be taken in a general context and one that is not entirely negative because it would be possible to see some of my contributions as the contributions of somebody who wished to have the Government spending money all the time and almost recklessly. I would like, right at the outset, to say that this is not at all the case. I believe that all of us, including the Minister and the Government party, clearly recognise — and indeed the Government party have a very honourable tradition, particularly in the person of the Taoiseach, Deputy Haughey, in that regard — the importance of the arts. Deputy Haughey recently paid particular tribute to the importance of tourism in this country and noted, and as I said before in the House, the particular capacity of that sector of tourism known as cultural tourism to rise and expand.
We are extremely fortunate in this country in having a very fine collection of paintings of international standard by any measurement that can be applied. The gallery itself was brought into being by an act of, I suppose, an ancestor of this House in 1854 and so we can claim some continuing interest in its success and failure. Its foundation was in 1854 and it was completed ten years later in 1864. The early administrators of the gallery made some extremely valuable acquisitions. It was strengthened of course, as the Minister is aware, by the generosity of the late George Bernard Shaw, who under the provisions of his will left certain entitlements to the Directors of the National Gallery for the purpose of acquiring and restoring paintings. I suppose by a kind of cultural accident by which all of the people have benefited, the royalties of one of George Bernard Shaw's plays, "Pygmalion", spectacularly increased because of the success of a film, "My Fair Lady" made from the play from which royalties have consistently been paid over the last 30 years into the coffers of the gallery.
This enabled them, even during a period when things were also difficult, to make some very adventurous and very well chosen acquisitions. Added to this, is the recent extraordinary munificence of Sir Alfred and Lady Beit although, of course regrettably, not all the paintings included in that bequest have come into the possession as yet of the gallery due to criminal activities. However, it is hoped that they will. This is a great collection. One must have concern in regard to the conditions under which these paintings are housed and these conditions really do give genuine cause for concern.
The Beit donation was an extraordinary generous one, as I have said. We must, in our turn, be at least moderately generous in acknowledging that gift and it behoves us to provide at a minimum, adequate housing for these very important paintings. A bequest or a gift valued at between £50 million and £100 million has been made to the Irish people and we are apparently not prepared to spend one penny on ensuring that these paintings are properly kept.
I would like to invite the Minister to comment on the fact that we have not only paintings here of Irish importance but paintings that are of international importance. What would a Dutch or an Italian of a French visitor think if he came here and discovered, as I did, when I went this afternoon to get a really up-to-date view of the situation, that about half of the gallery was closed down. I could not see some of the French paintings. I could not see most of the Italian paintings. Perhaps it was just as well. I did manage eventually to get in and have a look at these areas — in an authorised fashion — and I could not help noticing, even had it not been pointed out to me, that the condition of the paintings is deteriorating very rapidly. I believe that something simply must be done about this.
The Italian Fresco Room, for example, is open only 20 per cent of the time partly because of cutbacks in employment, partly also because of conditions. That means that the icons and early Italian paintings are not available at all to the public for most of the time.
The principal room of the gallery, the Great Picture Gallery on the first floor, parodoxically contains the first fire-proof floor, I understand, in any gallery in Europe but has, alas, become so outdated at the moment that it constitutes a major fire hazard. In this room many of the glazing sheets covering the ceiling are cracked, two whole panels of glazing are missing entirely and paint is actually peeling from the ceiling. It must be remarked that if ordinary domestic paint is peeling from the ceiling one can only imagine what the effect is going to be on the delicate pigment of great oil paintings? It is a dirty, dingy room in which great paintings are displayed in conditions as a result of which they are unquestionably going to deteriorate.
The top Italian rooms constitute a suite of four small rooms in which there are Renaissance paintings, many of them on panels. This is an even greater source of worry. Now, I actually went there this afternoon and looked at them. I am sure the Minister has seen them as well and, if not, I am sure that he will do the honourable thing and go to see them, because I am not suggesting the spending of money recklessly. These are principally paintings on panels and due to the absorption of moisture and then its consequent expulsion there is an expansion and contraction of the wood as a result of which the paint is actually flaking right off the panels. These paintings are being seriously damaged. In addition to that, the wood is now permanently warped right out of the frames.
This is part of our heritage. It is entrusted to us at this period of time and we are betraying that trust by allowing these conditions to obtain. One of the paintings in the suite, may I say, I was wryly amused to note, was called "Pharaoh and his Host Overwhelmed by the Red Sea" by Ludovico Mazzolini and I could not help thinking what an appropriate subject it was, though it is being overwhelmed at the moment not by the Red Sea but by moisture from the walls.
