COMMITTEE FOR CULTURE, ARTS AND LEISURE
OFFICIAL REPORT
(Hansard)
Inquiry into the Development of a
Museums Policy for Northern Ireland
23 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
The Lord Browne
Mr Raymond McCartney
Mr Nelson McCausland
Mr Pat Ramsey
Mr Jim Shannon
Witnesses:
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure (Mr Campbell)
Mr Colin Watson ) Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure
Ms Hazel Campbell )
The Chairperson (Mr McElduff):
Good morning, Minister, Colin and Hazel — you are welcome to the Committee. Members have a copy of a written submission that was sent to the Committee by the Minister and the Department. I now invite the Minister to address the meeting, after which members will have the opportunity to pose questions.
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure (Mr Campbell):
I thank the Committee for the opportunity to attend this meeting and to present the Department’s view on the proposed development of a museums policy for Northern Ireland. Hazel and Colin will assist me with the most difficult questions.
I assure the Committee that I am committed to ensuring that the highest possible standards for our museums are, and continue to be, in place. Museums are attractions for the local population and for our ever-increasing number of visitors. Inevitably, the provision and development of museums is linked to the availability of resources — unfortunately, that is a fact of life.
The pressures that exist — even for an organisation on the scale of National Museums Northern Ireland — mean that prioritisation is necessary. The Committee may be aware of the report prepared by the Northern Ireland Audit Office entitled ‘Collections Management in the National Museums and Galleries of Northern Ireland’, which was the subject of a meeting of the Public Accounts Committee. That report highlighted the conflicting priorities of storage, the improvement of public facilities and the enhancement of the collections.
The per capita spend on museums in Northern Ireland compares favourably with other parts of the UK. Northern Ireland is second to Wales — we spend £7·73 per capita, compared with £8·37 in Wales. In England, the figure is £7·22 per capita, and in Scotland it is £4·62.
I am aware that the Committee has taken a great deal of oral evidence, and members are now well versed in the facts and figures that relate to many of our museums and services. I am sure that members are familiar with the museum landscape here, but it would be useful to set out the views of the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL) on the relationship to the sector in order to put some of my subsequent comments in context.
My Department’s prime responsibility is for National Museums Northern Ireland, which holds collections of national significance at its four main sites: the Ulster Museum; the Ulster Folk and Transport Museum; the Ulster American Folk Park; and the Armagh County Museum. The Armagh County Museum is unique in that it is the only local museum that is funded directly by central Government. That has been recognised, and the museum will be transferring to council ownership under the proposals of the review of public administration (RPA). National Museums also has responsibility for the W5 science centre at the Odyssey.
National Museums is undertaking a major reform and modernisation programme aimed at reducing costs and creating a modern museum service. The Committee will be aware that we eagerly await the reopening of the refurbished Ulster Museum in 2009. Looking to the future — and with the important caveat that it will be subject to competing priorities and funding — I am aware of the aspiration to have a national art gallery and for greater recognition for our industrial and maritime heritage. Furthermore, a number of external organisations have rightly pressed the case for greater recognition of our military past. I am open to considering how those aspirations might be met. More information and discussion is needed.
Nationals Museum ’s revenue funding for 2008-09 is £12·85 million, and the total capital programme for 2008-11 is £26·3 million. That is a welcome investment after many years of an infrastructure deficit.
The local museums sector comprises 38 accredited museums, and, in addition, there are approximately 150 other heritage organisations that hold collections of artefacts. About 27 of those operate like a museum, although they are not accredited. The Department provides support to local museums in Northern Ireland through the Northern Ireland Museums Council (NIMC). Councils and museums that benefit have indicated to the inquiry their support for the Museums Council.
The Museums Council provides advice and guidance to local museums, and also co-ordinates training and operates a small grants scheme, among other activities. It lobbies central Government on behalf of its members, including local councils, about the museums sector. The RPA, as agreed by the Assembly, concluded that the functions of NIMC should transfer from central Government to local government. My Department is considering how best to implement the Assembly’s wishes and achieve that transfer.
That gives some indication of the Department’s connection to the museums sector, for which I have direct responsibility. I will now turn to the specifics of the terms of reference. The Committee has taken evidence from various groups on the impact of the lack of a museums policy on their organisations. I have no doubt that each will have outlined the genuine difficulties that they face. Government clearly has a role to play in directing and influencing the museums sector.
