COMMITTEE FOR CULTURE, ARTS AND LEISURE

OFFICIAL REPORT

(Hansard)

Inquiry into the Development of a
Museums Policy for Northern Ireland

16 October 2008

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:

Mr Barry McElduff (Chairperson)
Mr David McNarry (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Dominic Bradley
Mr Francie Brolly
Mr Kieran McCarthy
Mr Raymond McCartney
Mr Nelson McCausland
Mr Pat Ramsey
Mr Ken Robinson
Mr Jim Shannon

Witnesses:

Mr John Briggs ) Armagh City and District Council
Ms Sharon O’Gorman )

Ms Helen Perry ) Causeway Museums Service
Mrs Evelyne Robinson )

Mr Chris Bailey ) Northern Ireland Museums Council
Ms Briony Crozier )

The Chairperson (Mr McElduff):

We now move to the Committee’s inquiry into a museums policy. The Committee Clerk will brief members on the additional information that was requested from Research Services. That material is contained in members’ packs.

The Committee Clerk:

The additional information provides some clarity on previous research papers. First, the paper clarifies that the figures that we received on local council per capita spend on culture do not include museums, because the figures for museums are not statistically robust enough to be included.

Secondly, it clarifies the definition of an “out-of-state visitor” as someone who does not reside in Northern Ireland. Thirdly, it clarifies that 78% of visitors to museums in Northern Ireland are residents of Northern Ireland. Lastly, it provides some visitor numbers in respect of museums in the Republic of Ireland.

The Chairperson:

Thank you for that. I refer members to information on the cultural forum and the heritage subgroup in relation to the local museum and heritage review. That information was requested at last week’s meeting, and it has been provided by the Department. The heritage subgroup was charged with bringing forward recommendations in respect of the local museum and heritage review, including the development of a museums and heritage policy. However, it has not met since January 2007. We will question the Minister on that matter next week. I refer members to the outline plan/timetable in their packs.

The Committee Clerk:

The outline plan has been updated since last week. It now includes the key points from the evidence that we heard last week, and it will be updated accordingly after today’s meeting.

The Chairperson:

The suggested questions for witnesses are included in members’ packs. The inquiry is being covered by Hansard, so please ensure that all mobile phones are switched off.

Mr McCarthy:

Shall we ask our questions in the usual way?

The Chairperson:

Yes, Kieran. You usually ask the first question.

We must declare any interests at every meeting. Does anyone have any interests to declare? I am a member of Omagh District Council.

Mr McCarthy:

I am a member of Ards Borough Council.

Mr Shannon:

I am a member of Ards Borough Council.

Mr McCausland:

I am a member of Belfast City Council.

Mr P Ramsey:

I am a member of Derry City Council.

Mr McCartney:

I am a member of the Bloody Sunday Trust.

The Chairperson:

We will now welcome representatives from Armagh City and District Council. Their written submission is contained in members’ packs.

I welcome Sharon O’Gorman, strategic director of regeneration and development; and John Briggs, clerk and chief executive of Armagh City and District Council. Please make a brief opening statement. Members will then have an opportunity to ask questions.

Mr John Briggs ( Armagh City and District Council):

Thank you, Chairman, for giving us the opportunity to give evidence. As you are aware, we thought at first that it was inappropriate for us to give evidence to the Committee because we do not have hands-on experience of running a museum. We are grateful to the Committee for asking us to reconsider that view and come here, because we found it useful to research the links between the tourism product and museums in Armagh.

Tourism is very important for Armagh. Our tourism product is a combination of niche facilities, including museums. One could say that Armagh is almost one big museum. We have the Mall and the Georgian buildings that surround it; the Armagh County Museum; the two cathedrals; the Robinson Library, and the Cardinal Ó Fiaich Memorial Library. The people of Armagh are very attached to the Regimental Museum of the Royal Irish Fusiliers, and they are disappointed that moves are afoot to relocate it. The Armagh Observatory and the Armagh Planetarium, which fall under the Department’s remit, also have museum facilities. The Armagh area can also boast the Navan Fort archaeological site and other historic buildings such as the 400-year-old Royal School, Armagh; Milford House Museum; and Richhill Castle.

The council recently unveiled a tourism strategy that is based on Armagh being a standout destination in itself, but which combines those niche facilities. Many of those facilities are not under the council’s control, however, and decisions are sometimes made to move facilities away or downgrade them. Funding for some of those facilities can occasionally be reduced because of efficiencies made by the organisations that run them. That has the potential to weaken Armagh’s tourist product and make it more difficult for the council to attract tourists.

The council’s overall strategy is to develop a small and sustainable city based on tourism, public-sector administration and small-business development. We wish to place on record our disappointment with the Bain Review on the location of public-sector jobs. Although it is concerned with decentralising jobs and moving them out of Belfast, it did not include Armagh in its recommendations. That has the potential to cause jobs to leak out of Armagh, most of which are based in heritage buildings such as those along the Mall and at St Luke’s Hospital. If that happens, the tourism potential of the area will be damaged. In light of that, we put forward a strong argument wherever we go that Armagh should be considered as a special case. We are aware, however, that that is not a matter for the Committee.

I do not wish to say much more at this point. Sharon O’Gorman will answer members’ questions in more detail, but I will return later to the issue of the Regimental Museum of the Royal Irish Fusiliers.

Mr McCarthy:

Thank you for your presentation. Has the lack of a museums policy had an impact on your work?

Ms Sharon O’Gorman ( Armagh City and District Council):

Whether or not the lack of a policy has had a detrimental effect, the council acknowledges the role of Museums and Galleries of Northern Ireland (MAGNI) in helping five museums in the Armagh area to develop their collections and promote public awareness. Notwithstanding MAGNI’s role, there are several other independent local museums that sit outside MAGNI’s framework, such as the Regimental Museum of the Royal Irish Fusiliers. The Northern Ireland Museums Council (NIMC) plays a valuable role in supporting those local museums, but the lack of an overall policy has been detrimental, in that there is fragmentation of efforts and a lack of co-ordination among museums at local, national and independent levels. That has led to a situation in which some museums are isolated from the national structures, and may be precluded from some funding opportunities.

The council would support the development of a formal policy for the entire museum sector. It should be driven by a bottom-up approach, involving all stakeholders. There would be a large number of benefits deriving from such a policy, particularly in that it would offer an opportunity to provide a more cohesive and co-ordinated framework for the museums sector. The policy should shape a clear vision and strategic objectives for the sector, and could involve measures such as ensuring that museums are fit for purpose in the future, examining what investments they may require, and examining opportunities for collaborative working within the museum sector. The policy could also examine the sharing of resources, skills and expertise. Having a policy in place would also be useful from the perspective of benchmarking and continuous improvement.

The creation of a new policy would place cultural development at the heart of tourism and wider development. We recognise that museums have an important role to play, outside the brief of DCAL. They are important for integrating with, and adding value to, tourism, and that is the responsibility of DETI. They can also promote learning and social development, which in turn promotes community cohesion, diversity, and the shared-future agenda.

In summary, our view is that the absence of a policy has had a detrimental effect, and there are clearly a number of tangible benefits in developing a policy for the sector.

Mr Shannon:

Thank you for your presentation. The Committee has heard representations from Newry and Mourne District Council — which will be one of your partners under the new RPA structures — and from the Royal Irish Regiment Museums Group, which expressed a slightly different opinion from yours. With that in mind, will you explain why you feel that Armagh City and District Council will not be able to promote itself? I mean in general, and not just on the jobs issue that you mentioned earlier, John.

I wonder how any strategy that the Committee develops will be able to encompass some of your viewpoints as well as the viewpoints of others which, in this case, seem to be at odds with yours. The representatives of the military museums group said that they would prefer a centralised approach, centred in two locations — or perhaps one — maybe in the east of the Province.

Do you feel that the smaller number of larger council bodies envisaged in the RPA would be an advantage in respect of advertising and promotion, or do you feel that the council can adequately advertise and promote as things stand? I am conscious that I am asking a lot of questions at once, but I have another one concerning the planetarium and the observatory. The Committee is aware of the problems relating to the financing of those institutions. It is important that they be funded, because of their uniqueness, but what is your opinion in relation to those matters?

