Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)

I move:

That Dáil Éireann:

— endorsing the positive contribution that a thriving arts and culture sector makes to Irish society as a whole;

— acknowledging the value of our cultural heritage;

— recognising the impact on the economy and jobs of our wider arts sector, contributing €4.7 billion to the economy and directly and indirectly supporting 79,000 jobs;

— noting that in the period 2005 to 2010 alone more than €1.1 billion was invested in the sector;

— highlighting that these funds facilitated a transformation in our national, regional and community arts and culture infrastructure, performance venues and film and television production capacity;

— recognising the need to protect and promote our cultural heritage as we approach the centenary of the 1916 Rising;

— accepting that there should be a consultation process with the national cultural institutions before any changes take place in their governance structure as a result of the public service reform plan;

requests that a cost-benefit analysis of proposed changes to the sector be published;

agrees that independence and autonomy of this sector is crucial, that political interference should be avoided and that the "arm's length" principle should remain;

accepts the necessity for an independent recruitment process for the CEO vacancies in some of the national cultural institutions and that these positions should be filled without delay;

acknowledges the detrimental effects the proposed mergers of cultural and arts institutions would have on our cultural infrastructure and heritage; and

rejects:

— the proposed merger of the Irish Museum of Modern Art, the Crawford Art Gallery and the National Gallery of Ireland;

— the proposed merger of the National Archives and the Irish Manuscripts Commission; and

— the proposed merger of the National Library and the National Museum.

I wish to share time with Deputy Robert Troy.

This motion is important because it recognises the positive contribution a thriving arts and cultural sector makes to society as a whole. It is important to state for the record that the previous Government indicated its intention to produce a Bill on amalgamation. However, it consulted the directors of the National Archives and the National Library and the chairman of the Irish Manuscripts Commission and asked for their observations. It is important to put on the record that the general scheme of the Bill was not approved when Fianna Fáil left office and no changes were agreed by Government. That said, I acknowledge that much of the momentum for this emanated from the bord snip nua report. In my view, the policy as articulated was wrong and I set that on the record of the House.

We have consulted widely with the arts sector and have observed and reflected on the public debate that has arisen recently. Following that process, our Front Bench introduces this motion in a genuine way that is designed to try to change tack and course before it is too late. This motion reflects our belief that it would be irresponsible not to publish a cost-benefit analysis of the proposed changes before proceeding. Having listened to and researched the views of stakeholders and experts in the field, we believe the independence and autonomy of this sector is crucial and must be maintained.

The outstanding and valuable role that arts and culture play in our national life and the sector's potential to develop further is threatened by what I believe to be a short-sighted approach by the Government. This Government has failed miserably to appreciate or harness adequately the potential of the arts and creative industries as a powerful tool towards economic renewal. Furthermore, by its shoddy treatment of and broken promises to this sector, this Government has not grasped that the arts are part of our national identity and go to the core of our Irishness. This sector deserves our respect and encouragement and does not deserve to be short-changed or kept in the dark.

The Government should think very carefully about moving in an arbitrary and cynical manner in terms of merging long-standing and valuable cultural institutions as part of a quick fix or counter-productive strategy to make savings. We on this side of the House will oppose that. The motion gives the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Deputy Deenihan, the opportunity to state unequivocally he will not support any plans to merge cultural institutions as this would undermine their independence and damage our cultural heritage. I urge the Minister to do so even if that means finding the political courage to say "hands off", because independence in this sector is crucial.

I have met representatives from the sector. They realise reform is necessary. They will co-operate with reform, but the red line is independence. Ireland's arts and culture are not an optional extra or an expendable luxury but are intrinsic to our make-up as a nation. Our cultural heritage and artistic talent are recognised and appreciated all over the world. This gives Ireland a unique and valuable brand that provides us with a real competitive advantage in a globalised world. In the middle of a world recession, we should be leveraging this great national resource, not pulling the rug from under it.

On this side of the House we will listen very closely to the Minister's speech, as will countless arts and culture organisations. No rationale or detailed explanation has been offered as to what benefit merging these cultural institutions will bring. Even more perturbing is the Government's failure to engage in any meaningful discussion with the cultural sector about its agenda. Proposals that threaten the very edifice of our national cultural architecture cannot credibly be imposed by Government without taking on board the views of stakeholders. The Minister needs to listen and engage. He must also reflect on the long-term damage that will be done by removing the autonomy of boards which have a sole mandate to protect cultural institutions, discarding years of built-up expertise and putting the governance of cultural institutions at the behest of a Department which has numerous other priorities.

This action will certainly make it easier to impose a severe cutbacks regime on our cultural institutions. It will facilitate those who cannot see beyond "fumbl[ing] in a greasy till/And add[ing] the halfpence to the pence". The reality, however, is that this approach can only cost the State revenue rather than generating it in the way our arts and cultural sector has been doing all along.

