Home
Top1
Home Committees Membership Publications Legislation Chronology Commission Tour Search
bottom1

Northern Ireland Assembly

Tuesday 11 June 2002 (continued)

Ms Morrice:

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I have several remarks to make on the motions. However, at this point I am able to speak only to the first motion.

Mr Deputy Speaker:

You can speak to the first two motions.

Ms Morrice:

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank the Chairperson of the Committee on Procedures for outsmarting me by going out of his way to allay the fears that he probably expected me to raise, especially the potential to extend the hard-fought-for family-friendly hours, of which the Assembly, as a modern legislature, can rightly be proud. The Assembly agreed that there should be family-friendly hours, at least on a Monday.

I am pleased that the Chairperson has assured us that an extension beyond 6.00 pm will be used only occasionally, when there is a delay or some unscheduled business. The Women's Coalition has always accepted that, under exceptional circumstances, time could, and should, be allowed after 6.00 pm. However, the most important issue is the hard-fought-for principle that the Assembly's family-friendly hours should not be broken or disturbed in any way. Having listened to the Chairperson's opening remarks, I believe that that is still the case.

At present, we start at 12 noon on a Monday, so rather than an extension beyond 6.00 pm, why can we not start business earlier? When we first sat, and when I was involved in the setting of the Standing Orders in the original Committee, the agreement was a 10.30 am start on Mondays. Travelling distances, party meetings, et cetera on a Monday morning suggested that that time should slip. Again, we are prepared to accept that. However, why slip to 12 noon? Why not have 11.00 am as the starting time, so that that extra hour between 6.00 pm and 7.00 pm could be made up in the morning? The family-friendly hours of the Assembly would, therefore, be preserved. The principle here is that Members have families that they should, could and would like to - whether they are men or women - go home to in the evenings in order to see their children before they go to bed. I am glad that the Chairperson of the Committee on Procedures has said that there is the potential for starting business earlier on a Monday morning and that only on rare occasions will the principle of the 6.00 pm finishing time be breached.

11.45 am

Mr C Murphy:

The Committee has made the position clear, and I give the credit for outsmarting Ms Morrice to the Committee Clerks rather than to me, as they prepare the wording on these occasions.

Family-friendly hours are important. They are not only an issue for the Women's Coalition. They are an issue for all Members. I have a young family. I am sure that many other Members in the Chamber also have young families and are, therefore, keen to continue with family-friendly hours. However, 6.00 pm might mean family-friendly hours for someone living in north Down or in south Belfast. For Mr Gerry McHugh, Mr Tommy Gallagher, Mr Derek Hussey or Mr Pat Doherty, for example, a 6.00 pm finish does not necessarily mean particularly family-friendly hours. By the time those people get home it is closer to 9.00 pm. Family-friendly hours benefit those who live fairly near to the Assembly, but they are not so much of a benefit to those who live far away.

The Committee has always been supportive of the principle of family-friendly hours. It is clear in the proposal that the ability to extend the time beyond 6.00 pm should be used in exceptional circumstances only, when the scheduled business has been delayed or interrupted and it is necessary to continue until it is finished or until 7.00 pm, whichever is the earlier. Certainly, that is the intention of the proposal.

Previously, the plenary did start at 10.30 am on Monday mornings. However, parties were under pressure because they had no time during the week to carry out internal party business, given that Committee meetings are held on Wednesdays and Thursdays and, indeed, on Fridays, when the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development meets. It is difficult for larger parties to meet at a time when there is no other pressing Assembly business. A trial period was introduced in which the plenary began on Mondays at 12 noon. At the end of the trial period, the Committee on Procedures proposed to make the 12 noon start permanent, with the exception that the Business Committee can decide - as it did on only one occasion - that the plenary should start earlier. At that time, no party objected to business starting at 12 noon. It appears, therefore, that those arrangements are satisfactory, and the Committee on Procedures is still satisfied with them.

Of course, Standing Orders are open to change, and any Member can propose an amendment if he wishes. Standing Orders are constantly under review. Based on experience, the Committee is satisfied that the changes that it has proposed today will allow for the conduct of business on Mondays. The Committee is also content that the changes will facilitate the extension of business and that there is no need to start the plenary before 12 noon, other than in exceptional circumstances when the Business Committee so decides.