There is a humidity fluctuation in sections of the gallery between 35 degrees and 75 degrees, despite the fact that, as the Minister and his advisers know, the optimum level of humidity in a gallery of this standard is 55 degrees and there is allowable in second class galleries a margin of 5 per cent on either side of that. We are wildly outside that to the extent that the paintings are actually being seriously damaged.
When I was there, wind was actually whistling through panels and I saw paint in the process of flaking off some of these pictures. In addition to the flaking there was the phenomenon known as bloom, when a kind of vaporous cloud forms like the mist that forms on the lens of glasses when rotund persons like myself get overheated; it is the same kind of effect. But it actually does cause damage to paintings. Some of them, of course, can be restored but, sad to say, when I was up in the restoration room this afternoon and I was not surprised to find that even in the restoration and conservation room, there was a leak in the roof. In that room they actually had lines of plastic down to catch the water. That is a sad commentary on the seriousness with which we regard the conservation of works of art in this country. I would, however, like to pay the most sincere tribute to the international team working there on the restoration of these canvasses.
In addition to those problems, there is the possibility of serious damage to the entire collection and I say this particularly bearing in mind the donation of Sir Alfred and Lady Beit, I speak of the danger of fire. The partitions in the main rooms are made of wood panelling and chipboard. In, for example, the Milltown Room which was an earlier bequest from the same House, Russborough, by the Countess of Milltown, you have the quadrants of the room hollowed so that they are allowed to contain electrical conduits and exposed timbers and this actually creates a kind of fire funnel effect so tragically experienced in the King's Cross disaster.
In a room further down, we have an Irish collection of paintings including the paintings of the late Jack Yeats and some of Yeats' paintings — I am very sorry to have to report — have been seriously affected by the conditions obtaining in the gallery. I do think that this is a shame. It is also a great shame, and in fact quite a scandal, that a number of the paintings from the Lane Bequest should have been allowed to deteriorate to the condition that I saw them in today. I could not help being reminded of the words of Jack Yeats' brother, the poet W.B. Yeats, in dealing with the pettiness of a previous administration for which none of us were responsible in refusing to provide proper accommodation and housing for the paintings in Hugh Lane's own collection when he said: "What need they, being come to sense but fumble in the greasy till and add the halfpence to the pence". We must get away from that mentality. If we are to be an attractive destination for cultural tourism, we cannot afford to squander in this extravagant manner what is the heritage of all our people.
I would like to turn to some of the specific, practical problems in the gallery and they really boil down — and boil down is the operative word because what you have is what should be a controlled climate and what is now an uncontrolled climate where paintings are alternately boiled and then frozen and I have actual photographs of the results of this process here with me today — to a situation in which there is only adequate heating throughout part of the gallery. Even that is only an unsatisfactory attempt, employing a rogue system, as it has been described to me, at humidity control in one-third of the gallery. The rest of it is completely outside the operation of a proper system of climatic control or even air conditioning. The result of this was that five years ago, for example, a system put into the new 1968 wing which was supposed to control humidity levels and temperature fluctuations and so on, backfired, despite the fact that the gallery had pointed out this possibility and requested the Office of Public Works to build in fail-safe machinery into it. This was not done and the staff came in at 9 o'clock in the morning to find that steam had been pouring in all night to such an extent that there was precipitation from the ceiling and it was actually raining on to the paintings. I really believe that this is a cause of such public concern that it could be described as an open scandal.
This afternoon I also went up on the roof of the gallery and discovered that lead had come away from the flashings on the roof. I admit that some of this damage, because the structure is in a weakened condition, may have resulted from last night's storm and I hope that this will provide an opportunity for something really serious to be done, but it is not this kind of elastoplast work that is needed. At one point due to an incorrect design, over some of the most important paintings, I could actually put my hand into one of the rooms, from the roof. I could put my hand into it, without triggering off any kind of alarm, without affecting the situation in any way other than demonstrating that if my hand can penetrate into it, so can the atmosphere and the atmosphere is subject to considerable fluctuations at this time of the year.