We all recognise the need for efficiencies in a time of economic recession. The cultural institutions are willing to play their part and have expressed a willingness to collaborate and work together where cost savings can be shared. The last thing we need, however, is shotgun amalgamations which are not grounded in detailed consideration and strategic planning or even respectful consultation. I look forward to hearing how the Minister intends to square the public service reform plan published on 17 November 2011 by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, and take in conjunction the Government's statement on State agency rationalisation and the pre-election promises of Fine Gael. The campaign run by Fine Gael in 2011 was the most dishonest election campaign the country has ever seen. We know now about the broken promises on Roscommon hospital, the "not another red cent" for the banks, the pledges given to students, the breast care centre in Sligo and the unit for the elderly in Lifford. It is a list that continues to grow. Another stand-out deception to add to this shameful catalogue is Fine Gael's pre-election promise that cultural discussion will be driven up the agenda of Government and that the arm's length principle will be respected. In his remarks, the Minister, Deputy Deenihan, might have the good grace to admit the cynicism and shallowness of those pledges.

Fine Gael's pledge that cultural discussion will be driven up the agenda of Government has been replaced by the sad reality of obfuscation and a deficit of dialogue. It is worth pointing out to the Minister the recent remarks by Senator Fiach Mac Conghail, the Taoiseach's nominee to the Seanad, and the director of the Abbey Theatre, our national theatre. Speaking in the Upper House on 24 May, he stated:

There is a crisis in the way culture and our living heritage is administered by the Government. This is not about money but about the lack of vision and public consultation in the way our national cultural institutions are being treated in a profoundly secretive and cavalier way.

I also look forward to hearing the views of the Labour Party Members of this House. Senator Bacik has strongly defended the arm's length principle, stating on 7 June:

I think it is important that the Boards and Directors of all the national cultural institutions, such as the National Museum and the National Library, should remain at arms' length from Government, in keeping with the National Cultural Institutions Act 1997, introduced by former Arts Minister, Michael D. Higgins. In this way we will ensure the maintenance of their reputation, both national and international.

It is good to see the Labour Party Senators showing some independence of thinking in recent times. On this motion, however, nobody should be surprised to see Labour Party Deputies follow more slavishly the Tánaiste's instructions to prop up Fine Gael, irrespective of which party principles are abandoned. That has been an all too regular pattern in this Dáil. This motion is a test of the political courage of the Labour Party Deputies. Will they support Senator Bacik's defence of the arm's length principle, something that has been agreed by all for many years and by successive generations in the House?

The Government's, in particular Fine Gael's, lack of empathy with or understanding of our arts and culture are in contrast to the policy of our party. Our policy is that Ireland's unique culture has long played a key role in defining us as a people and promoting a positive view of Irishness around the world. We do not need and will not support forced marriages of convenience for our cultural institutions. A new generation of Irish people are making their mark among the most renowned and respected artists in the world and we believe they deserve to be encouraged and supported. From our writers and musicians to our architects and animators, Irish people continue to punch far above their weight on the international stage. This reflects well on our nation. Fianna Fáil believes we should be particularly conscious of the potential of the sector to provide opportunities for self expression and participation which can help to lift people's spirits in a time of economic difficulty. We also appreciate the economic potential of the arts and creative industries and their role in supporting enterprise and innovation in the economy as a whole. This is reflected in the motion which highlights the important fact the wider arts sector contributes €4.7 billion to the national economy and directly supports 79,000 jobs.

This is not merely rhetoric from our party's perspective. Investment in arts, culture and the film sector in the period 2005 to 2010 came to more than €1.1 billion. In that time there was an unprecedented investment in national and regional arts and cultural infrastructure, performance venues and film and television production capacities. It was money well spent. Visitor numbers to the national cultural institutions grew by more than 75% and participation rates in the cultural and arts activities have increased.

This motion reflects our belief that it would be irresponsible not to publish a cost-benefit analysis of the proposed changes before proceeding. Some of these mergers were announced in budget 2009 but having listened to, researched and reflected on the views of stakeholders and experts in the field, I reiterate our belief that the independence and autonomy of the sector is crucial and must be maintained. It has also been pointed out by the national campaign for the arts that experience from Canada and New Zealand indicates it costs millions to resource such mergers. We should try to learn from the mistakes of others. The views of Professor Diarmaid Ferriter also merit respect and I respect him as a historian and a person of principle. He has written compelling articles, particularly in The Irish Times on 29 May, on the different functions carried out by the National Library and the National Archives. I will not go through the detail of what he wrote but he identified the fundamentally different role and function of the National Library, on the one hand, which is the great custodian of our literary and estate manuscript collections, and the National Archives, the focus of which is solely on archives, most of them the files of Government Departments and so on. The Minister should engage with the country's historians before proceeding with any decision to merge the National Library, the National Archives and Irish Manuscripts Commission. The views of Professor Ferriter are worth reflecting on. In my view, that was a clarion call to shout "stop" and for people to take stock, review and reflect.

Put simply, as this motion acknowledges, there would be a detrimental effect on our cultural infrastructure if the proposed mergers of these cultural arts institutions were to go ahead. Senator Mac Conghail who spoke about this recently in the Seanad talked about "a tsunami of desecration and potential undermining of the whole cultural infrastructure of our nation". He is another person for whom I have respect, given his role in the arts and culture in recent years. We should all listen carefully to what people of that calibre and reputation have to say. I urge the Minister to accept the motion.

See this speech in context