Mr Deputy Speaker:

I remind the House that because the motion relates to amendments to Standing Orders, the vote requires cross-community support.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved (with cross-community support):

Delete Standing Order 10 and insert new Standing Order:

"10. SITTINGS AND ADJOURNMENTS OF THE ASSEMBLY

(1) The categories of business to be conducted in the Assembly shall consist of the following:

(a) Assembly Business

(b) Executive Committee Business

(c) Committee Business

(d) Questions

(e) Private Members' Business

(f) Private Business

(g) Adjournment Debates

(h) Party Business.

(2) Subject to the authority of the Business Committee to determine the time for commencement of business in plenary session the sittings of the Assembly shall be arranged as follows:

Monday 12.00 midday - 6.00 pm

Tuesday 10.30 am - 6.00 pm

The allocation of time for business within these sittings shall be determined by the Business Committee, except that

(a) on each Monday on which there is a sitting there shall be a period for Questions commencing at 2.30 pm and finishing at 4.00 pm;

(b) at the end of each sitting up to one hour may be set aside for an Adjournment Debate;

(c) any private notice questions shall normally be asked immediately before the Adjournment Debate.

(3) Where business on the Order Paper has not been disposed of by 6.00 pm on Monday, the Speaker may allow business to continue until 7.00 pm or until the outstanding business is completed, whichever is earlier. Consideration of business on the Order Paper not concluded by 7.00 pm shall be postponed until such a time as the Business Committee determines.

(4) If at 7.00 pm a division is in progress, or a question is being put and a division or a vote in the chamber results, adjournment of the Assembly shall be deferred until after the declaration of the result of the division or vote in the chamber.

(5) If Tuesday's business cannot be completed in the allocated time, the sitting may be extended into the evening, into Wednesday, or both.

(6) Additional sittings may be arranged by the Business Committee according to the exigencies of the Assembly.

(7) Where statements made under Standing Order 18 impinge upon the time bands specified in this Standing Order the Speaker shall take action under Standing Order 18(5).

(8) An adjournment of the Assembly shall mean an adjournment until the next sitting day unless the Assembly, on a motion made by a Member of the Executive Committee after notice, has ordered an adjournment to some other definite date.

(9) A Session of the Assembly shall be that period from the commencement of business following the Summer Recess until the end of the subsequent Summer Recess. The Business Committee shall determine the dates for recess."

Resolved (with cross-community support):

In Standing Order 18(5) line 7 delete "Standing Order 10(3)" and insert "Standing Order 10(5)".

The Chairperson of the Committee on Procedures (Mr C Murphy):

I beg to move:

In Standing Order 54(1) after paragraph (l) insert:

"(m) Those functions relating to the Planning Appeals Commission and the Water Appeals Commission transferred to the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister by The Departments (Transfer of Functions) Order (Northern Ireland) 2001."

I say at the outset that the motion to amend Standing Orders has been moved at the request of the Committee of the Centre, which has asked for an extension to be made to its remit to allow it to examine certain functions relating to the Planning Appeals Commission and to the Water Appeals Commission.

That is because under the Departments (Transfer of Functions) Order (Northern Ireland) 2001, administrative responsibilities for the Planning Appeals Commission and the Water Appeals Commission transferred from the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure, the Department for Regional Development, the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Department of the Environment to the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister.

The responsibilities transferred were administrative in nature, centring on the appointment of commissioners, the determination of their remuneration and allowances, the appointment of persons to assist the commissions in the performance of their functions and to determine their remuneration and allowances and the remuneration and allowances for any assessor appointed by the chief commissioner to assist at hearings, the making of rules for regulating proceedings before the commission and the prescription of fees in respect of appeal applications.

I shall not explain the rationale for the transfer, as it is not within the remit of the Committee on Procedures. It has already been the subject of consideration by the relevant Statutory Committees. However, the Committee understands that the thrust behind the Order was to reinforce the independence of the Planning Appeals Commission and the Water Appeals Commission. The Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister has recently initiated a quinquennial review of the Planning Appeals Commission and the Water Appeals Commission.