Mr Briggs:

I will answer some of those questions, and Sharon may interject to answer the others. Those are very relevant questions, Mr Shannon; thank you very much. In relation to the regimental museum, I am aware that we may be at odds with some other organisations that hold a different opinion. As I said in my introduction, Armagh’s tourism product is constituted of several niche facilities — you used the word “uniqueness” when referring to the observatory and planetarium. The regimental museum in Armagh is really unique — it has a very strong collection. I was recently looking through the papers of John Creaney QC, who passed away recently. He was one of the trustees of the regimental museum, and very supportive of it staying in Armagh.

He prepared a statement on the links between the Royal Irish Fusiliers Regimental Museum and the city of Armagh. In the statement, he said that the regimental depot Gough Barracks, named after its founder, was established more than 200 years ago, and that, until 1922, recruitment for the Fusiliers took place in Counties Armagh, Monaghan, Cavan, and Louth. Indeed, Craigavon Borough Council, as well as Cavan County Council, Louth Town Council, and Monaghan County Council have debated that issue and decided to support the campaign to keep the museum in Armagh.

Mr Creaney’s statement proceeds to give more detail about the training administration centres in Armagh and indicates that the regimental chapel lies within St Patrick’s Cathedral. He indicates that no closer or more affectionate and proud relationship exists than that between the regiment and the city of Armagh.

That particular museum has a real link with Armagh; its story centres on Armagh, but extends to Cavan, Louth, and Monaghan. The councils unanimously support our endeavours to keep the museum in Armagh.

I am aware of the proposals to develop a museum elsewhere, possibly at the Ulster Folk and Transport Museum in Cultra. The regimental museum should stay in Armagh, as should its collection. We do not mind if a collection is developed elsewhere; however, a strong link exists between the regimental museum and Armagh city. It is part of Armagh’s unique tourism product.

Another issue is that of the Armagh Planetarium and Armagh Observatory. The planetarium and observatory offer wonderful, niche, unique facilities; however, year after year, they face problems with their funding and finances. We encourage the development of a sustainable solution to ensure that there is not a funding crisis each year. Those facilities are very important to the people of Armagh.

Recently, I returned to the observatory to speak to its director, Mark Bailey. During my visit, I was given a tour of the small museum at the observatory. The museum has a collection dedicated to Archbishop Robinson, who established the observatory and helped to found much of Armagh. If that link were lost, it would damage Armagh as a product, and the idea of the city as a big museum.

Mr Shannon:

Do you think that within a bigger council group, advertisement and promotion will become easier for you and Newry, and possibly other partners?

Mr Briggs:

Under the RPA, the new council system will give us many more opportunities. Sharon will give details of that.

Ms O’Gorman:

Under the RPA, Armagh will merge with Craigavon Borough Council and Banbridge Borough Council. That will provide opportunities for co-ordination of efforts across services. Presently, our tourism strategy is to develop the area as a destination through promotion and marketing. However, we would want to promote the area’s attractions collectively and in partnership with other councils, where appropriate.

Mr D Bradley:

Good morning, John and Sharon. Thank you very much for your presentation.

You said that Armagh’s culture is like a jigsaw into which various pieces fit. You mentioned the Armagh Public Library, which was founded by Archbishop Robinson; the County Museum; the regimental library, which is part of the Royal Irish Fusiliers Regimental Museum; the Cardinal Tomás Ó Fiaich Memorial Library and Archive; the Armagh Planetarium; and the Armagh Observatory. You said that those pieces fit together to create a unique cultural picture in Armagh. You said that to remove the regimental museum from that jigsaw would, in some way, weaken it. How important is that museum for Armagh?

Mr Briggs:

The regimental museum is very important, because it helps to tell the story of Armagh. That museum is the one thing that can link all the various facilities. To begin with, there is Navan Fort, which dates back thousands of years. Then there is the story of St Patrick and the cathedrals. There have been strong links throughout the years with the military. The Georgian properties on the Mall were built by the military.

The “jigsaw” of culture is a good analogy. There was an Irish studies library based in one of our buildings, which, for reasons beyond our control has been moved for efficiency reasons in connection with education. We can understand such problems, but that resulted in our losing another piece of that jigsaw. We fight very hard for all those pieces because we are heading for difficult financial times. We ask that all the organisations that have control of the various pieces consider the overall destination of Armagh and how one small decision can damage that picture. One relevant issue is the relocation of jobs — if public-sector jobs leave Armagh, heritage buildings will be left empty and it will be very difficult to find another sustainable use for them.

Mr D Bradley:

You have said that the regimental museum tells the story of local military history in the area. Therefore, is your argument that, because that museum provides a localised history, it should remain in a local location?

Mr Briggs:

I attended an exhibition on the Battle of Passchendaele last year at the museum, at which I was accompanied by the Mayor. At the exhibition, a gentleman from County Louth told me that the museum had helped him trace his grandfather to that battle, and was able to tell him what had happened to him. As the Committee will know, there were many deaths during the First World War, and it is difficult to trace exactly where people died. Therefore, the museum provides a valuable local connection.

The Chairperson:

I have four more questions from members and those questions come in the following order: Pat Ramsey; Raymond McCartney; Ken Robinson; and Nelson McCausland. In the interests of time management, I will group those questions. Pat and Raymond, we will have your questions first, followed by Ken and Nelson.

Mr P Ramsey:

John and Sharon, you are very welcome this morning. It is good to hear that you are trying to protect the integrity of the tourism product, as you have called it. That is to be commended.

Although Armagh City and District Council does not directly fund any of the museum services in the Armagh area, do you have any knowledge of how the funding mechanisms operate in relation to the independent sector? Furthermore, do you have any knowledge of museum services outside Northern Ireland? Are there any models of best practice that you know of and can talk about with the Committee?

Mr McCartney:

Do you have any relationship with the NIMC? How do you feel that that organisation operates? In respect of future policy, do you have any thoughts on that organisation?

Mr Briggs:

We have little connection or hands-on experience with the NIMC at the moment. However, we have had some meetings with the Museums Council in relation to transfer of functions, etc.

As a result of the RPA, the county museum will fall under the jurisdiction of the new cluster of councils in that area. Therefore, in the future, we will need to gain some knowledge of funding.

Ms O’Gorman:

The council is not directly involved in any museum or in its fund-raising. Therefore, we can only draw on the experience of how the council’s museums are currently funded.

The county museum is currently funded through the National Museums network, and the Royal Irish Fusiliers Museum is funded through the Ministry of Defence. The Ministry supports that museum with money for salaries, utilities and the general upkeep of the building, but any other aspects are normally generated through fund-raising. Indeed, in the past, the museum has made successful bids for lottery funding and the council has provided some support as part of an investment exercise. We also work with both museums on marketing initiatives, so in that way we provide support.

As to the question about the Northern Ireland Museums Council, we understand from our discussions that it plays an important role in training, advice and the sharing of best practice for local museums in Armagh.

Looking wider and further afield, though research that we have conducted into models of best practice, museums appear to be better resourced in the South and in Scotland. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport in the UK is also interesting, however the conclusions are purely on the basis of academic research.

Mr K Robinson:

I apologise for being late this morning. I thank the witnesses for what I have heard of the presentation.

There seems to be an underlying tension. Obviously, you have a unique product in Armagh, which is made up of several components: if any one is removed, the picture collapses. We are considering strategies and policies. However, sometimes it is good to step back and see what is on the ground for the customer. If you lose any part of the jigsaw puzzle that is Armagh, the venue becomes less attractive for the customer or potential visitor.

How do you resolve the tension between your organisation and the regional museums? Belfast attracts a regional audience and brings in overseas visitors. Hopefully, it spreads them out to areas such as Armagh, Omagh and other centres.

I have just read Dermot Weatherup’s submission. He was very good to me when I was doing my degree — Seanchas Ardmhacha and all those initiatives were active at that time, thanks to him. The atmosphere in Armagh is unique, right through the city and to Navan Fort.

How do you resolve the tension between the policies that you need to pursue locally and the regional strategies and policies that we are trying to adopt? Can you address those issues?

Mr Briggs:

That is a good question. Armagh City and District Council has spent the last nine months holding a root-and-branch review of its tourism strategy. That has clearly indicated that we need to promote Armagh as a destination in itself — a standout destination. It has highlighted more clearly than before that all the niche facilities and unique elements are part of that. We are trying to develop a strategy and action plan to do as the Committee asks.

