Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 6 April 2004
140 Mr. English asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism if he has received a report from the chairperson of the Arts Council regarding the scrapping of the Arts Plan 2002-2006, which was included in the Programme for Government 2002-2007; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10664/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe Arts Plan 2002-2006 was prepared by the Arts Council and the Government had no part in its formulation. The council sought Government adoption of the plan that required funding of €314 million over the period of the plan. The Government was happy to endorse the general objectives of the plan, namely, to make an arts career a realistic ambition for excellent and innovative artists; to broaden and enhance audiences for the arts; to raise standards in arts leadership and management; to broaden and enrich participation in the arts; to extend the international impact and success of Irish arts and artists; and to work with others to help bring the arts closer to local communities.
However, our financial system, based on an annual Estimates cycle cannot accommodate the multi-annual financial commitment for which the arts plan called. For the Government's part, the phasing of the plan and the funding that could be provided in any given year would have to be addressed through the normal annual Estimates campaigns. There could never be any guarantee of funding being provided to meet the specific annual targets included in the plan by the Arts Council. Government endorsement of the broad objectives of the plan cannot restrict or constrain the council from changing or setting aside any part of its own plan.
In 2002 the then Minister and now Minister of State, Deputy de Valera, fully endorsed the plan and gave the impression that funding would be available. Does the Minister think the arts plan was scrapped because of the Government's neglect to provide sufficient funding? The Arts Council hoped to be allocated €53 million in 2003, but received only €44 million, which is approximately 83% of what was expected. In 2004 the plan was to be allocated €61 million but received only €53 million, which is 85% of what was expected. It will not be possible to implement the plan. Questions were asked at the council meetings about how the plan could be supported when it was not working. It was not working due to a lack of funding. The Government failed in that regard. The arts plan was scrapped because of the Government's neglect. I would like to hear the Minister's comments on that. Would the director still be in place if the plan had been given proper support and if it had been funded by the Government? Did we let her down?
As Deputy English will be aware, Governments do not operate on a multi-annual Estimates basis.
That was not the impression given at the time.
Every Department must in each given year make its case for funding and then the Department and the Minister concerned must cut its cloth in accordance with the measure. The funding for the Arts Council in 2004 was substantially increased over 2003. The increase was 19% and the argument could be made that, if the Arts Council had decided to proceed with the arts plan, it would have had a sufficiency of funding to proceed with the portion which was appropriate to the year 2004. However, the views of various experts outside the Arts Council are of little consequence.
The Arts Council is charged under the new Arts Act with the administration of the arts on an independent basis. It is not my function nor the function of any expert to tell the Arts Council how it should or should not proceed. It is not possible for me or anyone else to tell the Arts Council who or what it should or should not fund. In the same way, the Arts Council makes a decision about its own arts plan. It is independent in the exercise of that function. It made a decision that it would proceed in a different direction. When the Arts Act was discussed in the Houses of the Oireachtas, the Opposition made much play of the fact that it was necessary, in so far as that was possible, to maintain the independence of the Arts Council. That is a position to which I subscribe and that is the situation.
The arts plan is about policy-making. The Minister said there was an increase in funding in 2004 over 2003. The funding in 2003 was less than that in 2002, which was a general election year. I wondered what was the reason for that. The impression was given that proper funding would be provided, but that did not happen. The Minister said it does not have any consequences, but that is not the case. There was a plan, but now there is none. How will funding be allocated this year and the following year?
The Deputy should be brief.
We do not know what criteria will apply for funding. That is not good for the arts sector which had a plan and a future. It does not know what will happen now. I await the Minister's response.
The Arts Council is more than capable of carrying out its own functions without looking for advice from me and it has not sought any from me. The Arts Council is independent in the exercise of its function and there are a number of good reasons for that, not least the question as to whether there could or would be political interference in the arts world. Some people would regard that as undesirable. We sought to avoid that, in so far as it was reasonably possible, when framing the Arts Act 2003. I have every confidence in the Arts Council to frame policy and to bring forward solid suggestions to advance the cause of the arts and artists in this country. My confidence in the Arts Council is 100%. I have no doubt it will serve the cause well and I have no reason to believe it will not do so.
That concludes Priority Questions. We will now take other questions. I remind the House that supplementary questions and answers are subject to a maximum of one minute each.
