Alex White (Dublin South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am glad of this opportunity to raise this matter with the Minister of State. It arises on foot of the resignation from the board of the National Library of Professor Diarmaid Ferriter, as reported in this morning's newspapers. It is a matter of regret that somebody as genuinely publicly engaged as Professor Ferriter should choose this course of action. As a historian and member of the library's board, he has been involved in the important work on the centenary commemorations. The Minister of State is fully aware of its importance as well as being engaged in it. Amongst others, Professor Ferriter has been prominent in that area and will continue to be active. This may not be directly related to the issue I wish to raise, but it has some connection with it.

Professor Ferriter's resignation is regrettable and he has indicated that it is partly as a result of the funding issue, which is obviously frustrating. It has at least as much to do with what he described as the manner in which these issues appear to have been dealt with. I presume he has been quoted accurately in the newspapers. Professor Ferriter has referred to "offensive and disingenuous double-speak" as being a cause of concern to him. I do not know whether the Minister of State wishes to respond to that or if he has any knowledge about what Professor Ferriter is referring to.

Even allowing for some measure of hyperbole in that reference, however, it is of concern that Professor Ferriter felt it necessary to resign from the board of the National Library. There has been very little debate about the proposed merger of the National Library and the National Archives. It is worthy of debate, including in these Houses. Will the Minister indicate to the House what is the current state of play with regard to the proposed merger? We also need to debate the rationale for this merger because they are two separate and distinct institutions. That alone is not a reason for keeping them separate and it may be that there is a rationale for the merger. If one looks at the history of the National Library and the National Archives, however, it is clear that they have come from two distinct traditions and disciplines, and were established for different reasons.

Although I was very young in the mid-1980s - like the Acting Chairman, Deputy Durkan - I well remember the then Taoiseach, Dr. Garret FitzGerald, introducing the Bill to establish the National Archives. It was profoundly progressive legislation that was introduced by that Government, which has transformed the whole archival project in this country. The preservation of State records and other papers, as well as making them available periodically subject to different rules, was an immensely important achievement for this State going back 30 years. That work has been extremely important for us.

On the other hand, the National Library is an immensely important institution next door to us here in Kildare Street. It is held in worldwide respect and admiration for its connection to the works of many writers and scholars. It is a premier national cultural institution whose recent achievements include the Yeats exhibition and the National Photographic Archive.

However, the National Library and the National Archives are separate institutions, so I would like to know the rationale for merging them. We should debate that matter in this House. I note the Minister for Education and Skills has arrived in the Chamber. We had a debate yesterday on the amalgamation of particular agencies under his Department, and the rationale for those mergers was not simply based on cost. Everybody understands the necessity to make savings. It may not be the view of the Minister or his departmental officials, but simply because the National Archives and the National Library deal with documents is not, of itself, a reason to bang them together and produce a new institution.

There are different disciplines and requirements for holding archives than those the National Library must observe. The disciplines, requirements and parameters for making documents accessible are all different. We should debate precisely what is going on in this regard, including what the proposal is, where it currently stands and what the cost saving will actually be. Will there indeed be a saving in this proposed merger? The National Archives is under severe pressure of space to accommodate State records it is required to preserve. The National Library has its own pressures also, so will we end up saving anything?

We have two distinct cultural institutions, the identities of which should be maintained and promoted. If synergies can be achieved through storage or otherwise, let us do that. I remain to be convinced, however, as to the rationale or desirability of merging these two institutions.

Dinny McGinley (Donegal South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputy White for raising this matter. As he will be aware, in November 2011, the Government announced a number of amalgamations and mergers of bodies that come within the ambit of the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht. Details of these can be accessed on the website of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform at www.per.gov.ie.

The amalgamation and merger of these bodies, including the possible consolidation of boards, raises complex issues which the Department is currently examining. In that context, the views of the various interested parties are being noted and considered.

My Department has established a high level reform committee and is liaising with relevant bodies, including the National Archives, the Irish Manuscripts Commission and the National Library, in order to implement the Government's decisions in these matters as effectively and efficiently as possible. The Minister expects to revert to Government on progress made concerning this process by end-June of this year.

Professor Diarmaid Ferriter notified my colleague the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Deputy Jimmy Deenihan, by e-mail late last evening, of his intention to step down from the board of the National Library of Ireland.

I would like, first, to pay tribute to Professor Ferriter on my own behalf and on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Deenihan, for his public service not simply on the board of the National Library, but also his continuing service on the National Archives Advisory Council as well as the Government's Advisory Group on Centenary Commemorations. Professor Ferriter's remarks may be partly born out of frustration at the necessary reductions in programme funding with which all public bodies, including the National Library and our other cultural institutions, have been challenged. Unfortunately, the Government has no option in this regard and the economic realities pertaining to the public funding available simply have to be faced and overcome while exhorting our national cultural institutions to maintain the best level of public service possible. It is worth recalling, lest we lose sight of recent history, that the Government inherited an economy in serious trouble and an unsustainable Exchequer deficit. I, like other Ministers, had no alternative to the redistribution of reduced allocations to all State and cultural institutions. Day to day funding for the National Library was cut by 5.4% to €6.62 million in 2012. That is almost on a par with its 2004 allocation at the height of the economic good times. In contrast, the previous Government cut the day to day allocation to the National Library by 28% in the three years to 2011. It, too, planned to amalgamate the National Library and the National Archives.

