Minister to intervene in row over gallery director appointment

The Minister for Arts, Culture, Gaeltacht and the Islands is set to intervene in a dispute over the way in which a new director…

The Minister for Arts, Culture, Gaeltacht and the Islands is set to intervene in a dispute over the way in which a new director has been appointed for the Irish Museum of Modern Art.

Two members of the IMMA board resigned yesterday over its decision on Monday night to invite Dr Brian Kennedy to take over the directorship, which has been vacant since last April when the then director, Mr Declan McGonagle, resigned in controversial circumstances. The proposal to appoint Dr Kennedy came from the board's chairwoman, Ms Marie Donnelly. Ms Donnelly declined to comment on the resignations, or the appointment of Dr Kennedy, yesterday.

Mr Niall Crowley, CEO of the Equality Authority, and Ms Terry Prone, a director of Carr Communications, both resigned, alleging that the integrity of the appointment process was flawed.

A spokesman for the Minister told The Irish Times that she was "naturally concerned that two board members should tender their resignations. She will be discussing with them their reasons for resigning and afterwards will be contacting the chairwoman." In his letter of resignation Mr Crowley points out that the interview board did not select a candidate and recommended that the board of IMMA widen the search for an appropriate candidate while keeping one of those interviewed "involved for future consideration".

READ MORE

The process was ignored "in what became a headlong rush to appoint the candidate preferred by the chairperson," he said.

Dr Kennedy is at present director of the National Gallery of Australia and was previously assistant director of the National Gallery of Ireland. His tenure in Australia has been marked by controversy concerning both his staffing policies and some of his exhibition decisions.

Ms Prone made it clear in her letter that she had no bias against Dr Kennedy, but felt that his appointment was based on "improper and inequitable procedures". Mr Crowley also made it clear he was objecting to the manner in which the decision was made, citing in particular the fact that the board was asked to make it without any evidence of his suitability being put forward, and without any access to the concerns of the interview board that decided against appointing him.