The Committee of the Centre wishes to be involved in that review. To do so, an amendment to Standing Orders is required, because Standing Order 54, which sets out the remit of the Committee of the Centre, is very specific. Unlike Statutory Committees, whose remit is to advise and assist their respective Ministers in the formulation of policy, the remit of the Committee of the Centre is limited, as it can scrutinise only those functions specified in Standing Orders or any other matter determined by the Assembly.

The net effect is that each time the Committee of the Centre wishes to scrutinise a new role of the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, an addition to the list of functions in Standing Order 54 is required; hence this motion to amend Standing Order 54. The proposed wording of the amendment reflects the legal advice that the Committee received to describe the transferred functions.

Ms Morrice:

The Chairperson has again responded to my query to a certain extent. However, I would appreciate further information, as the Planning Appeals Commission and the Water Appeals Commission are to be the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister's responsibility.

The Chairperson said that he should not necessarily comment on that. He said that it was to do with reinforcing the independence of those bodies, which we certainly welcome. Will the Chairperson elaborate on the exact reason for the transfer? If not, will he tell us where we can find it?

Mr C Murphy:

The reason for the transfer was not a matter that the Committee on Procedures considered; it was a matter for the Statutory Committees that were involved in the transfer and for the relevant Ministers and Departments. The Departments (Transfer of Functions) Order (Northern Ireland) 2001 came into force last year. I am sure that the reasoning behind that legislation is laid out in the explanatory notes. The Statutory Committees and the Committee of the Centre have considered the matter. The Committee on Procedures's function was simply to table a motion to amend Standing Orders to allow the Committee of the Centre, whose remit is firmly fixed in Standing Orders, to consider matters relating either to the Water Appeals Commission or to the Planning Appeals Commission.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved (with cross-community support):

In Standing Order 54(1) after paragraph (l) insert:

"(m) Those functions relating to the Planning Appeals Commission and the Water Appeals Commission transferred to the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister by The Departments (Transfer of Functions) Order (Northern Ireland) 2001."

The Chairperson of the Committee on Procedures (Mr C Murphy):

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle.

I beg to move:

Insert new Standing Order:

"75. OFFICIAL REPORT (Hansard)

(1) A substantially verbatim report of the proceedings at all sittings of the Assembly and Committee meetings that form part of the legislative process or at which evidence that will contribute to a report by a Committee is being taken shall be prepared and published. The report shall be known as the Official Report (Hansard) and shall be a record of the proceedings in the language spoken.

(2) A revised edition of the Official Report (Hansard) for all Assembly sittings and Committee meetings which form part of the legislative process shall be prepared in bound volume form at such times as the Speaker shall determine. Such bound volumes shall also contain written questions and answers for the period covered.

(3) Editorial control of the Official Report (Hansard) shall rest ultimately with the Speaker but shall be exercised on his behalf by the Editor of Debates."

The Official Report, or Hansard as it is usually called, is the report of proceedings in plenary. It is a substantially verbatim report, and it performs a vital function in showing the Assembly's commitment to openness, accountability and accessibility. In addition, Hansard offers a unique record for posterity that will help future generations paint a picture of how we lived today and how and why we made decisions.

Standing Orders do not contain official provision for the production and publication of the Official Report. That is at odds with the practice in the Scottish Parliament, the Dáil and the Welsh Assembly. It could leave the Assembly open to the accusation that it is not being seen to give Hansard the standing that it merits. More importantly, it could also be argued that the omission is contrary to the intention of schedule 6 to the Northern Ireland Act 1998, which states that

"The standing orders shall include provision for reporting the proceedings of the Assembly and for publishing the reports."

Standing Order 70 makes provision for the printing of the minutes of proceedings, which are the official record of proceedings. Those form the record of decisions made and should not be confused with Hansard, which has a separate, independent role. Moreover, Standing Order 70 is concerned with the Office of the Clerk and with the records of the Assembly. Hansard is a separate entity, with editorial control resting with the Editor, who exercises that responsibility on behalf of the Speaker. It is important that that independence is reflected in a separate Standing Order, rather than by being incorporated it into an existing Standing Order, such as Standing Order 70.

