WHEN Des O'Malley forecast that Michael D Higgins would "go mad in office", he wasn't talking about megalomania. But if the frustration associated with life in government has got to the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht at times - as the former Progressive Democrats (PD) leader predicted back in 1992 - it has not deflected him from delivering on a steady programme of work.
One such achievement is the new National Cultural Institutions Bill, `which is due to reach its final stage in the Seanad at the end of this month. Described by the Minister as "one of the most significant legislative initiatives, in cultural terms" since the foundation of this State, it has attracted very little debate outside the Oireachtas, beyond Opposition accusations that it is another attempt to centralise power and to fix up jobs before the election for a few loyal pals.
Even the prospect of a pint in the National Museum and National Library on foot of the drink licence provisions in the Bill - doesn't ignite or excite. "Worthy, but that's about it," is how one senior arts administrator describes the legislation. And wishes it was more adventurous. And wishes, for once, that the Minister had actually "gone a bit mad".
Published in late September of last year, the Bill is part of a promised package of heritage legislation and is concerned primarily with the aforementioned museum and library. Under it statutory boards will be set up for both national institutions to manage the collections. A register of significant cultural objects will also be drawn up, and it provides for a State system of indemnity for foreign exhibitions and valuable cultural items on long-term loan to major collecting institutions.
The new boards are afforded considerable autonomy, according to the minister's department. Both will be able to raise or borrow money. The National Museum's board will comprise a chairperson and between 13 to 15 ordinary members, all to be appointed by the Minister. The historical role of the Royal Dublin Society (RDS) and the Royal Irish Academy -(RIA) in the museum's development is acknowledged; one of the selected members will be chosen from two nominations made by the RDS, and a further two will be picked from four nominations made by the RIA. Other groups and societies can submit suggested names, but the Minister is not obliged to take any or all of these nominations.
The museum's director will be answerable to the board, which will be granted powers formerly vested in the arts minister - such as licensing alterations to archaeological objects. The board will be obliged to consult with the Heritage Council on drawing up guidelines for lending material within the Republic and Northern Ireland.
Also under the Bill, the Government will be empowered to curb or stop exports which would be considered a serious loss, and to acquire them if necessary for the State by compulsory purchase. Existing rules governing the export of paintings and old manuscripts will also be strengthened, and expanded to include the decorative arts.
THE act will have significant implications - moneywise - for the cash-strapped National Library. It extends the copyright deposit requirement on books to other classes of library material, such as CD ROMs, film, audio and cassette material. It also changes the definition of "publisher" to cover "published in Ireland", rather than "first published in Ireland", and extends the application to material which is predominantly of Irish interest - and is imported and distributed here.
This does have "resource implications", an Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht department spokeswoman acknowledges. But the staffing and resource issues associated with the library and highlighted repeatedly by the former director, Pat Donlon "needed to be addressed anyway", the spokeswoman says. If anything, this provision may release some funding, as the library will be entitled to request certain additional materials free of charge, she says.
The department prefers to high-light other positive aspects, such as changes to the governance of
Marsh's Library and exemption from local authority rates for certain institutions listed in the Bill. The new boards will transform a "civil service structure" of administration into "semi-state" the department points out.
The reaction so far ? "Like some remnant of the failed Soviet Union, the Labour Party is setting about centralising all power at Government level," Mairin Quill of the PDs said in the Dail last December during the second stage debate. "Above all, they concentrate power in ministerial hands," she said.
Objecting in particular to the method of appointing to boards, she said that such political control and authority should now be being weakened, not strengthened. The Bill would also increase the "bureaucracy" associated with export licences by extending it to household goods - a "gross interference" with the right to have and to sell private property, in her view. During committee stage, Ms Quill also raised the issue of staffing in the museum; on the eve of the move to Collins Barracks, no permanent keepers had been appointed to any of the four divisions of Irish Antiquities, Art and Industry, Natural History and Folk Life. The new boards would be handed a "poisoned chalice" in running institutions which were "almost derelict due to staff deficiencies and modern staff and management structures", she said.
The Fianna Fail arts, culture and heritage spokeswoman, Sile de Valera, has expressed suspicion about the Minister's apparent haste. "I wonder is it because the Minister wants to appoint these new boards for the National Library and National Museum before he leaves office ?" she has said. It has certainly afforded him considerable scope for "political patronage", in her view; and "fancy board structures" would not disguise the lack of resources given to the National Library.
Both spokeswomen have highlighted disadvantages in the cultural objects record and export restrictions. "Is it an unpractical wish list?" de Valera asked during the committee stage debate, when the Minister did concede certain amendments. Was the Minister concentrating resources on an area over which he had no control?
"There is a difference between that which one owns and that which constitutes one's heritage, the Minister replied. He referred to "scholarly inclusiveness" in terms of a theme or period, and said that it would be "ludicrous" to leave something out - "simply because one didn't own it". On export restrictions, which Mairin Quill - believed could become a "quagmire", the Minister emphasised that he was anxious to balance property rights and heritage.
THE institution's directors are already on record as giving the Bill a broad welcome, while Donlon, who stepped down earlier this year, has commented that the move from legislation to implementation would require money and more personnel. Semi-independent status would result in additional accounting, personnel and human resource functions handled previously by the department, she said. Pat Wallace, director of the National Museum, said he was "delighted", while John Hunt, acting director the Hunt Museum in Limerick said the legislation represented a "great day" for those bodies concerned with care of the nation's heritage.
The fact that it is going through at all is regarded as significant, given the dearth of such legislation since the State's foundation. The board structure will make the existing administration more accountable. However, some informed observers - who prefer not to make public statements - refer to a "lost opportunity", and say that the Bill's title is a complete misnomer. Much of the wording concerns two institutions only. What about the National Gallery, Irish Museum of Modern Art (IMMA), the National Concert Hall (NCH), Abbey Theatre et al?
The department points out that both IMMA and the NCH are covered by the Companies Act. The Abbey, in which the major shares are held by the Minister for Finance, has a company status similar to the two aforementioned bodies. The National Archive is covered under 1986 legislation.
No, it is not just "fixing" legislation, the department says, while acknowledging that the title may be a mite misleading.
On the potential for politicisation, in terms of appointments, much will depend on the individual in office. One arts administrator says that it is unfair to accuse this Minister of overt interference. "If anything, he has done the opposite. He has not abused his power, but that doesn't mean that a successor would not also."
Some reservations have also been voiced about the implications for the Heritage Council. Its existence is acknowledged; but as the Opposition deputies have argued, resources may also become an issue here. The Minister is expected to consult with the Heritage Council on including items in the register of cultural objects.
Under EU law, there is already a system for retrieving "national treasure". This term is not, therefore, used in this legislation which prefers to use the term, "significant cultural objects". The list will include the obvious - the Book of Kells, the Ardagh Chalice, for instance. It isn't intended to be catch-all, according to the department. And there is absolutely no truth whatsoever in the rumour that Mr Higgins might be listed himself.
What's in the Bill:
Key points of the National Cultural Institutions Bill, 1996
. Establishment of statutory boards for the National Museum and National Library
. Register of "significant cultural objects"
. State system of indemnity for foreign exhibitions and valuable cultural items on long-term loan to major State collecting institutions
. Amendment and extension of existing provisions for export licensing of paintings and old manuscripts, extended also to decorative arts
. Application of certain provisions to the National Gallery
. Extension of copyright deposit requirements for the National Library to cover new technology
. Changes to governance of Marsh's Library
. Local authority rates exemption for certain listed national cultural institutions