I do not have a complete answer for you today; Sharon may be able to contribute more detail. However, an essential part of our strategic action plan is to hold negotiations and discussions with all the various parties to ensure that they recognise that Armagh is a destination in itself. Many people are aware of the uniqueness of Armagh: but it could suffer a death by a thousand cuts as the various parts move off in different directions.

Stage 1 is to get the Executive and the Assembly to see Armagh as a destination in itself, which is worth preserving. If you visit the exhibitions at Navan Fort, one the first things that you will see is one of the earliest maps of the world, and Navan Fort is shown on it. Navan Fort was a centre of administration and decision-making far back in history, and we feel that it would be unfortunate if separate organisations, striving for efficiency and effectiveness, damaged its unity.

Sharon will go into more detail about our strategy.

Ms O’Gorman:

The council has recently invested a large amount of time in developing the tourism strategy, to firmly reinforce the uniqueness of Armagh as a destination, and the wealth of heritage product that it has. Collectively, it aims to ensure that that product is fit for purpose in the future and retains the unique identity of the destination.

Obviously, that has to feed into regional strategies, and we contribute, in part, to the policies of the Tourist Board with our St Patrick/Christian Heritage Signature Project. Fundamentally, our strategic review of tourism ensures that our destination meets expectations.

Mr K Robinson:

As a grandfather who is often stuck with his grandchildren on wet Saturday afternoons, could I make a plea that all your component parts be open at the same time? That would be helpful.

Mr Briggs:

We are trying to do that. The Armagh Visitor Education Committee is promoting partnership working, but that is an issue.

The Chairperson:

Ken also usually makes a plea that nothing be thrown out — he does not like anything to be thrown out.

Nelson, I will group your question with Francie Brolly’s.

Mr McCausland:

In your view, would a museums policy affect the level of importance that local authorities place on museums? Would it help to push museums up the agenda?

What, if any, support does Armagh City and District Council give to other museums? I have been to Navan Fort and the military museum — and this shows how long it has been since I stopped in Armagh — and St Patrick’s Trian. Can you give me an update on that, please?

Mr Brolly:

I listened to your presentation, and there are echoes of the situation in Derry city — the description of the various different parts involved and of Armagh being a museum in itself. You link the museums so closely to tourism; would you prefer a decent tourist strategy or master plan to a museums policy?

Ms O’Gorman:

Mr McCausland, you asked about where a museums policy would place museums in the wider agenda. As we said, museums have a particularly important role to play in tourism, and a wider agenda. The development of a policy would assist museums in their role; it would allow museums, because of the benefits that they offer, to transcend central Government Departments, so to speak. Relevant issues could be moved across from DCAL to DETI, and even to DSD and OFMDFM, as part of efforts to promote the shared-future agenda. That would move museums further up the list of priorities.

To turn to funding and support for museums, Armagh County Museum receives funding through the National Museums Northern Ireland network. As I said, in the past, the council provided some grant aid to the Royal Irish Fusiliers Museum when it was making a particular investment. We work with all the attractions on collective and collaborative marketing opportunities, and, in that way, we encourage local authority support of all the attractions in Armagh.

Mr Briggs:

Mr Brolly asked about the benefits of a museums strategy, versus a tourism strategy. We would love to see them both well and truly linked. After the RPA changes, responsibility for the county museum will fall to the new authority. We would like to offer visitors a great experience, ranging from a very interactive children’s experience, right through to a research-based, academic experience, if that is what people require. There is the potential to do that through the Armagh County Museum, the Cardinal Tomás Ó Fiaich Memorial Library and the Robinson Library. Part of our tourism strategy is to make the Navan Fort site much more interactive — by telling the story of how people lived at the time and giving visitors an experience — rather than simply offering the more academic exhibition that is being shown at present.

Mr D Bradley:

One of the major attractions in Armagh that has not been mentioned is the Market Place Theatre and Arts Centre, which obviously attracts many people to the city. Have you thought of trying to reap the benefits of that attraction by linking it with the other locations that we have already mentioned?

Mr Briggs:

Yes; that has been considered as part of the tourism strategy. We know that if we are to encourage visitors and tourists to visit Armagh, we must provide entertainment for them in the evening. Although theatres tend to wind down in the summer, the tourism strategy proposes that a cultural programme and experience be developed for tourists in Armagh. We are trying to adopt a joined-up approach that promotes Armagh as a destination in itself.

Mr K Robinson:

I have a bricks-and-mortar question. Has any thought been given to the retention of the buildings around Charlemont Place and the Mall — lest they be turned into supermarkets — should the education and skills authority ever get off the ground and the Southern Education and Library Board become redundant?

Mr D Bradley:

I agree that Armagh would be an excellent headquarters for the education and skills authority.

The Chairperson:

This meeting is becoming a showcase for Armagh. We were talking about museums policy. Dominic and Ken, consider yourselves suitably reprimanded. [Laughter.]

Mr D Bradley:

I was just supporting Ken’s proposal.

The Chairperson:

Thank you, John and Sharon, for your contribution this morning.

I welcome Ms Helen Perry, who is an officer with the Causeway Museums Service, and Councillor Evelyne Robinson, who is vice-chair of Causeway Museums Service and an elected representative on Ballymoney Borough Council. I invite you to make a brief opening statement, following which members will be invited to ask questions.

Mrs Evelyne Robinson (Causeway Museums Service):

Thank you, Mr Chairman. I have been vice-chair of this most important service for one week. [Laughter.] Therefore, I will allow Ms Perry to hold the floor. It is foreign to my nature to allow someone else to hold the floor, but I am being diplomatic on this occasion.

Mr Brolly:

We do not offer long-service medals. [Laughter.]

Ms Helen Perry (Causeway Museums Service):

Thank you very much, Councillor Robinson. I pass on apologies from the chairperson of Causeway Museums Service, Councillor McIlroy of Moyle District Council; he was unable to attend but Councillor Robinson has offered to step in, and she is very able to do so. No doubt she will comment throughout the meeting and answer some of the questions.

Causeway Museums Service was established in 1996 by four local authorities — Coleraine Borough Council, Limavady Borough Council, Ballymoney Borough Council, and Moyle District Council. The intention was to develop and deliver museums services in those borough and district areas. The Causeway Museums Service was the first truly regional museum service for Northern Ireland. Its aim is to ensure the sustainability of the rich collections of the Causeway Coast area, which includes two of the smallest local authorities in the UK.

Each of our councils has a fantastic, distinctive, accredited museum, which are: the Green Lane Museum in the Roe Valley Country Park, Limavady; Ballymoney Museum; Ballycastle Museum in the Moyle District Council area; and Coleraine Museum, which delivers a temporary exhibition programme in the town hall. The collection stores for Coleraine Museum are based in council offices while the council progresses its plans for the regional museum in the Market Yard, Coleraine.

A substantial mechanism is in place to deliver programming across the area, and that is evidenced by the range of exhibitions, and by the amount of grant aid that we have secured through bodies such as the NIMC and Heritage Lottery Fund, which helps to deliver what we regard as essential services.

Our four councils have a strong commitment to their museums, which dates back to the days when Ballymoney Museum opened in 1860 as one of the first public collections in the UK. Our local collections represent material of local, national and even international importance. As the Committee will agree, the non-national museums sector in Northern Ireland is very diverse, skilled and dynamic, and is responsible for considerable cultural assets being available, not only to the local ratepayers, but to the wider community.

To date, the level of central Government support for those national assets — as provided through the Northern Ireland Museums Council — has been precious and important to our councils and to the work of the Causeway Museums Service. However, we believe that the level of central Government support currently received through NIMC does not reflect the importance of those assets to Northern Ireland as a whole.

The Causeway Museums Service commends DCAL for progressing with the development of the museums policy for Northern Ireland — it is long overdue. In our experience, when external funding bodies are evaluating projects for grants, the absence of a formal museums policy has left Northern Ireland projects very vulnerable. That has been experienced by three of our councils when dealing with the Heritage Lottery Fund over the past few years. It must be recognised that we are competing nationally for a substantially decreasing pot of lottery funding.

The lack of a formal museums policy places museums well down the public agenda, despite their capacity to deliver on, and support, a wide range of issues that are on the public agenda, including learning, community cohesion, equality of opportunity, regeneration and tourism. That point echoes what I heard from our colleagues from Armagh District Council.

Local museums struggle to compete with statutory services, which is due to the lack of a formal museums policy. Evelyne Robinson will be able to provide more information about because of her experience in Ballymoney.