Although the issue has caused no problems to date, the new Standing Order makes formal provision for Hansard and removes any uncertainty as to its role. It gives Hansard the important place that it merits in the operation of the Assembly. I commend the motion to the Assembly.

Mr Fee:

I want to talk specifically about the role of the Editor of Debates and the role of the Speaker and about paragraph (3) of the proposed new Standing Order 75, which states that

"Editorial control of the Official Report (Hansard) shall rest ultimately with the Speaker but shall be exercised on his behalf by the Editor of Debates."

I understand from what the Chairperson of the Committee on Procedures has said that we are following the precedent set by Westminster, the Scottish Parliament, the Dáil and the like. On enquiry this morning, however, I have not been able to find any Standing Order of this nature that pertains or applies in Westminster, the Scottish Parliament, the Dáil or in any other Western democracy. There are certainly conventions, custom and practice, and proper procedures that have been built up over centuries, but they do not vest editorial control of the Official Report in the Speaker of any of those Parliaments.

To be fair to the Editor of Debates in this House and to the Speaker, both of whom have provided exemplary performances in recent times, we should not confuse the authority vested in those two positions. From the outset, all of us agree that Hansard has to be a true and accurate account of what happens here. It is a crucially important historical record. Following recent judgements in the High Court in England, it is also a very important legal record from which courts may draw inference. However, to rest the editorial control with the Speaker, who may have to adjudicate on a challenge to the official record, is to confuse his role with that of the Editor of Debates.

It is the role of the Editor of Debates to try to ensure that a true and accurate account of the sittings of this Assembly is recorded and published at an appropriate time. All of us in this place know that the Hansard staff have been wonderful in meeting the deadlines that we have set for them, both before and after devolution. The former Editor of Debates did a wonderful job when he was here, and his successor has followed in his footsteps.

However, to divest the Editor of Debates of the responsibility for editorial control will cause the House substantial problems.

12.00

An old journalistic maxim is that the editor of a newspaper will publish such prejudices of the owner as the prejudices of the advertisers will allow. If we allow this new Standing Order, it will open the House to that accusation. If we consider again the procedures and precedences in other places, we will find that the independence of the Speaker guarantees a full and accurate Official Report and that the independence of the Editor maintains the Speaker's role and the accuracy and veracity of the Official Report.

I ask the Committee on Procedures to reconsider the new Standing Order and to implement procedures whereby the Assembly Commission, the Clerk and the Speaker's Office are compelled to ensure that the Official Report (Hansard) is properly published. I beg the Committee not to remove the editorial independence of the Editor of Debates.

Mr B Hutchinson:

The Member for Newry and Armagh, Mr Fee, voiced my concerns eloquently.

Mr C Murphy:

This Member for Newry and Armagh will try to answer Mr Hutchinson's concerns eloquently also.

All new Standing Orders or changes to Standing Orders brought to the Assembly by the Committee on Procedures are checked by the Assembly's legal adviser, and the Speaker is consulted. The Speaker's view has been sought on this Standing Order. I assure Mr Fee and Mr Hutchinson that the Committee would be happy to consider all queries about Standing Orders. If a Member is not content with the Committee's view, he or she is free to table an amendment.

This Standing Order confirms current practice. In Westminster, editorial control rests with the Speaker, and that arrangement has not caused the problems that John Fee anticipates occurring here. In Westminster, the Speaker is responsible for the Official Report (Hansard) and delegates editorial responsibility to the Editor of Debates. The Speaker, as required by Erskine May and, perhaps, Westminster Standing Orders, appoints the Westminster Editor of Debates.

The Committee on Procedures checks amendments to Standing Orders and proposed Standing Orders with the Assembly's legal adviser. If Members think that that arrangement raises a problem, the Committee would be happy to re-examine it. The proposed Standing Order is, however, legally competent and reflects current practice here and in other legislatures.

Question put.

The Assembly divided: Ayes 45; Noes 14.

Ayes

Nationalist

Bairbre de Brún, Pat Doherty, John Kelly, Barry McElduff, Gerry McHugh, Mitchel McLaughlin, Pat McNamee, Francie Molloy, Conor Murphy, Mick Murphy, Mary Nelis, Dara O'Hagan, Sue Ramsey.

