Labhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire . I welcome the Minister to the House. I compliment the Independent Senators who put forward this motion for consideration. These Senators have a very fine record in this House in bringing forward issues that might otherwise not get the airing which they deserve.

The issue this evening is certainly one of those. I also appreciate the Minister's comments and I think his tone is quite right. There are areas where we must develop partnership, and this is one of them. It is easy to become frustrated and angry about issues today, but we cannot afford to go down that road. We must find ways and means of filling a gap that has occurred through no one's fault. The Minister is also right in selecting the words in the motion because there are different meanings to fund-raising, private giving and philanthropy. They may all have different meanings but at the end of the day, we are talking about people who have money and are prepared to share it for whatever cause. In that way, they can feel confident that the money they are giving will be used in the right manner.

We have often seen cases where something might develop that would be negative in that area, so people can be cautious about giving money. We do not have much of that in Ireland and the Charities Act certainly fills the vacuum in that regard. When it is fully implemented, I have no doubt there will be full policing of, and full confidence in, that area.

It has been pointed out how good Ireland is at providing funding, with 89% of people saying they give money to charity on some occasions, as against 58% in the UK and 40% in Germany. That is quite a record in itself. The major part of that 89% is given in the case of emergencies that may occur either at home or abroad. It is to be welcomed and obviously it will continue.

We are talking about stabilising funding, particularly in the arts and culture sector. We should start by realising the economic importance of the arts and culture in the country, and the amount of money our cultural heritage donates to the coffers. It is something between ¤4 billion and ¤5 billion. Some 79,000 people are engaged in that sector and we are talking about big figures. It is not a matter of just getting something that will sustain, expand and enhance the sector, it is also to ensure the money accruing to the State from that area will continue and will be underpinned. It is important to take that into consideration.

I fully accept we are living in recessionary times and, as a result, everybody will take some type of hit. We must be careful, however, that the hit is not so great it will in some way undermine what has been achieved. The arts and culture comprise one of the great areas of which we can be proud, and tourism is another. We can feel proud to have something that is exclusively our own and in which the world wants to participate. That is what we will be looking at in a competitive world in future. It was sunshine for a while and then it was something else, but most discerning travellers want an experience they do not have at home. Cultural heritage is one such experience. I can still recall a survey undertaken by the former Bord Fáilte on what people wanted to do when they came to Ireland, and the first three out of six referred to cultural heritage. I am sure that tendency has not changed and, if anything, it has improved in the meantime.

We must come up with a cohesive approach to this matter, involving players in the field, the Government and those from whom we are expecting to get funding. There is a lot of finance in the arts and culture sector provided that we can sell the concept in a way that does not undermine vital creativity and that leaves tangible results. We should all work together to produce something that will attract people's attention. Senator Daly quoted 0.7% for the top 500, but I think it is lower than that. As it is so low there must be an opportunity of embracing it.

What do people in the corporate sector want when they give money? In the main, I think they want acknowledgement, which we are pretty good at giving to them. There is also a major section of people who donate because they have done well themselves and want to improve the quality of life. They see this as a mechanism for doing so and the same applies in private giving.

We can do it as individual organisations but that is not powerful enough. We are really talking about preparing the field before sowing the seed to have a great harvest. That is the way we must approach this matter because the way we prepare that field is important. Incidentally, we might only get one bite of the cherry because these types of things tend to be seized upon. When a report is published, it will last for so long, but after the sell-by date, it disappears quickly. That is why I think there is a degree of urgency involved.

It would be well worthwhile if, in some way, we could have an extension of the forum and give the main players - be they six, nine or 12 - an opportunity. I am not talking about a quango, expenses or staff. All we are doing here today is setting out a stall, but what one puts into that stall is important. I will cite a small example that may be of interest. Capital funding in the arts and culture is virtually disappearing at the moment. We need only look at the figures. Where we might have had tens of millions we are now down to ¤2 million or ¤3 million. The Minister might consider a suggestion, however. There are billions of euro on deposit in Ireland at the present time. In the banks one gains nothing, apart from trouble. My suggestion might be an echo of charitable status. If a private individual wants to give to an organisation that requires capital funding for a project, the organisation could give 1.5% or 2% but no DIRT tax would be payable on it. That means, first and foremost, that the banks would lose the money for the time being. The individual donor will gain more than in a bank. The important thing from a capital viewpoint, however, is that an organisation could benefit. In other words, instead of borrowing at 4% or 5% it could borrow at half that rate. I will not go into the details now, however.

If we take this matter forward and have some type of assembly or forum - private rather than public - there will be a great opportunity to get down to the real nitty-gritty of putting the infrastructure together that will sell the concept to which we are all committed. We all believe the potential is there. The tone of the Minister's address and the other contributions to the debate mark a good starting point. We should take it forward from here.