Professor John O'Hagan:

I apologise as I do not speak Irish but I have three grandchildren going to an all-Irish school so we are making up for my deficiencies.

The report did not look at the allocation in any particular area, it was trying to establish was whether decision making in the Arts Council was transparent and based on very clear criteria, and it is. There is a very clear process in place. It is the same in Trinity College when we allocate money; some people will be disappointed but what matters is that the process is transparent and based on fair criteria and I think it is.

The Senator is quite right, but I think chapter 8 in the report went way beyond commodifying the arts. That is always a danger. That is why we put a lot of emphasis on information other than the quantitative data because then it becomes about bums on seats, as the Senator said. We have moved on to other societal benefits that are very hard to measure. Bums on seats or the economic benefit is only third on our list. I will give one example. If, let us say, the Abbey Theatre is going to have far more innovative plays, especially in the Peacock part of it, normally for that type of play there will be very few people but that is the nature of experimental work, so there is this conflict between having lots of people attending or whether one wants the theatre to be a test bed for new works and new actors. The Senator is quite right but I feel the report did not over-commodify the arts by adding that last chapter.