As well as serious pollution, wooden catwalks intended for the repair and maintenance of the roof are in such a rotten condition that they have been condemned as unsafe and can no longer be used and so, large sections of the roof are not even given this small protection. Some little time ago, when ultra-violet filtration sheets were being fitted to a section of skylight in the gallery, the work was incomplete at knocking-off time and the flashing was left pulled back and the entire area exposed to damp penetration which in fact occurred and the area underneath was flooded. This demonstrates a serious lack of co-ordination between the gallery and the OPW. In fact there has been a consistent history of flooding in the gallery which simply must, in my estimation, be put right. It is also unfair to the employees of the National Gallery to have to operate in circumstances where, for example, in the Italian Room, they are expected to function in a situation where the temperature sometimes drops as low as 7 degrees in the winter. It is not just paintings; it is also the staff and the public. I would like to read into the record if I may——
The Senator has three minutes more — so that he may gauge what he wants.
Thank you for drawing my attention to this. I would like to read into the record some of the temperature fluctuations so that the Minister can comment upon them.
The measurements recorded at the National Gallery in Dublin recently have regularly and significantly exceeded both the 40 to 70 RH range and also the permissible degree of fluctation.
In the week ending December 19 last, the RH in Room 11 varied from 38 on Monday night to 60 on Thursday; in Room 30, from 78 on Wednesday to 44 on Friday; and in Room 37 it reached 70 on Wednesday and was at the optimum mark of 55 only once, on Saturday afternoon. Room 30 houses some of the most valuable pictures in the gallery's collection, including canvasses by Poussin, David, Fragonard, Degas and Daubigny.
The following week the humidity in Room 11 went from 44 on Thursday evening to 72 on Saturday afternoon, while a similar pattern was recorded in Room 30 and 37. In the week ending January 2, the RH in Room 11 varied between 64 on Monday, 46 on Tuesday, 58 on Wednesday, 46 on Thursday, 62 on Friday, 44 on Saturday. In Room 37 in the same week, it varied between 46 and 68 — in other words, absolutely impermissible.
According to gallery sources, the rapid and repeated taking up and shedding of water vapour by wood, and to a lesser extent canvas, causes the material to crack and loosens the adhesive holding the paint to the surface where a number of wood panels have been stuck together.
The pictures are very clearly being damaged. The National Gallery's director, Homan Potterton, who has had a most distinguished career, has encouraged the gallery in difficult circumstances to acquire further paintings. He has an unparalled history of publications behind him and is on record as saying that the condition of the National Gallery is a public disgrace. I would like to draw the Minister's attention also to the fact that less than 18 months ago during a first night, one of the big occasions in the National Gallery, when 500 people were assembled, ten minutes before the reception was due to begin, and mercifully, before they had gone up the stairs, every single electrical circuit in the public reception area, which was to be used, failed.
That is a worrying thought. If the electrical circuits are failing what would happen supposing there was a spark in the middle of the night, supposing there was a fire? We must take precautions in this regard. I regard it, not as a wasteful spending of money, but as essential in terms of generating tourist revenue. I put it in the same category as another subject I hope will be raised in this House, that is the scandalous condition of the beautiful and historic conservatories in the Botanic Gardens at Glasnevin by the distinguished Dublin ironsmith, Turner, which are also part of our heritage.
I believe these are the things that can encourage tourism into our country, I would like an assurance from the Minister that the paintings we have will be protected, that the courtesy will be extended to people, who have generously donated paintings in the past, of treating them properly and providing an adequate and suitable environment for them.
Is cúis áthais dom bheith ar ais arís anseo agus ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil leis na Seanadóirí go léir a ghlac páirt san díospóireacht thábhachtach seo.
I am pleased to have this opportunity to address the House regarding the National Gallery and the problems in the building. One of these problems in particular, the environmental conditions, has received a degree of media attention recently and has prompted Senator Norris to institute this Adjournment Debate. I am glad, too, to have the opportunity to outline to the House the proposals the Office of Public Works have to deal with the problems.
I want to assure Senator Norris and the House that I, my Department, the Taoiseach and the Government, have been fully aware of the situation in the National Gallery for some time. The difficulty is that we are only just a mere ten months in office, we operate in a very strict financial situation where there are major economic constraints and we must deal with every eventuality as it arises taking into account the financial implications and the economic constraints within which we operate.
Francis Fowke presented plans for a new National Gallery in 1859. he was involved with the construction of the South Kensington Museum, The Victoria and Albert, and he introduced some of the innovative methods of art gallery construction to the Irish National Gallery which opened in 1869. The National Gallery, as we know it today, was built in three phases, 1864, 1903 and 1968.