We rely on the functions of NIMC, but it is under threat from the review of public administration. NIMC administers effectively the accreditation scheme that enables our museums to achieve the standards of the sector and gives comfort to the public. We hold those in trust with perpetuity.

NIMC provides us with essential, albeit limited, funding that enables us to deliver programmes, to maintain our collections, and — importantly — to purchase specimens for those collections. It also provided specialist training for the sector across the region. Furthermore, it provides us with advice and research, which is important in the current climate.

As a local-authority service, we follow the policies of the sector. We draw on colleagues outside the UK for our museum policies — including places such as Canada, Australia and the Republic of Ireland — and consider how they deliver their policies. We take examples of best practice and share knowledge within our sector. Our regional museums service was established through the Northern Ireland Museums Advisory Committee (NIMAC) report of 1992 and NIMC’s policy in the 1990s. That mechanism has proved to be extremely effective in ensuring access to museums and their collections in our area.

Although we receive access funding from NIMC, the Heritage Lottery Fund and the Art Fund, ratepayers are our primary source of income. It is often the case that those small NIMC grants act as an essential leverage for more funds from external sources. Without them, the crucial work that is delivered as part of that funding would not occur. We also benefited from Northern Ireland Museums Council initiatives across the sector that accessed considerable resources, such as the past and future programmes of the Big Lottery Fund and cross-border funding for sectoral training.

The Causeway Museums Service has also been very effective in acting as a contributor to accessing partnership funding — I refer to the Arts and Humanities Research Council. We are considering delivering some programming with funding provided to the education and library boards; the creative youth partnerships; the University of Ulster; and the Northern Ireland Regional Curators Group. We worked in partnership with them to deliver very effective programming that came at little direct cost to us. I stress that the National Lottery is our only other source of significant funds. That source has been alarmingly and substantially depleted with the impact of the 2012 Olympics, and I believe that that is likely to have a further impact.

There are other sources for museums elsewhere in the UK, such as ‘Renaissance in the Regions’. The difficulties that we and the local authorities face are perhaps best evidenced by the commendable and substantial efforts of Ballymoney Borough Council to improve public access to the collections and to provide appropriate storage of its substantial collection by building a new museum at Ballymoney town hall using ratepayers’ money.

The key elements of the policy should be ascertained through investigating best practice in Canada, Scotland and the Republic of Ireland, and in studying some of the regional policies in places such as Piedmont in Italy. It is essential that the policy identifies the structures and resources that are needed to implement it, and that it recognises the strengths of the non-national sector. That sector contains considerable cultural value and expertise, and has the capacity to deliver many aspects of the Programme for Government. A strong commitment to our museums exists, but it is in competition with a number of statutory agendas.

A strong diversity of collections exists within our area and the associated programming. We ask that the policy addresses weaknesses. The lack of a formal museums policy means that the NIMC functions are vulnerable; and those functions are essential to us. Museums are discretionary in nature, and there is a lack of equality of access across Northern Ireland. Numerous institutions are not currently accredited and therefore lack eligibility for funding. Garvagh Museum and Heritage Centre, which is struggling, is one such case.

A mechanism is required to address the loss of the specialist curatorial expertise in the national sector. As a non-national museum service, we relied on that expertise to fine-tune our knowledge of the collections, and that has been lost. Equally, we struggle to access material of local provenance at present because the agendas of those who own it lie elsewhere. Having examined the resources and support that central Government provides to the museum sector, Northern Ireland is falling way behind the rest of the UK, and the gap is widening. A programme of action to increase resources should underpin any new policy.

To sum up, the museums that make up the Causeway Museums Service represent national assets that we hold on behalf of our communities. The new policy must position our museums so that they can compete with the statutory services in local authorities and so that several Departments recognise their relevance. Accreditation has been highly effective in delivering standards for our museums and should be maintained as a standard to secure funding. We support the retention of the Northern Ireland Museums Council in its current format during the development of a Northern Ireland museums policy, and we recommend that the Committee access the skills and experience that exist outside the national museums sector.

Mr McCausland:

I recently visited Ballymoney Museum and had an opportunity to look round. However, I have no experience of the internal dynamics of a service that spans several councils; therefore, it would be helpful if you would give me some sense of that.

The Chairperson:

Perhaps that question could be parked and answered with the next one.

Mr Shannon:

Thank you, ladies, for your presentation this morning. You referred to the Causeway Museums Service as a number of collections — large and small. Streamlining and centralisation have been running themes in presentations to the Committee. Do you envisage a centralisation of those collections being possible within the Causeway Museums Service or at a different location?

At any stage, have you considered having, or do you have, a sports collection in the Causeway Museums Service? If so, does it include a section on motorcyclists? Motorcycling comes to mind as the appropriate sport for the area. It has been suggested that there should be a central venue — perhaps Belfast — for a sports museum. Everyone has their own idea about what they want from a museums policy, but what is your opinion on that?

Mrs E Robinson:

Thank you for your questions, gentlemen. Unless you prefer the questions to be answered in the order in which they were asked, I will address Mr Shannon’s question first.

Mr Shannon, allow me to invite you to Ballymoney to view what is probably the most wonderful collection of road-racing vehicles to exist anywhere. It includes all the paraphernalia from Joey and Robert Dunlop and goes back to the original riders of the road. You can see from the dates in the presentation that Ballymoney Museum is extremely old. It has an extensive collection of motorbike memorabilia, and the museum that we built in Ballymoney was designed to exhibit that collection permanently. The other part of the museum displays various collections at various times and also includes an interactive area. The road-racing section of the Ballymoney Museum is, I suggest, second to none, anywhere in the world. I invite every member of the Committee to come to Ballymoney to visit the museum.

Mr Shannon:

You have been in charge for only a week. Had you been in charge for a month, two months or two years, I wonder what you would have told us.

The Chairperson:

I think that Jim is asking questions to which he knows the answers. [Laughter.]

Ms Perry:

Mr McCausland asked about the structure of our organisation. The Causeway Museums Service has a committee at the top level, which is made up of elected representatives and senior officers from the four councils. With my team of two officers, I report to that committee on a quarterly basis. We act across the whole region, so, although we are centred in Coleraine because the lead partner in the service and the employer is based there, we work across the service to deliver professional services to collections. Moyle District Council and, to a lesser extent, Limavady Borough Council would struggle to maintain accreditation for those collections on their own.

Joined-up thinking — looking ahead to the review of public administration — resulted in the Causeway Museums Service being set up to sustain those collections, which are valid expressions of local identity. Mr Shannon talked about the motorcycle history in Ballymoney. Equally, the arts-and-crafts revival in places such as Ballycastle, the extraordinary industrial heritage in Roe Valley and Coleraine’s position as the first settlement and the first planted town in Ireland are distinctive. Given the wide geographical remit and the relatively low ratepayer base, we recognised that the Causeway Museum Service was an essential tool to maintain those collections for the public.

The Chairperson:

The questions from Kieran and Francie will be grouped.

Mr McCarthy:

Thank you for your presentation and your written submission; you have already covered most of the questions. You said that you support a museums policy and that the sooner it is implemented, the better. You said that the inability to secure sufficient funding was proving detrimental to that. Is that the primary obstacle to a museums policy?

Mr Brolly:

I note the association between tourism and museums, and I am conscious that, apart from a museum in Limavady, the area in which I live is a wasteland for museums. People often say that tourists visit Derry city and the Giant’s Causeway but miss the bit in between. That is a pity, because that area has some of the best pieces available, not least the Broighter gold.

Mr McNarry:

Is the member making a presentation for that area?

The Chairperson:

Please conclude, Mr Brolly.

Mr Brolly:

The Broighter gold is on display in Dublin, and the famous ancient Dungiven suit — which I am not wearing today — is on display in Belfast. Do you think that a museums policy would help to consider the deficit in a rural area such as ours and put things where they belong in order to allow people to see them? I know that Jim would like more motorbikes to come to Ballymoney, as they obviously should be there.

Ms Perry:

Undoubtedly, the lack of funding has had an effect on the implementation of a museums policy. Museums are currently way down the agenda. The policy is concerned with recognising the importance of our heritage for tourism, learning and community cohesion. That recognition enables us to access funding, not only at a local level and through central Government, but from our other partner funders. We recognise that museums are not cheap to run and that they require significant investment. Therefore, the idea of joined-up thinking to provide a regional museum service has worked well.