The funding reductions in the cultural institutions are just one aspect of change that must be tackled. The Government announced its public service reform plan last November, some aspects of which relate to the National Library. Engagement and examination has been ongoing in regard to proposed reforms. The Minister met the board of the National Library earlier this year and officials of the Department are meeting jointly with the directors of the National Library and the National Archives next week to follow up on their previous bilateral consultations with each of the institutions affected. It is regrettable that Professor Ferriter was unable to attend the meeting between the Minister, Deputy Deenihan, and the National Library board or any of many official engagements by the Minister at the National Library since his appointment. The Minister was, and is always, prepared to discuss the concerns of board members in regard to any national cultural institutions, including in particular the National Library.

The engagement on the reform agenda in the Department is continuing. Last week, the Minister, Deputy Deenihan, met the chairs of the national cultural institutions collectively, including the chair of the National Library, and there was an extensive discussion on all aspects of the public service reform plan. At that meeting, the Minister, Deputy Deenihan, confirmed that he would revert to the Government on options for the reform proposals for the National Library, the National Archives and the National Museum, inter alia. It is at that juncture that final decisions will be made in regard to rationalisations, restructuring and shared services. The chairs proposed a joint paper on reform and the Minister is currently awaiting that. In the meantime, the Minister has exhorted the institutions to continue to deliver the quality public and cultural service for which they are widely recognised.

We live in times unprecedented in decades in this country. Change is unavoidable. The Minister's objective in addressing change in the sectoral areas, for which he has responsibility, is to effect it in a manner which strengthens the continuation of public service delivery by national cultural institutions, through shared back office services and necessary structural reform. In an era of diminished Exchequer capacity, that is a very serious challenge. It is a matter of regret to all of us that Professor Ferriter cannot join in addressing that challenge.

Alex White (Dublin South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State for his response. I am sure both institutions will respond well to the exhortation that they would continue to deliver the quality public service that they always have delivered. One need only go into the National Library, which is next door to the Houses, and see the amazing and valuable work that is done there for the State and the people of Ireland in terms of facilitating scholars and members of the public. It is an immensely important public institution. Equally, great work is done in the National Archives. One need only look at the digitisation of the census of 1901 and 1911 and the production of the really high quality material that has been produced for and made available to the public. The people who work in those institutions will not be found wanting in their efforts. Equally, we, as politicians and legislators, and the Government must play our part and we owe it not only to the institutions and the people who work there, but to the people of Ireland to do that. We often say what is at issue is about the people of Ireland when we make points in the Dáil. This is crucially about our history, heritage and future access by scholars and citizens to vital assets and resources. It is important that the discussions in which the Minister is engaging will be shared with the public - I am sure he will do that - and that we will have a public discussion on these issues. That is vitally important. The rationale for decisions, a cost-benefit analysis, ascertaining if there is a saving in this respect, and a regulatory impact assessment must be addressed. I have doubts about whether there will be a cost saving here give the pressures for space and everything else these institutions have.

I very much doubt that Professor Ferriter would make this decision lightly, that he would lightly say that he was exposed to what he called "offensive and disingenuous double-speak". I do not know the source of what caused him to say that but that is a statement he made and I do not believe he would have made it lightly. Nor do I believe that similar remarks, which I do not have to hand, were made lightly by the recently retired director of the National Museum, Pat Wallace, when he retired and spoke of his frustration not so much about decisions that were being made, but about other matters. People understand and are working with the necessity to make cuts in terms of funding but the issue is how we deal with people who have an expertise. They should not be placed on a pedestal and treated like gods but they should be involved in this assessment, work and in this debate. If anything has happened in terms of how this particular person was treated which has caused him to pull himself out of the picture in regard to this, that is extremely regrettable and an effort should be made to repair that rupture, if it is possible, because this is an extremely important area for all of us.

Dinny McGinley (Donegal South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I acknowledge the points raised by the Deputy and they will be brought to the attention of the Minister as soon as possible. On a personal note, I have a positive experience of having been in the National Library. The Deputy mentioned that scholars go there. Poor scholars and students used to go there and there was many a night I spent in the reading room there studying whatever I was doing at the time.

An ongoing process involving wide consultation is taking place. Papers are being prepared. I have no doubt that any dealings I or any other Minister will have with individuals will be dealt in a very sensitive manner. Many of these people have given their services and expertise, often freely, to the State, which is appreciated, and sensitivity will be employed in this regard.