Unionist

Ian Adamson, Roy Beggs, Paul Berry, Esmond Birnie, Mervyn Carrick, Wilson Clyde, Fred Cobain, Robert Coulter, Duncan Shipley Dalton, Ivan Davis, Nigel Dodds, Boyd Douglas, Sam Foster, Oliver Gibson, William Hay, David Hilditch, Danny Kennedy, Robert McCartney, Michael McGimpsey, Maurice Morrow, Ian Paisley Jnr, Edwin Poots, Ken Robinson, Mark Robinson, Peter Robinson, Denis Watson, Peter Weir, Jim Wells, Jim Wilson.

Other

David Ford, Kieran McCarthy, Sean Neeson.

Noes

Nationalist

P J Bradley, Annie Courtney, John Dallat, Arthur Doherty, John Fee, Tommy Gallagher, Joe Hendron, Patricia Lewsley, Alasdair McDonnell, Monica McWilliams, Eamonn ONeill, John Tierney.

Unionist

Billy Hutchinson, Jane Morrice.

Total Votes 59 Total Ayes 45 ( 76·3%)
Nationalist Votes 25 Nationalist Ayes 13 ( 52·0%)
Unionist Votes 31 Unionist Ayes 29 ( 93·5%)

Question accordingly agreed to.

Resolved (with cross-community support):

Insert new Standing Order:

"75. OFFICIAL REPORT (Hansard)

(1) A substantially verbatim report of the proceedings at all sittings of the Assembly and Committee meetings that form part of the legislative process or at which evidence that will contribute to a report by a Committee is being taken shall be prepared and published. The report shall be known as the Official Report (Hansard) and shall be a record of the proceedings in the language spoken.

(2) A revised edition of the Official Report (Hansard) for all Assembly sittings and Committee meetings which form part of the legislative process shall be prepared in bound volume form at such times as the Speaker shall determine. Such bound volumes shall also contain written questions and answers for the period covered.

(3) Editorial control of the Official Report (Hansard) shall rest ultimately with the Speaker but shall be exercised on his behalf by the Editor of Debates."

12.15 pm

Report of the Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure:
 Cultural Tourism and the Arts

Mr Deputy Speaker:

Order. Members will leave the Chamber quietly.

The Chairperson of the Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure (Mr ONeill):

I beg to move

That this Assembly approves the Report of the Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure on its Inquiry into Cultural Tourism and the Arts and calls on the Executive to ensure that the Committee's recommendations are evaluated and implemented at the earliest opportunity.

The Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure launched this important and substantive inquiry on 25 January 2001. Its terms of reference were: to determine the status of the existing relationship between the cultural and tourist sectors; to identify areas of the arts with the potential to be incorporated into a cultural tourist product that could be actively promoted by the tourist industry; to identify the support required by cultural activities, including languages, to enable that heritage to be maintained and enhanced; and to report to the Assembly, making recommendations to the Department and/or others on action to strengthen the link between culture and tourism. The Committee also agreed that the inquiry should take particular account of the diversity and unique nature of the cultural tourism product that Northern Ireland can offer its visitors.

I am not exaggerating when I say that the Committee was astounded to receive 82 written submissions from a wide variety of groups and individuals with an interest in every conceivable aspect of culture, heritage and the arts.

These ranged from the North of Ireland Bands' Association to the Ulster Historical Foundation; from the Hilden Brewery Company to the Lyric Theatre; from the University of Ulster to the Somme Association; and from the National Trust to Gael-Linn. We held 39 oral evidence sessions with key organisations representing the main sectoral interests. In addition, the Committee had the opportunity to draw on the experience gained during fact-finding visits to Boston, Paris and Barcelona, which were taken in association with the inquiry. We were fortunate to be able to engage with key public and private sector organisations in those cities.

At the outset, the Committee accepted that Northern Ireland's negative image, combined with the failure to promote and market the region enthusiastically, resulted in lost years of tourist growth compared to other parts of the United Kingdom and Ireland. We certainly cannot promise good weather and warm seas in Northern Ireland, but today's traveller is increasingly seeking more than sun-and-sand destinations. People are living longer, remain more affluent in their retirement, and have a growing interest in visiting places where they can learn about different cultures.