In considering the development of a formal policy, my Department had to weigh up departmental priorities and resources. The view is that there are legislative powers and working practices in existence, and there is no high priority to allocate the time and precious resources required to develop a policy. I do not see a formal policy as being a panacea for all the issues facing the museums sector, particularly those areas for which central Government has no direct responsibility, namely, museums owned and funded by councils or voluntary-based organisations.
I do not subscribe to the view that, in the absence of a formal policy, the museums sector in Northern Ireland lacks direction or control. I will provide a few examples. The legislative framework for museums is the Museums and Galleries ( Northern Ireland) Order 1998. The Order sets out the arrangements for the establishment of a board of national museums and its functions in relation to collections; management; the promotion of understanding and education through those collections; and financial arrangements. The Order also sets out legislation in relation to museums that are provided by councils. For example, councils are obliged to consult the Department prior to the planning of a new museum. That consultation provides the Department with the opportunity to stress the importance of having sustainable museums, and to try to avoid overextending the sector.
The Department has governance over the two main museums bodies — National Museums Northern Ireland and the Northern Ireland Museums Council. Those organisations are subject to governance practices, which include corporate and business-planning processes, management statements and financial memoranda, and accountability arrangements whereby the appropriate checks and balances are made. That provides museum services with ongoing strategic direction.
The Department encourages the accreditation of all museums as a means of ensuring the quality of the product, as well as to meet national standards. It can, for instance, help to facilitate loans between museums, not just in Northern Ireland, but on a UK and worldwide basis. It is essential that our museums maintain accreditation parity with their counterparts across the UK. Accreditation enables museums to assess their performance, as well as supporting them in planning and developing their services. The scheme encourages museums to reach minimum levels in museum management, user services, visitor facilities and collections care. That helps to foster public confidence in museums and it provides a benchmark for grant-making bodies, sponsors and donors that want to support museums.
Funding is always to the fore in these debates. I am sure that many contributors would like more money for their organisations and would perhaps envisage a policy that contained a funding package. However, the development of a policy and additional funding do not necessarily go hand in hand. Visitor numbers and studies have shown that museums have great value for tourism and education. For example, the Ulster American Folk Park was named as the visitor attraction of the year at the 2008 Northern Ireland tourism awards. In the past financial year, 165,000 people passed through its gates — the highest number in its 30-year history.
Museums also contribute to our quality of life. The Department commissioned its own study into the social and economic contribution of museums, art and sport. That study showed that some of the other areas in which museums contribute include employment creation; the knowledge economy; community focus; and the fostering of social cohesion and cross-community involvement.
The Committee will be aware that the Department previously gave consideration to the development of a museums policy, but that did not proceed due to competing priorities and resource implications. We must be careful that we do not unduly create expectations that would be difficult to fulfil. However, I welcome the fact that the Committee chose to consider a museums policy for Northern Ireland, and I look forward to receiving a report of the Committee’s findings in due course.
I am happy to take questions.
The Chairperson:
Thank you, Minister. As an MLA for West Tyrone, I am pleased that you acknowledged the ongoing success of the Ulster American Folk Park. However, I will now revert to my role as Chairperson. In your written submission, you stated that the Department operates under the legislative framework of the Museums and Galleries ( Northern Ireland) Order 1998. It strikes me that you and the Department seem to hold the view that legislation equals policy. Witnesses told us that there needs to be a vision for museums in a policy. Where is the vision in the legislation?
Some people suggested that the legislative framework is simply an operating manual for museums, and that a vision is missing. In your opinion, is legislation the same as a policy?
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
No, it is not. I assume that the Committee understood what was meant by “resources”, as I mentioned it four or five times during my opening statement.
I am conscious that the development of a policy could be costly. If I were able to acquire the costings to allow a policy decision to be taken — which did not impinge or impact on the delivery of a high-quality museums service — I would be prepared to consider developing a policy. However, that has not been the case. Hazel will elaborate on the previous considerations of a policy and the implications that they had for the Department.
Ms Hazel Campbell (Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure):
As the Committee is probably aware, some time ago the Department conducted some work on a local museums and heritage review, the outcome of which was a wide-ranging study. However, that study was difficult to progress, because there were so many stakeholders involved. Although the Department made sterling efforts to progress that study, it proved difficult, and interest in it flagged. The Department has not said that it will never re-examine the issue, but it has made it clear that it does not have sufficient resources to do so at present.
The Chairperson:
Is it fair to say that, in 2003, the Department said that it would implement the recommendations of the report?