Shortly after the National Gallery was opened in 1869 the building was placed under the responsibility of the Office of Public Works. During 1890 the picture collections of the gallery had grown and a new extension designed by Sir Thomas Newenham Deane was completed in 1903, which doubled the existing space of the gallery. This included a portico with offices above it giving the present recognisable character to the exterior of the gallery. A further extension was added to the gallery in 1968. It contained facilities for restoration, conservation, offices, a new library and lecture theatre in addition to gallery space.
The Commissioners of Public Works have a statutory responsibility for the general maintenance of the National Gallery. I am satisfied that they have discharged that responsibility fully over the years. I understand the director has recently informed the news media that environmental conditions are causing serious concern about the condition of the paintings in the gallery collections. I wish to assure the House that this situation is not due to any lack of maintenance or any negligence on my Department's behalf.
The threat to the paintings arises from the effects of general atmospheric pollution as well as fluctuations in temperature and relative humidity outside the range that is considered acceptable. Ironically, the temperature and relative humidity problems are greatest in the 1968 extension. I am advised that this is because, unlike the areas constructed earlier, the 1968 wing has a limited form of air conditioning and, while the system was designed in accordance with the standard practice at the time, it no longer accords with modern standards despite a constant high standard of maintenance. The inherent problems in this system are its lack of refrigeration and a continuous heat source. The solution to the environmental problems in the National Gallery lies in the installation of a modern air conditioning system which will filter most of the pollutants from the atmosphere and which will control temperature and relative humidity within the acceptable range on a continuous basis.
There are other difficulties in the National Gallery apart from the environmental problems. Old electrical wiring, to which Senator Norris referred, is becoming unsafe and must be replaced. Materials used in construction, which were the best and most suitable available at the time, are now known to be unsuitable from a fire safety point of view and must be replaced with materials having greater fire resistant properties. Emergency escape routes in the gallery are no longer up to modern standards and must be augmented. There is a constant need to update the security system to protect the collections because of the times in which we live. There is also a demand for some development work within the gallery to rationalise the use of space, improve access for the disabled and possibly provide some additional exhibition area.
The Commissioners of Public Works have prepared a comprehensive scheme for the re-development of the National Gallery incorporating all of the works necessary to deal with the problems and requirements I have enumerated. The scheme has been developed in close consultation with the director of the gallery and his staff and has been agreed with the director. I want to assure the House that this scheme was prepared and developed before the matter was brought to public attention in the media. My Department are fully aware of the situation and have been constantly monitoring and working on improvements to the environment within the gallery and other improvements to which I have referred. Because of its scope and complexity and because the execution of the work would necessitate temporary closure of the working area it is proposed to execute the scheme in phases.
Planning for phase 1, which will concentrate mainly in the 1968 gallery where, as I already explained, the problems are most severe, is already at a very advanced stage.
The placing of a contract for phase 1 of the work is dependant upon the availability of funds in 1989, 1990 and 1991. This question is under consideration at present. The most I can say is that I am hopeful that the necessary funds will be available. Subject to the availability of funds it would be possible to have a contract for phase 1 placed by the end of this year. The work would take about two and a half years to complete. The Government have already made available funds from the national lottery to meet costs arising this year.
As I said at the outset I thank the Senator for raising the matter in the House. The Government, my Department and I are fully aware of the situation. I do not think we can accuse Senator Norris of being a doubting Thomas, even though he had to put his hands through the roof, to see for himself the situation. I want to assure the Senator that the leak, to which he refers, has been caused by the very severe storms that have raged over the weekend and that we will do our utmost to see that this situation is remedied. Thankfully, the storms have now abated.
The Government, and the Taoiseach in particular have done trojan work in the interests of the arts in our country. The Taoiseach has put a proposal before the Government and we are hopeful that with the funds the Government have made available from the national lottery that phase 1 of the restoration and remedial work can commence at the end of this year. Therafter, the other areas of the National Gallery will be dealt with consecutively once phase 1 is complete.
I hope we will be able to find the resources, even though it will cost a large amount of money, to remedy the situation in the National Gallery. The Government, subject to the constraints within which they must operate, will give it the necessary priority to ensure that the heritage of the past is preserved for future generations, and we in our time will do our utmost to alleviate the difficulties in the gallery and preserve it as a great centre of national culture and art.
The Seanad adjourned at 8.10 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 11 February 1988.