Mr. Colm Croffy:

The sports capital funding model sometimes puts communities competing against each other, whereby we must all have a lawnmower, a track around our playing fields and outside lights. There are nine sets of outside lights in my town. If they were all on at the same time the planes would not land in Knock but in my town. That is the downside of the sports capital funding. It is not that it is not welcome; it is. Perhaps the decade of centenaries would be a very good model to look at. Local authorities, the County and City Management Association, the Department and the heritage officers connived and combined – and I use these two words advisedly – in the structures of bureaucracy to deliver at ground zero level meaningful commemorations in a sensitive and embracing way that did not leave anyone feeling left out or excluded. We know there were some issues but perhaps that is a model that can be used.

In its recommendations the committee needs to separate the animation and activation of local community arts activity from the capital package in which it occurs. The capital element of funding for where the activity takes place should be sequestered, with a line budget direct to the Department. It should not be hindered by Arts Council standing policies and otherwise, which are all very good and address the needs of the creative and professional artist and professional arts production. The capital element of funding should be provided in a way that allows for the ecology of what the groups here today are discussing. That would be very useful. The animation and activation elements, of which we all require more, should be funded through a ring-fenced scheme under the local authorities.