Most people come to Northern Ireland to visit friends and relatives, and although this important market has sustained the industry in hard times, we now have a tremendous opportunity to develop new markets. The growth of a top-quality cultural tourism sector, which will have the potential to attract the general tourist and the high added-value niche market, forms the core of that opportunity. Noting that tourism's contribution to Northern Ireland's gross domestic product (GDP) is less than a third of that in the Republic of Ireland, Scotland and Wales is a stark illustration of how far we have to go to catch up. In fact, it is 1·8 % compared to 6% in the other regions. Also, we cannot rely, at least in the short term, on the North American market as a visitor source. If Northern Ireland's culture and heritage are to remain key attractions, it is essential that targeting customers outside the long-haul market is given priority. The Republic of Ireland, Great Britain and continental Europe must be regarded as critically important.

Nevertheless, the Committee believes the scope for cultural tourism to be immense. Key niche products such as roots tourism and local studies, education and linguistics, literary and other arts-based summer schools, festivals, theatre, music and dance, as well as the many facets of our built and natural heritage, all hold considerable potential for growing a vibrant cultural tourism product. Northern Ireland has a wealth of cultural and heritage attractions that are key elements of the experience that we can offer to the visitor. Over 440 official heritage sites have been identified in recent research by the Academy for Irish Cultural Heritage at the University of Ulster. There are also many unofficial sites.

Culture and arts enrich our lives, build confidence and inspire hope in communities. They must not be seen as elitist pastimes. The Committee also believes that Northern Ireland's approach to the arts and culture as products must embrace the principles of sustainability; long-term viability; limited negative impact; local involvement; and positive social and economic benefits for all communities, groups and individuals involved.

Our inquiry also brought home to us the importance of industrial heritage tourism and its potential, largely untapped in Northern Ireland. That can help to create employment and investment in industrial areas where manufacturing industry has declined. It can also restore pride in communities and improve people's perceptions of their localities. Many local authorities, particularly in industrial towns in the English Midlands, are incorporating industrial heritage tourism into their tourist development programmes.

By comparison, in Northern Ireland, we have largely neglected our industrial heritage and allowed many of its best examples to be destroyed. We now need to commit ourselves to recognising the importance of preserving and reusing it for sound economic reasons, as well as for the education and appreciation of our community and visitors.

Linked to industrial tourism is the story of the Titanic. Several written submissions expressed interest in the development of a maritime museum in the Belfast shipyard. The story of the Titanic has been told across the world, but Northern Ireland has failed to capitalise on the fact that the ship was designed, built and launched in Belfast.

The plans for the Titanic are currently held in the Ulster Folk and Transport Museum at Cultra. The original drafting rooms, Thompson Dock and the keel blocks on which the Titanic rested during its fitting-out still exist. Furthermore, the SS Nomadic, the last remaining White Star Line tender, which was used to ferry passengers to and from the Titanic, is currently located on the River Seine in Paris. The acquisition of that vessel could be a focal point for a Titanic attraction.

It is also evident that we have not developed the arts festival and summer school sector to the same extent as the Republic. While we have a few major festivals that have proven sustainable over the years, there is enormous scope for further developments. We must also consider how to fill the gaps that exist during the summer months with arts- and culture-based activities and attractions for the community and tourists.

We must do more to persuade the promoters of world- class and major international events that Northern Ireland is a good location. However, we must be in a position to back that up with hard cash.

Northern Ireland lags significantly behind England and Scotland as a location for world-class and major international events. It is even further behind the Republic of Ireland. The region's negative image is clearly a major factor for performers, promoters and sponsors.

The Northern Ireland Events Company's budget for this year is just over £1 million. Two years ago, the Government of the Republic allocated an extra £2·5 million a year for three years to bring in extra events. That was in addition to the financial support already provided for four major golf tournaments and a range of other cultural, arts and sports events. For example, approximately £7 million has been allocated to the 2005 Ryder Cup from the public purse, and the return to the Irish Exchequer on this investment alone is expected to be between £50 million and £100 million.

That illustrates clearly the need for that kind of investment. We must persuade promoters that Northern Ireland has good facilities and is a safe, sensible location. We also need to persuade ourselves that we can host major events.