Mr Brolly, the last time we spoke was in the chamber of Limavady Borough Council. I do not know whether you have seen the Limavady heritage trail, which the Causeway Museums Service is involved with. It is an attempt to start to raise awareness in order to draw people to the landscape of the Causeway area, which is second to none.

Museums, as a permanent edifice, are expensive, but there are ways of providing access to those collections. The Causeway Museums Service has been good at engaging disparate rural communities and enabling them to see those collections. There has often been a geographic barrier to people coming to museums, because people are economically excluded from travelling into a town centre. In some cases, that barrier may be because of the way in which they perceive the town centre.

There are ways to provide a quality service to all citizens, which the Causeway Museums Service has demonstrated.

Mrs E Robinson:

Museums services are central to our culture. They allow us and our children to explore the past, our roots and our heritage. Recently, pieces of wood were found in Ballymoney. The manager of Ballymoney Museum discovered that the wood is a sixteenth-century plough, which the museum is recreating. Museums are living, vital organisations. Museums are, sometimes, considered dead areas where — as Ken Robinson said — a frustrated grandfather —

Mr K Robinson:

I did not say “frustrated”. [Laughter.]

Mrs E Robinson:

A fond grandfather might take his grandsons to a museum on a Saturday afternoon. I recall that that happened in Belfast. Museums should excite children. Furthermore, children should remember their experience and appreciate how vital museums are to Northern Ireland’s structure.

Mr McCartney:

Your submission mentions that the NIMC should remain until a museums policy is established. Do you believe that the NIMC should continue to exist? If so, in what form?

The Chairperson:

That question will be grouped with Ken’s.

Mr K Robinson:

I will not ask a frustrated question. You mentioned the loss of curatorial experience. What is the reason for that loss? What steps could be taken to ensure that any ensuing gap is filled?

Ms Perry:

The NIMC’s role will be considered during the policy process; our role could change, it could be strengthened, or other structures could be established. We cannot be prescriptive about that matter, but those functions must be strengthened and enhanced. However, they must be maintained at least until a new policy is established.

Mr K Robinson:

Will you explain the loss of curatorial experience and expertise?

Ms Perry:

From conversations with my colleagues in the sector, I understand that in the past we relied on the specialist curators from the Ulster Museum to identify an object such as the piece of sixteenth-century wood that was mentioned. Those curators have been a terrific asset, because they have a vast repository of knowledge that they have passed on to us. Moreover, they hold much wider collections than us. The reorganisation has resulted in the loss of knowledge. I admit that, in the past, we benefited from that service being free of charge. Some of our local provenance is in their stores, and they have cared for, and conserved, that material. However, although it is difficult to assess, the reorganisation has impacted on us.

Mr K Robinson:

Will the reorganisation result in fewer curators or will they spend more time on administration than on searching for artefacts?

Ms Perry:

I cannot speak for the national museums. However, the networks in the Ulster Museum and at Cultra are no longer available. Many curators have taken the voluntary redundancy package, and some have been promoted.

Mr K Robinson:

It is generational; people move on and take their expertise with them. Are those gaps being filled at the lower end?

Ms Perry:

I understand that people move on. To date, the knowledge does not appear to have been transferred in the institution. That may be happening.

Mr K Robinson:

Is that an aspect that the Committee should be addressing?

Ms Perry:

I certainly think so. There is a fantastic collection there that —

Mr K Robinson:

Yes, but unless there is someone there who can unlock its secrets, it is just an old piece of wood.

Ms Perry:

I may be getting on my own bandwagon here, but I believe that local museums are doing far more to allow access to their collections at present.

Mrs E Robinson:

It was actually the local manager at Ballymoney who had the expertise to ascertain the authenticity of the piece of wood.

Mr McCartney referred to the NIMC, which I understand will be in place until 2010. A chasm exists, and I am sure that the Committee is going to come up with an absolutely super-duper policy to address that. During the period of policymaking, we must retain a structure that preserves the kind of expertise and calibre that currently exists in the NIMC. We must look to the future and create a particular kind of a structure that the NIMC currently fulfils. In doing so, we must maintain not only the council’s current functions, but whatever functions the new policy stipulates are proper for such a body to carry out. The policy must include a means of implementing that.

Furthermore, I agree with Ms Perry in that the policy must address funding for museums. Ballymoney Borough Council is small. In order to build the museum, it had to provide £2·5 million for a new building — not all for the museum, but as part of the extension of the town hall to house the museum. We then had to apply for a 75% grant — almost £300,000 for a £400,000 project — to fit out that museum, and that work is being conducted in a highly professional manner. Some Committee members here are from areas where the penny product brings in £250,000 while in Ballymoney, we struggle to attain £40,000. Therefore, there is a discrepancy that makes it more difficult to fund what we do. That is despite the fact that we have a resident expert who understands that a piece of wood is a plough from the sixteenth-century. [Laughter.]

The Chairperson:

Thank you for your presentation and for answering the Committee’s questions.

Ms Perry:

I have left some leaflets for Committee members. Those leaflets detail some aspects of the scheme that we are extremely proud of.

The Chairperson:

I welcome Chris Bailey, who is the director of the Northern Ireland Museums Council, and Briony Crozier, who is the assistant director.

You have provided a good written submission to the Committee. The Committee has heard the council mentioned several times in the recent past and, in the main, contributors have been very supportive of your work. Will you please make brief opening statements? The detail can then be drawn out through the members’ questions and your answers.

Mr Chris Bailey (Northern Ireland Museums Council):

Thank you very much for the invitation to come before the Committee again to discuss museums. We very much welcome the Committee’s commitment — through this inquiry — to the concept of creating a museums policy. The council feels that such a policy will have a beneficial impact for generations to come.

In my short presentation, I will touch on three themes: the policy for museums; supporting strategies and their outcomes; and how the policy could be built. In doing so, I hope to address some of the questions that the Committee has posed.

In the concluding part of my presentation, I will outline some of the key issues that are of concern to the Northern Ireland Museums Council.

What do we mean when we talk about policy? By definition, policy is a principle of action adopted or proposed by a Government, which, given the word’s etymological root, would or should be in the interests of the state and its citizens. Governments around the globe have supported museums, some more than others, in recognition of their unique contribution to the development of the state and its citizens. Two websites — www.culturalpolicies.net and www.european-heritage.net will provide members with an appreciation of the various approaches that have been adopted by countries throughout Europe and further afield.

Differing circumstances, such as history, resources and legislative background, and, possibly, political priority, determine the relative weighting of cultural policy priorities — hence the variation in approaches among countries. Those variations are well worth examining as we develop our policy, for obvious reasons. Yet, amid such diversity, certain common aspirations emerge, the bones of which have been identified in the Committee’s terms of reference for its inquiry:

“building a joined-up museums sector that will, over the long-term, deliver real benefit to individuals, communities and the economy”.

I note that the Committee is quoting directly from the proposed vision for the national strategy for museums in England, which is being developed by the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council, which is an arm’s-length body associated with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. The Museums Council of Northern Ireland would counsel against putting too much faith in the policy models of others. We must find our own solutions to our own issues. They may echo those of others, but it would not be appropriate to assume that another country’s approach is directly transferable, no matter how tempting that might be.

Valuable lessons can be learned by examining the approaches of others, but, rather than imitating, I would prefer to be imitated. The scale of our museums sector will allow us to develop an exemplary service. It would not be overly aspirational to extend the vision statement to read:

“We aim to stand as a beacon of best practice in building a joined-up museums sector that will, over the long term, deliver real benefit to individuals, communities and the economy.”

Obvious questions emerge from that statement. What do we mean by “the long term”? What are the specific benefits to individuals, communities and the economy? If we knew the answers to those questions, we could set targets, measure progress, examine the impact, and, in turn, ascertain the value of investment in museums. With no formal policy in place, Government have few reference points by which they can determine the value of their investment in museums or its impact on social, cultural or economic development. With no vision for the development of the sector, and no strategic framework through which the potential of the collective effort of the sector might be unlocked, are we not bereft of a route map?

From the various sessions of oral evidence, members will know about the exciting developments in the national museums of Northern Ireland and will have heard how the Mid-Antrim Museums Service, among others, has built a clear strategy. Similarly, the Somme Heritage Centre and the Derry Heritage and Museum Service have built a solid picture of what they do and why they do it.