Ms H Campbell:
Yes, it is. However, that was in conjunction with other Departments — it was not just a DCAL report. The Department did establish a subgroup and chaired six of its meetings. However, as time progressed, it was clear that the subgroup was not meeting its initial objectives and was not progressing.
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
My understanding is that, the more that the subgroup met, the more difficult it became to resolve problems. Is that a fair assessment?
Ms H Campbell:
Yes; a lot of different stakeholders involved, which was part of the problem. The interpretation of “heritage” was also an issue. The subgroup got bogged down in such debates instead of trying to identify clear priorities to develop.
The Chairperson:
The Committee regards a focus on museums as relatively narrow, so a policy could have been achieved.
Mr McCartney:
Thank you for the presentation. As the Minister said in his opening remarks, many witnesses gave evidence to the Committee, and the representatives of the local and independent sector all spoke highly of the Museums Council. Minister, what is your view on the future of the Museums Council?
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
I am considering how best to manage the transition over the next 18 months to two years. I have not come to a final conclusion on how to do that. However, I recognise that there is a supportive stance across local Government for the Northern Ireland Museums Council. I acknowledge that the submissions that the Committee received were very supportive of the Museums Council, which will play an important role in determining the outcome. We are not yet at that point, but we will get to it over the next year to 18 months.
Mr McCausland:
I thank the Minister for his presentation. Following Hazel’s point about previous work that was done on the issue, something that arose in discussions was that the breadth of that work was too wide and ambitious. The term “heritage” can mean a thousand things, from every local-studies group in every wee village in the back of beyond to major organisations, such as the Ulster Historical Foundation. If the policy was more focused on museums, it would be much more feasible.
The other point to emerge was that many studies on museums have already been done, and there is also significant local expertise. Some witnesses who gave presentations to the Committee had considerable experience in their field. Could we not save a great deal of money, and avoid paying a fortune to consultants, by requesting that some work be done in-house on a more modest level? Often, when consultants are appointed, they question the experts, write down the answers and give them to the Committee. In-house work would put less strain on the Department’s budget.
Mr McElduff:
They might change the opening paragraph in that response, Nelson.
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
We are getting to the cusp of the matter now. Previously, when heritage was included, as Mr McCausland outlined, the subject matter was extremely wide. Now that it has narrowed, the task is slightly easier, because the remit is clear.
Before coming to today’s meeting, I asked about museums policies in England, Scotland and Wales. It transpired that views on the subject are diverse. Scotland does not have a museums policy and has no plans to develop one. England and Wales each have a strategy, which could be dressed up as something approaching a policy, but they differ considerably from each other.
I want to avoid going down a particular route for the sake of ticking boxes. I want to ensure that the excellent product is maintained and improved. We must choose the most cost-effective route to meet that objective. I am not convinced by taking the policy route, but I will study any report that the Committee produces. However, I must take the wider picture into account, but even when I do so, the issue is not clear-cut. There is no vast body of opinion that the policy route is the one to deliver.
Mr McCausland:
If it reassures you, Minister, no one is terribly hung up on, or heavily wedded to, the word “policy”. It is question of a “vision” — a word that was used earlier — of the future, and common understanding. Perhaps “strategy”, in which a degree of vision is implicit, is a better word.
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
That is fine; I am happy to consider the matter.
Mr Shannon:
It is good to see you here again; we will keep that seat warm for you every week.
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
Thanks a lot.
Mr Shannon:
One of several recurring themes in the inquiry was free entry to museums, which would meet our objective of generating more visits. Is anyone in the Department examining that possibility? The Committee feels that free admission is critical to what it is trying to achieve.
Another recurring theme mentioned by many groups was the need for a link between DCAL and other Departments to work on tourism, education and the oft-used words of the shared future. Have you, at any stage, considered that to be of such importance that it should form part of your Department’s strategy?
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
I will ask Colin to answer the question on free access to museums.
Mr Colin Watson (Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure):
As members know, admission to the Ulster Museum is free, as it is a national museum. The Ulster Folk and Transport Museum and the Ulster American Folk Park charge for entry. It is a question of resources, because the money from admissions helps to run the museums.
Mr Shannon:
Perhaps the two museums that charge offer something slightly different than other museums. The issue of free entry was mentioned by many deputations from smaller museums. I am keen to know how free entry to smaller museums can be achieved.
Mr Watson:
Ultimately, there is free entry for the national museums, such as the Ulster Museum. In other parts of the UK, national museums also try to offer free admission. It is a matter for local councils to decide whether smaller, local and voluntary museums can afford to offer free admission. They fund and maintain those museums. It is not a matter for the Department to intervene on local councils’ policies on their heritage, tourism and museum provision.