12.30 pm

The devolved Administrations in Scotland and Wales have allocated significant budgets to attract big events. With competition becoming more intense, the key to success is to enable the Northern Ireland Events Company to give a financial commitment sufficiently far ahead in the bidding process.

In the year that we have submitted our bid for European Capital of Culture 2008, it is astonishing that Belfast is the only major city in the United Kingdom without a dedicated public art gallery. The Ulster Museum has a unique collection of Irish art and a collection of British contemporary art that was described by 'The Times' as the finest outside London. Irish art is hugely popular, particularly in America, but the museum cannot display its full collection because it does not have enough space. The development of a museum of creative arts could be, and should be, the key priority for the Department, and the Museums and Galleries of Northern Ireland (MAGNI). That would provide a showcase for the prestigious collection held by the Ulster Museum and enable exhibitions of world-class collections to be staged.

It is worth noting that the Monet, Renoir and the Impressionist Landscape exhibit, which was on show in the new Millennium Wing of the National Gallery of Ireland between January and April this year, attracted an average of 2,000 paying visitors each day, a large proportion of whom would have had a considerable economic impact on the city with overnight or weekend stays.

With 60 million people claiming to have Irish ancestry, there is a worldwide market for roots tourism. However, investment in, and the marketing of, genealogy have been largely neglected. We heard compelling evidence about the impact that a move away from the use of townland names would have on communities and potential roots tourism.

Other issues considered included: the promotion of our linguistic diversity as a unique asset to the tourism industry; promoting and showcasing our tradition of quality band music through hosting international competitions; the cultivation of traditional song and music; providing support for local professional opera; developing dance; reviewing the opportunities which exist to support the independent professional theatre sector; the potential to develop and co-ordinate cultural trails and tours; and the importance of film and television in forging positive images.

The Committee's report sets out 56 recommendations, and their implementation will be essential to improving the quality, cohesiveness and competitiveness of our cultural tourism.

Only two weeks ago Committee Colleagues and I attended a conference on cultural tourism in County Cork. The theme of the conference was 'A National Asset Awaiting Sensitive Development'. Delegates heard that tourism is undoubtedly Ireland's greatest area of growth, with ever-increasing numbers of tourists interested in culture and tradition. Those tourists are prepared to go out of their way to remote places to find authentic, living culture, much of which is hidden among the hills and valleys and has lived on for generations without disturbance. That is every bit as true in areas such as the Glens of Antrim, the Sperrins or Rathlin Island as it is in Cork, Kerry or Clare.

Our hidden locations need to be developed alongside the better known cultural centres to ensure a wider spread of attractions and, consequently, more tourist spending throughout rural and urban areas. The challenge will be to ensure that authentic culture survives commercialism.

One of the speakers at the conference expressed the view that the extent to which a country's culture is known elsewhere is a defining characteristic of any people. That is a thought-providing statement. He encapsulated the importance of culture for us all by saying that

"If you were to meet a man coming along the road who couldn't tell you where he was coming from, it would be a fair bet that he wouldn't be able to say where he was going either".

We all have a stake in the enhancement and development of Northern Ireland's cultural tourism product, and we must take an interest in it.

I wish to express a number of acknowledgements on behalf of the Committee. We were encouraged by the level of involvement in the inquiry. We thank all those who sent in written submissions and those whose appearance before the Committee to give oral evidence provided us with much vital food for thought.

I wish to record the Committee's appreciation of the assistance given by Boston College and the British Council in facilitating our invaluable study visits to Boston, Paris and Barcelona. As Chairperson of the Committee, I pay tribute to my Committee Colleagues, who overcame many traumas to get to where we are and worked exceedingly hard to bring the report to publication. I pay an equally glowing tribute to the Committee staff, the Committee Clerk and its specialist adviser.

Cultural tourism is a broad area, and like the Committee's report on inland fisheries, our recommendations involve several Ministers and their Departments. It is a prime example of an area in which joined-up government is essential and can deliver real benefits for the entire community. My Committee Colleagues will further develop the issues emerging from the report, and I look forward to an interesting debate. I commend the report to the Assembly.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>

top2