Obvious and accruing benefits arise from the commitment and dedication of individual museums and the people who work in them, but the development of the sector is fragmentary at the moment. How much better it could be if we had a comprehensive, joined-up strategic approach. It is as if we have a box of delightful jewels that could be turned into a beautiful necklace, and, by stringing the necklace, we could build a whole that would be more effective, beneficial and attractive than the sum of its parts.

If we are to deliver real benefits to individuals, communities and the economy through our museums, the Museums Council suggests that there must a focus on some critical strategic areas. I am mindful that we are not here to write the policy; the Committee Clerk has made that clear on several occasions. However, I wish to demonstrate that, far from being an onerous task, the stringing of the necklace is a relatively straightforward exercise.

Considerable research and thought has already taken place in that area. As members will be aware, there is a commonly accepted definition of a museum — it is a place that enables people to explore collections for inspiration, learning and enjoyment, and it is an institution that collects, safeguards and makes accessible artefacts and specimens that it holds in trust for society. That definition and the accreditation standard should underpin our museum policy. Encapsulated in that definition are the two mutually dependent parts of the unique equation that make up a museum, namely the collections and the people.

Our thinking on the matter is relatively straightforward. We must ensure that collections are adequately safeguarded, which means that they are housed in appropriate buildings, that they are looked after by appropriate standards by people with the requisite skills, and that they are developed in a cogent manner. We need to be really imaginative in the ways that we provide access to those collections, that we exploit them for their didactic potential — Briony will tell you more about our work in that regard — and that we ensure that more people know about the benefits of engaging with museums.

To that end, we advocate that the vision for museums be underpinned by four strategic legs. First, infrastructure and resources, which will include strategies around museum buildings and the infrastructure, staffing and staff development, etc. Secondly, collections management, which concerns acquisition, disposal, care, management, conservation, research, storage, etc. Thirdly, the use of collections primarily as an education and learning resource, but also as an entertainment resource for the creative industries, among others. Finally, marketing and audience development, about which I am passionate. We need to ensure that the greatest number of people know about, and get the greatest benefit from, our museums.

Some of those aspects are mutually dependent. They provide a framework around which specific outcomes and outputs could be devised, and against which fundamental issues and cross-cutting themes can be evaluated. We may discuss that in more detail.

I touched on those four strategic areas in my presentation to the Committee in May, and I also highlighted the fact that the Minister had launched two reports: one on the mapping of museum collections and another entitled ‘A Survey of Museum Collections in Northern Ireland’. The reports are held in the Assembly Library if anyone is unfamiliar with them. We are currently doing three other pieces of research: a study on learning and education provided by museums, which Briony is heading up; a collections development strategy, which Heather McGuicken — our development officer — is heading up; and a study into marketing and audience development, which, for my sins, I have on my work plate. In addition, we have completed an overview of the capital development of the sector, and we will shortly be reviewing staffing provision in the sector.

Such work provides a sound intelligence base, which should be a prerequisite for policy development. It provides a baseline and a snapshot of the current provision. Policy need not be a costly exercise. It becomes so only when there is a knowledge deficit and one has to buy in expertise to fill in the blanks. However, in the NIMC, National Museums Northern Ireland, and the museum sector generally, we feel that we have that knowledge to a good degree. In the light of that, at the end of last year, we proposed that a working group comprising ourselves and National Museums in the first instance be established to do the necessary research and the critical analysis as the first step towards developing that policy. In the first instance, DCAL should draw on the knowledge, expertise and professional insight immediately available in its arm’s-length bodies. That is a common approach elsewhere. I mentioned previously that the Department for Culture, Media and Sport has charged the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council — one of its arms-length bodies — to develop a museums strategy for England.

In the Republic of Ireland, the Heritage Council’s role is:

“to propose policies and priorities for identification, protection, preservation and enhancement of the national heritage”.

That includes museums, and it does that through the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

In Scotland, Museums Galleries Scotland, which was previously known as the Scottish Museums Council:

“works with museums and galleries towards achieving a shared vision.”

In the museums sector, there is always a third party between Government and service delivery whose focus is on funding, development and advocacy. That is the case in the UK, Ireland, Canada, Australia, the USA, and virtually everywhere throughout Europe.

We also strongly believe that the museum development policy should not be restricted to one Department. The work of museums actively impacts on, and contributes to, wider Government objectives concerning tourism — which has been mentioned — community development, good relations, education, local identity, etc. That point, you will recall, was also emphasised by National Museums Northern Ireland when they gave evidence to the Committee.

We have to move away from a silo approach and create a more integrated, flexible attitude in operating our funding patterns. The shared-future initiative and the local museum heritage review (LHMR) both hinted at that, although were not progressed to the degree that we thought would have been advantageous. In the LMHR, there were recommendations to that effect, and that was started in 1999. NIMC supported those recommendations, and geared up for playing its role in their implementation, but, unfortunately, there appeared little appetite to drive the initiative forward, to the disappointment of our organisation and the local museums sector. It seems now that the LMHR has withered on the vine.

Here we are, nearly 10 years later, and we are not much further on. We are still discussing the issues at the same level. Will the same be said 10 years hence? It could be said that the local museum and heritage review fell by the wayside as attentions were diverted by the RPA. The RPA, which was announced in 2006, but started a lot earlier, envisages the transfer of NIMC’s functions to local and central government. I have already pointed out the need in our communities for a third party in the museums sector.

From the oral evidence that the Committee has received so far, it is apparent that the implementation of the RPA, so far as it relates to NIMC, will prove extremely detrimental to the local museum sector and to Government. There are four reasons for that. First, rather than being informed by policy aspirations or strategic objectives, the RPA decision is concerned solely with changing structures, without an assessment of the impact of supporting evidence. Such a view approaches the issue from the wrong end, and is not a robust intellectual position to start with. Elsewhere, the ‘Renaissance in the Regions’ report provides a good example to suggest that should NIMC go, it, or an equivalent, would be reinvented after a period.

Secondly, the thinking behind the RPA decision is now almost half a decade old, and the political imperative behind it has changed. At least, that is our impression from the discussions and meetings we have had with local councils over the last nine months. We have been in touch with all of the councils that run a museum, and made presentations to most. All reiterated their support for the work we do, all were agreed on the need for a museum policy, and all agreed that the accreditation standard should be the policy’s foundation. The vast majority saw little point in each of the new councils duplicating what we do, and recognise that economies of scale could be made in NIMC, or indeed in an evolved body working on behalf of the whole sector in future.

Penultimately, the RPA decision is the wrong one for voluntary and independent museums. That is the fastest-growing part of the museum sector, with a 61% rise in attendances over the last five years. It would leave them without the necessary support, and would parallel the deficiencies felt by the independent museums in England with the implementation of the recommendations of ‘Renaissance in the Regions’. The Museum of Free Derry stressed the value of its independence in telling the story of its community without interference; that reflected the sentiment generally felt in the sector. Maintaining such a principle will maintain a vibrancy and diversity, which, in turn, will establish what is unique about our museum sector, thus making it more effective, and hence more sustainable.

Finally, the RPA decision is the wrong one for Government. We act as a bridge between local museums and Government. Approached one way, we act as a conduit for Government initiatives being rolled out in the sector. Approached the other way, we can reflect the aspirations and achievements of local museums’ contributions to the Programme for Government. Acting on behalf of the sector, we have, over the last four years, unlocked additional resources for local museums at a rate of 92p for every £1 that DCAL provides, and in relation to the grants that we provide, for each £1 provided by our organisation, we unlock or lever £1·69.

Such additionality; such value for money is only possible through our current constitutional and charitable status, which would be lost under the review of public administration proposals. In the light of the above, we ask that the Committee give serious consideration to recommending that the review of public administration decision regarding NIMC be rescinded. To proceed with it would be tantamount to cutting the string on which our beautiful necklace may hang, before it has even been fully threaded.

Thank you for listening. I and my colleague Briony are more than happy to take questions.

Mr McNarry:

You are both very welcome . As usual, Chris, you were a breath of fresh air, although I must say that we were taking pretty long breaths while listening to your presentation, which was a bit of an abuse of what we are here for. Nevertheless, it was important because I fear that, in other cases, we have become a showcase lobby opportunity for some who appear before us.

As the Committee draws close to reporting, what thoughts do you have on what type of process should emerge to formulate what we are looking for in recommending a good policy? Can you say whether the NIMC has a view on the establishment of a national art gallery and where that would sit within a museums policy?