The Minister for Culture, Arts and Leisure:
As we examine the Museums Council’s approach during the next year to 18 months, I want to consult with other Departments on how local government in particular is affected. Therefore, links will be forged through consultation and the discussions that will be held with a range of bodies in order to ensure that the correct result is achieved.
Mr D Bradley:
Good morning, Minister. I think that I am correct in saying that the majority of stakeholders who appeared before the Committee or sent in written submissions are positive about and supportive of a museums policy. However, the Department’s view seems to run counter to that. Some leading experts in museums are of the view that it would not take a great deal of time or resources to develop such a policy. If I understand you correctly, you say that you are wary of a museums policy because it might create expectations of resources that are greater than those that you have at your disposal. Although a policy obviously entails resources, that might involve the redistribution of resources based on changing priorities. There is no doubt that all sectors will fight for greater resources in the future.
Why do you believe that the development of a policy will take such a long time and involve considerable resources, given that experts in the field are convinced that it could be done in a relatively short period of time? One person said that it would take no longer than six months, because much of the necessary information is readily available.
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
It boils down to what people expect a museums policy to deliver. It appears to me, having read and listened to people’s concerns, that the museums policy is looked on as a vehicle to deliver a particular outcome, which, most people would accept, is a desirable outcome. I have to consider whether the vehicle that will achieve that outcome is cost-effective. For example, will achieving that outcome be possible within short time frame? Will it be possible without considerable expense? If the answer to both of those questions is no — it is not possible to achieve that outcome within the constraints of a short time frame and, say, at a six-figure sum — I must examine whether I can achieve the same objective without having to go down the laborious route of devising a museums policy.
I am merely saying that I am not convinced. I will ask Hazel to explain the previous departmental position, as regards whether it related to other areas where a policy was not introduced. We could set aside the 2003 inquiry, for example, which was wide, cumbersome and did not achieve the objective. Indeed, that policy may have coloured judgement to some degree.
Ms H Campbell:
The development of Government policy demands a minimum of three months’ consultation with the relevant stakeholders. Their views must be considered, and even that is done after the initial research has been conducted. I do not doubt that there are people capable of helping the Department to examine the issue, but that could not be turned around within six months.
Another point about a vision, and related issues, is that national museums have a corporate strategy that sets out their vision and way forward. Therefore, what is being considered is the vision for the development of the local museums sector. The Department believes that, because local museums service local councils and communities, any policy development must have an input from those local communities and councils. Given the number of councils and groups with which the Department would have to consult, the process could take quite a while.
Mr D Bradley:
The refurbished Ulster Museum was mentioned. Does it, or will it, have facilities to provide presentations, literature and educational resources in Irish and other languages?
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
I am not sure. I was going to say a couple of things about the Ulster Museum. I will find that out and respond to the Committee.
I recommend that the Committee visits the Ulster Museum. I was there recently, and to me, it is a fantastic facility that will do everyone proud. I do not know the answer, but I will investigate what languages other than English will be provided. I will then forward that information to the Committee.
Lord Browne:
The Minister indicated in previous answers that he was financially constrained in drawing up a museums policy, yet there is a comprehensive sports policy on which approximately half of what is allocated to museums is spent. About £22 million a year is spent on museums. There is an extensive capital programme of £18·3 million for the next three years. Why is there no policy that will benefit both national and independent museums, when the policy on sport spends only half the amount that it is allocated to museums?
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
Hazel provided the national museums’ perspective. If I wanted to examine more closely the possibility of introducing a museums policy, it would apply more particularly to local museums. However, as we all know, each Department is examining their budgetary constraints, which I suspect will be tighter over the next 12 months that they were over the past 12 months.
If someone were to say to me that the resources to develop a museums policy were available, and I were convinced that it was a better way of achieving an end result, I think that I would be even more open-minded about it. The difficulty remains that the cost factor is likely to become more restrictive rather than to ease. I invite Hazel to respond on the issue of the lack of a museum strategy in comparison with a sports strategy.
Ms H Campbell:
The sports strategy was developed over many years. I am conscious about what you said about resources: the strategy will cost more than £100 million to deliver. The Department does not have funding for that in the investment strategy for Northern Ireland (ISNI). It is clear that it takes a long time to develop such a strategy.