It is fair to say that there is great interest in our inquiry and a lot of people are looking for money. They have good ideas and interesting properties, but they do not seem to have homes for them. That is an interesting point that has emerged from some of our deliberations.

How do you think an overall policy can encapsulate guidance for the distribution of central funding? Would that lead to anything different to what we have? Have we not a set of leagues of establishments, like the Premier League, First Division and Second Division?

Are you aware that any private money is being considered for injection into museums?

Mr Bailey:

With regard to the formulation of policy, the Committee’s catalysing power will be vital. We and our colleagues in National Museums, and in the museums sector generally, have a vital role to play as knowledge-holders. We should not be formulating policy: there are procedures for doing that through the Departments. Nevertheless, I stress the need to embrace a much wider set of stakeholders in policy formulation. There were various stages put forward at the end of 2006: the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure put forward terms of reference for devising a policy. That process is universal, and will be adopted on this occasion. However, I stress that, given the immense public interest in what our museums do, we need — as someone else said this morning — a bottom-up opportunity to input into that.

We have no specific view with regard to a national art gallery. There could be very great merits in that. Many aspects of such a proposal could address, for example, enhancing access to our art collection. However, that is not the only method by which one could do that: there are many other ways, including utilising the network of local museums and having much greater opening up of touring exhibitions, etc.

It is an intriguing proposition. Elsewhere, such large institutions are valuable in producing a sense of identity, particularly in capital cities, and in helping the economy by bringing in tourism. However, I would not say that we would automatically pin our flag to that proposal. It needs to be looked at as a component of our policy.

Providing a home for material is vital; therefore, we have guidelines for museums as they become the home for material that is out there. People love gifting to their local museums, because they know that that is valued at a local level. Local museums are vital for developing a sense of local identity; therefore, it is important to strike a balance between having national collections and a network of local museums.

That leads on to the point about having a league of establishments. I remind the Committee of the notion of a jewelled necklace — scale does not necessarily indicate importance. It does to an extent, however, when you consider that, in 2007, more than 509,000 people visited the non-national museums, and the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure’s strategic plan gives a target number of 585,000 visitors to the national museums in 2009 — albeit with the Ulster Museum closed. It is clear that they are two parts of the same equation.

Mr McNarry talked about private money in particular.

Mr McNarry:

I talked about two things. In relation to money, I asked whether you believe that the policy must encapsulate guidelines for the distribution of central funding. I then asked how likely you consider it that someone will leave a lot of money to a museum, or that a commercial interest might introduce sponsorship for museums.

Mr Bailey:

In relation to the distribution of public money, the advantage of having the policy and the strategic framework is that the anticipated outcomes will be detailed in those strategies, so the public money will go towards achieving those outputs. The policy will provide a measure against which the value of that investment can be assessed.

The amount of private money coming into the museums sector is pretty limited; there is not a great pot of that and, given the current economic climate, I do not anticipate there being a great deal more. However, private-sector input is a different matter. If that is considered in broader terms, we found that the non-national museums had 281 employees in 2006, with 170 volunteers working alongside them. Coupled with that is the amount of material and artefacts that are being gifted to local museums, which are especially valuable given that acquisition budgets are so small.

Particularly notable are the gifts that were given to the Newry and Mourne Museum, the museums in Derry, and the Irish Linen Centre and Lisburn Museum. Also notable is the dedication and commitment of the various “friends of museums” organisations that raise money for the museums — of the 38 museums, 16 of them have friends organisations. Therefore, it is evident that private input is quite notable.

Mr Shannon:

Thank you for your presentation and for the information that you brought to the Committee. I am quite interested in — and agree wholeheartedly with — your point about donating to local institutions. There is a story in today’s ‘News Letter’ about the Linen Hall Library in Belfast tonight celebrating 40 years of its political collection. Tom Hartley has been involved in that, and I understand that it showcases the spectrum of political life over the last 40 years.

Throughout this inquiry, the Committee has met some people who say that they want museum services to be centralised and the number of museums reduced. However, local councils have come along and proposed ideas for their areas, where their museums have niche markets, and have argued that those museums must be retained.

How can that all be brought together for people who may want to visit a few locations in order to see museums dedicated to, for example, military history? Various councils appear, rightly, to be paddling their own canoes when it comes to ideas for themed museums — aircraft, marine, and so on. How can those ideas be pulled into a presentable strategy that takes on board all those views, but that delivers for — and remains palatable to — all interested parties? That may be difficult to answer because there are so many views to consider, but it is an important question to tackle.

Mr Bailey:

I will make a stab at it. It is a complex, but not an either/or equation. It is not a case of “centralise or localise”. It is a combination of establishing the most useful way of solving particular problems and of ensuring best value for money. It is worth considering economies of scale in relation to some services — for instance, museum storage. I am not certain, and it requires more investigation, but there may be merit in museums introducing central storage.

Members have heard evidence that services at two museums benefit from the co-operation of a number of councils. The economies of scale involved work well in those areas. It remains to be seen, however, whether similar economies may emerge in that context when we have fewer local authorities.

I do not know whether fewer museums would be better. The question is: what functions do we want existing museums to perform? Local museums with collecting policies that are governed by geography — mainly local authority museums — tend to collate the social history of a specific area. Therefore, the distinction between them is not that great.

However, many local museums are now seeking a theme that provides a unique selling position. That means reflecting local identity, as well as delivering on a theme that is vital to all of Northern Ireland. For example, the Irish Linen Centre and Lisburn Museum tells the linen story on a Northern Ireland-wide basis. The Tower Museum within the Derry Heritage and Museum Service not only tells the story of Derry, but also of the Girona and the Spanish Armada. The Northern Ireland Museums Council has held discussions with Craigavon Museum Services about developing an inland waterways theme. For tourism in particular, the dispersal of such themed museums around Northern Ireland is vital. However, a critical mass of attractions must be achieved.

rom my perspective in marketing and audience development, they must also be interlinked and sold as a package, as part of the overall museum offer. At present, as implied by Mr Shannon, local authorities adopt a fragmentary approach by making cases for their own individual projects. The strategy must be joined up, which may be a role for the Northern Ireland Museums Council. That must be examined as part of the centralisation of resources in the future. The council is also building a learning framework for museums in Northern Ireland in an effort to establish a joined-up approach to museum services. Briony could offer more detail on that.

Ms Briony Crozier (Northern Ireland Museums Council):

I agree with Chris that there is not an automatic dichotomy between centralised and localised services, because it is possible to provide centralised strategies that enable greater efficiencies across localised museum venues.

For example, in 2005, funded by the Big Lottery fund, we partnered the Public Record Office of Northern Ireland (PRONI) in the development of a Second World War website, which aims to provide artefacts across all the museums in Northern Ireland, both national and local. Images of those artefacts and images of archived material, which is held by PRONI, are on the Internet.

That was a one-off project that was made possible through Big Lottery funding, and it was the first museums and archives joint website in Northern Ireland. The museums sector and PRONI had been trying to produce separate websites, but our partnership enabled greater efficiencies. The project, which provides 13 learning packages, has been well used and it shows the power of information and communication technology (ICT) in digitising museum resources and making them more accessible to everyone in Northern Ireland, irrespective of the location of the user and the museum.

Chris mentioned the learning report on which we are working. In 2009, we will publish a report that will be the first comprehensive survey of the learning services that are provided by the 38 accredited museums that are open across Northern Ireland. The facts and figures will then emerge. We are undertaking a comprehensive survey of all the museums, which will consider the education programmes that are provided, the staff and resources that need to be made available to museums and the constraints to developing partnerships to a greater degree.

Centralisation and localisation was mentioned. As shown by the evidence from the Mid-Antrim Museums Service and the Causeway Museums Service, community engagement is one important area in which museums can co-ordinate. Community engagement is being worked on in a larger regional area by bringing one or two officers to work across several council areas. The 11 council model allows great scope for doing that.

Over the past seven or eight years, the Museums Council has funded a substantial number of education and outreach posts. Although we have not been the biggest funder of those posts, we have been the most frequent. We have helped to lever an additional £1·46 for each £1 that we have put into education posts. Two of those posts were made permanent, and 21 of the accredited museums have an education officer.