I believe that a good strategy is now in place for the development of sport, but that took a long time and a wide-ranging consultation was involved. We hope to be able to launch and deliver that strategy, but many resources will be needed to do so. Therefore, the same sorts of issues are involved, and delivery will come down to priorities.
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
The shorthand version of what Hazel said is the expectation level might rise. What happened with the sports strategy is an example of what could happen with a museums strategy. The difficulties of implementing a policy lie with getting the resources and compacting the time. Overcoming those difficulties may raise the bar of expectation on what could be delivered. Some people might say that that is no bad thing, but additional resources would then be required to meet those expectations. There are no easy answers, but Lord Browne raised a relevant point.
The Chairperson:
Is the Department saying that the development of a museums policy is not high priority?
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
Five minutes ago, I said that I am not intrinsically opposed to an outcome that most people would determine as leading towards a museums policy. Everyone agrees on that outcome. However, I am not convinced that a museums policy is the best route to get there because of the costs and time constraints that are involved. I would prefer to consider another route that leads to the same destination.
That said, I will consider the Committee’s final report. I am prepared to consider other cost-effective mechanisms by which to implement a policy — and reasons and rationales for doing so — which leads to the same direction, but I do not currently see those.
Mr Brolly:
The Committee has received consultations, presentations and submissions from most of the councils that run museums. That information is available to the Committee and the Department. I think it was Raymond McCartney who mentioned that the groups that made submissions commented on the competence, experience, expertise and good work of the Museums Council. The submission from the Museums Council, which was delivered by Chris Bailey, was probably the best submission that we received. In fact, it encompassed everything that a museums policy might include.
The Chairperson:
Do you think that we are nearly at that stage, Francie?
Mr Brolly:
I think so. As I have said several times, there is no need to speak to independent consultants outside of the Museums Council, because they will go to Chris Bailey anyway, write down what he tells him and will send the bill.
The Chairperson:
Nelson made that point earlier.
Mr McCausland:
Information does not need to be taken from an individual or one organisation. Hazel mentioned that there are 26 councils, but four or five councils are grouped together into a museums service, with the result that we do not have to deal with all 26 councils.
The Chairperson:
The Mid-Antrim Museums Service is one example of that.
Mr McCausland:
Those local groups, the Museums Council and the national museums are the players that are needed.
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
I will certainly consider that again during the next year, and I look forward to seeing the Committee’s report.
Mr McNarry:
I am a bit gutted, Minister, to hear what you have said, especially after all the effort and time that we have put in. You have heard that a consensus has developed among members as a result of the evidence that we have taken. I take your point about policy and strategy, and I listened to the point that you laboured on expectation. You have not been convincing in saying that you are open to being convinced, but I am nevertheless working on the basis that you are.
The Chairperson:
That is a possibility.
Mr McNarry:
Yes. Is it possible that you could ally expectation with aspiration? Can you factor in the aspiration for the added value of increased visitors and tourism, which all the museum presentations mentioned, and which seems to have convinced most of the Committee? That appears to add value to and to generate the capacity for spin-offs for communities. I underscore my disappointment, but will the Minister give the Committee any more hope?
The Chairperson:
Further to that, you talked about a different vehicle, but is there an alternative to a policy?
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
I referred to England and Wales adopting their own strategies. I will not indulge in different descriptions of what amounts to similar projects. I stick to the position that I remain to be convinced. I do not want to go down a route that is costly. I am in no doubt that, if I were to do so, museums would say that if x amount of money had not been spent on drawing up a policy, x, y and z could have been achieved.
Mr McNarry:
The Committee is saying that it thinks money can be saved on drawing up a policy. You are not offering any Budget costs. However, the point has already been made by Mr Brolly and Chris Bailey about the fact that a policy can be put together.
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
The Department must have a degree of independence, professionalism and of consultation that will not be achieved in as short a period as six months. Whatever it may save, that will cost money. I merely say that I remain to be convinced. Regardless of whether there is another mechanism — the Chairperson referred to a “strategy” — I want to put in place the most cost-effective mechanism to deliver what is a very good-quality product.
The system that has operated over recent years will change over the next two years. However, I am not convinced that the policy route should be followed. I am prepared to consider what might replace that route; whether it is a strategy or whatever, provided that it ticks the Department’s boxes on time constraints and other issues. If a mechanism can be devised that gets a strategy, possibly similar to that in England and Wales —
Mr McNarry:
That may not be an argument; are you willing to listen to that argument?
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure:
Yes.
Mr McNarry:
That is fine.
The Chairperson:
I thank the Minister and his officials for their engagement with the Committee.