There is great scope to do more. The survey’s early indications show that learning provision is outstanding in some museum services, but that it is fragmentary across Northern Ireland. When I refer to learning, I mean both the formal education work that is done with schools and further education colleges, and the work with communities and adult groups. A centralised body — whether it is NIMC or a successor — is needed to provide that capacity, expertise and research on such areas to develop co-ordinated strategies that bridge that central / local gap.

Mr McCausland:

When do you think that a museums policy should be introduced?

Mr Bailey:

Although it does not answer the question, a policy should be introduced as quickly as possible. Realistically, it could not be delivered in less than six months. Pragmatically, I would like to see it within that timeframe, and it would be unacceptable if it went beyond a year.

Mr Brolly:

I do not understand why six months would be needed, because the policy seems to be well done already. We have spoken about that before, Chris, and I know what your views are. We recommend that the Northern Ireland Museums Council is kept as the body that is in charge, because of your experience, expertise and the research that you have conducted. The Department’s proposal to bring in outside consultants to work on a museums policy seems superfluous and expensive.

Mr Bailey:

I very much welcome your sympathetic outlook towards the council. Our attitude on the use of consultants is “proceed with caution”. A considerable intelligence base already exists, which the Department must evaluate and use before it starts to fill in the blanks. I am not saying that we have all the answers.

You asked why it would take six months to introduce the policy. I believe that there is leeway during that period to allow not only ourselves and our colleagues to have input, but to imbed it and seek the views of a wider group of stakeholders. There are also requirements under the equality legislation — equality impact assessments and so on must be carried out.

Mr K Robinson:

I thank the witnesses for their presentation. As ever, it was totally comprehensive.

The word “fragmentation” crops up again and again. You are in a unique position in that you seem to have the trust of all the other contributors who have appeared before the Committee. They trust your expertise and judgement, and you are fighting for that sector in a selective manner and not just by hitting everything that stands in your way. You have given us examples of the money that you have been able to lever in; for every pound that DCAL or the ratepayer puts in, you can find £1·46 and £0·92, depending on the circumstance. You are generating funding and giving money to the people on the ground who most need it.

I am not a frustrated grandfather, but I am a frustrated schoolmaster. There are tremendous opportunities within formal and informal education settings to get your message across. It totally frustrates me that many young people — and not-so-young people — do not know who they are or where they have come from, and do not have a clue where they are going to, even though all around them we can see influences on the land, the way we talk, the way we act and the way we view society. How do we break that mould and move beyond the classroom?

Sheila Speers is a name that springs to mind — that tells you the era in the Ulster Museum that I am talking about. She took groups of children around the museum, taking artefacts out of their cases and allowing the children to touch them. I still remember the look in the children’s eyes as they lifted the Stone Age axe. I asked a simple question then: please can I have a box of items to take to my school so that more pupils can get their hands on them? I was told that, unfortunately, that was not allowed. Have we broken through that invisible barrier now?

Ms Crozier:

Yes, very much so. To give NIMC a plug again, we fund the development of many loan boxes. Museums will give out boxes to schools and so on, or the outreach officer will bring them to the schools. I mentioned officer posts earlier, and those officers have an outreach role, too. They do not just stay within the walls of the museums; they go out into the community, too.

Mr K Robinson:

I am talking about the early days, when educational officers in museums were trying to break out and officialdom was pushing them back in. They possibly wanted to hand items out, but somebody somewhere was saying no, that the items might break if touched, and so on. However, if a child’s interest can be stimulated at that early stage, the impact can be lifelong.

Ms Crozier:

Again, our survey will show the areas of education that are well served and those that still need to be developed. To date, the information shows that Key Stage 2, the latter end of primary school, is well served, as is the early part of secondary school. Development is needed for the older children, the post-16 age group, and for the younger children at Key Stage 1, who many never have visited a museum except as part of a family visit. All the museum representatives who we spoke to are willing to carry out the work, and many have the expertise to do so. It is simply a case of building on that work and developing strategies that can facilitate it.

Mr K Robinson:

Community groups are a tremendous untapped resource. On many occasions, I have seen community groups visiting the Ulster Museum, under the tutelage of different bodies. Chairman, if you think that I am going on a bit, you should hear yourself sometimes; I am making up for that that today. I have seen the look of wonder on the faces of those groups of visitors. Suddenly, little snippets of information that they had are fitted into an overall framework. They begin to realise who they are and that things that they did that they were perhaps a wee bit uneasy about socially are quite acceptable. They learn that that behaviour has evolved because of an experience of their family, generation or area.

Recently, the Committee visited Londonderry where representatives of the Museum of Free Derry told their story. The Apprentice Boys also attended that session and wanted to tell their story. However, they were at a stage where they were unsure how to do that. Does the framework enable people to tell their story and ensure that we do not stifle them in officialdom?

The Chairperson:

Please incorporate Dominic’s question into your response.

Mr D Bradley:

A couple of weeks ago, an American educationalist visited the Committee. He commended our ability to construct effective policies, but he doubted whether we achieved outcomes from those policies. Should targets — and a means of measuring them — be incorporated into policy? Is that concept in keeping with the museums policy? Moreover, should the policy incorporate some form of review mechanism in order to assess its effectiveness?

Northern Ireland ’s curriculum has been revised and now contains less content. This week, new syllabuses that contain less content and place more emphasis on skills have been delivered to schools. Will your education programme be modified to reflect that new curriculum? Do the programmes make allowance for delivery in the Irish language and the Irish-medium sector?

Mr Bailey:

Community groups are our bread and butter. They make return visits, and we must engage those people. They are engaged in increasing numbers. We publish the attendance figures of accredited museums in our annual report, and those figures increase every year. The museums face a greater challenge because visitors are becoming more informed. They are becoming experts, and groups have an in-depth knowledge about their specific theme or interest. For example, the Railway Preservation Society of Ireland, the Museum of Free Derry, Milford House Museum and the Naughton Gallery at Queen’s University prove that point. That puts pressure on museums to ensure that they are on top of their game and know where to access the information about their collections.

Digitisation is a key means of dispersing more expertise. The Committee heard earlier about the possible diminution in curatorial expertise in the sector. The NIMC instituted two initiatives, one of which was a small grant fund — which was hugely oversubscribed — to allow museum curators to find time to research their collections. The Ballymoney Museum secured one of those grants, through which it identified that the piece of wood mentioned by Councillor Evelyne Robinson was a sixteenth-century plough. Furthermore, through that research, they found one of the earliest Iron Age, or possibly Bronze Age, butter churns.

Top-quality research is vital, and — as Ken Robinson said — the days when museum curators claim to know everything are gone. Relationships are improving between the museum curator, experts and, indeed, people with private collections outside the museums. That is a vital aspect of the development — vital to the liveliness and sustainability of the museums sector.

“Fragmentation” is an emotive word that we have all used when referring to the absence of joined-up thinking or to the failure to exploit the potential that may accrue from a more joined-up sector.

That leads me on to —

The Chairperson:

Please be brief, Chris. The Minister is due to join us now to discuss creative industries.

Mr Bailey:

I will.

I approve of policies, outcomes, target measuring and reviews — so long as we have the appropriate strategies in place and we have considered the appropriate outputs and outcomes. That is the way to assess whether we are getting value for money.

Briony will talk about the new curriculum and the Irish language.

Ms Crozier:

Museums are adapting to the revised curriculum and many museums that have education officers have adapted their education programmes to meet it. It opens up new opportunities for schools to use museums in all sorts of different ways, either in the classroom or by going out to museums.

Museum staff must have consistent and regular training. The vast majority of education staff in museums have educational qualifications and come from teaching backgrounds. They know schools and the education sector, but they need ongoing training in partnership with the education and library boards or the education and skills authority, when it is established.

We are not responsible for delivering education programmes themselves, but we are responsible for researching what the museums are doing. The early indications from the report that we will produce next year show that few museums provide services in Irish. Provision for languages generally is an aspect that deserves attention.

The Chairperson:

I must draw this to a close. If you want to raise additional points with us, please put them in writing. We must keep strictly to our timetable, and the Minister’s presentation comes next. Do you have you a final comment, Chris?

Mr Bailey:

A prime example of joined-up thinking was when Newry and Mourne Museum applied to us for money to provide hand-held audio translating machines that could accommodate numerous languages and could be used during tours. One of the languages was Irish, and money was received from Foras na Gaeilge. That not only met the language and tourism agendas, but the access agenda. It is that sort of joined-up thinking that we must strive for.

Thank you very much.

The Chairperson:

Thank you, Chris and Briony.