Sixth Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation
Wednesday 10 December 1997
[Mr. Bowen Wells in the Chair]
Draft Museum and Galleries (Northern Ireland) Order 1997
4.30 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr. Tony Worthington): I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Musuems and Galleries (Northern Ireland) Order 1997.
I welcome you to the Chair, Mr. Wells. I do not normally associate you with domestic matters, but I am sure that you will preside over us with your usual charm.
This significant order was laid before the House on 25 November 1997. It is the culmination of a process started by the report ``A Time for Change: a review of major museums in Northern Ireland''. The previous Government commissioned Alistair Wilson to carry out a policy review of Northern Ireland's three major museums--the Ulster museum, the Ulster folk and transport museum and the Ulster American folk park. The report's key recommendation was that the three museums should be brought together under a single management framework. Public consultation on the report confirmed a broad consensus in favour of the concept of merger. The three museums in particular confirmed their support for the proposal. Reservations related primarily to the details of implementation rather than to the concept itself.
I wholly accept the case for merger, which has considerable advantages. It will create a more substantial and prestigious museum body for Northern Ireland of national and international standing and influence in line with those in the rest of the United Kingdom. That single corporate entity will have a more cohesive and strategic approach to the use of resources and the future growth and development of the organisation. We are aiming for a new, more professional management ethos providing greater scope for flexibility and innovation. I recognise that my Department will have a duty to develop a better relationship with the museums.
The Chairman: Order. There is a Division in the House. The Committee is suspended for 15 minutes.
4.32 pm
Sitting suspended for a Division in the House.
4.47 pm
On Resuming:--
Mr. Worthington: Therefore, I have decided to proceed with the necessary legislation, to which I have introduced amendments to reflect comments received during the consultation process. I wish to record my appreciation for the interest shown by many bodies and individuals, and especially for the significant input of the museums merger steering group, which was established to prepare for the merger, and which includes representatives from the three museums. The preparations for the merger are therefore well advanced.
The order's purpose is threefold: to establish a single museum institution for Northern Ireland; to repeal the Museums (Northern Ireland) Order 1981, which currently governs the two statutory bodies--the Ulster museum and the Ulster folk and transport museum; and to make provision for the Ulster American folk park, an independent charitable museum, to transfer to the new institution by separate arrangements.
I will now turn to the detail of the order, focusing on the most significant provisions. One of the main issues that emerged from the consultation on the legislation was the model for the governance of the new institution. At present, each of the two statutory museums is governed by a board of 15 trustees--six members appointed by district councils, two university appointments, and seven Department of Education of Northern Ireland appointees.
The new merged institution will have a single tier of governance, which I have decided should be known as the Board of the National Museums and Galleries of Northern Ireleand. That was especially welcomed by the Arts Council. The title reflects the status of the institution in terms of the importance and breadth of its collections. As to membership, I believe that Goverments are best placed to achieve a balance, which includes individuals with relevant interests and expertise and which broadly accords with the plurality of Northern Ireland. I have therefore decided to adhere to the original proposal, which was put forward by the previous Government, that there will be no rights of representation on the new board, and that all members, including the chairman, will be appointed by the Government following consultation with a range of persons and bodies, including district councils and those that represent educational and heritage interests. Although specific provision for consultation is included in the order, the appointments process will, of course, follow the guidelines laid down by the commissioner of public appointments.
In repsonse to comments received during consultation, I have decided to specify a minimum of 12, and a maximum of 15, members of the board, and a term of appointment not exceeding five years. I have also decided to retain the provision enabling the chairman to be paid an annual honorarium, but have removed such provision for a vice-chairman. I have agreed that the honorarium shall be £8,000. I consider that to be a modest figure, taking account of the level of commitment required and the especially challenging task of overseeing the reorganisation in the intitial years. The detailed provisions are set out in schedule 1.
This model of governance has worked well to date in other bodies for which I have responsibility--for example, the Arts Council, the Sports Council and the Youth Council. It has produced well-balanced membership structures with a strong commitment to the development of the work of the bodies concerned.
In reaching my decision on the governance issue, I have considered the concerns expressed by several district councils, and some political parties, that the influence of local government should not be diluted. In response to those concerns I have ensured that district councils will be consulted as part of the public appointments process.
I have also taken a further step in response to district councils' concerns, in relation to the functions of the new board. As previously drafted, the primary functions of the board were considered too tightly focused on the heritage of Northern Ireland, especially by the three museums concerned. Article 4 now reflects a broader description of the collections, but places particular emphasis on the heritage of Northern Ireland. That mirrors the provisions of the National Heritage (Scotland) Act 1985, which governs the national museums and galleries of Scotland. Although the remaining functions and powers of the new board largely reflect those under current legislation governing the Ulster museum and the Ulster folk and transport museum, there are differences to which I should like to draw the Committee's attention.
In response to district councils' concerns, which I mentioned earlier, article 4 introduces the requirement that the new board should consult district councils, education and library boards and others on the exercise of its functions. I am not committed to any particular model for that consultation. I prefer to leave that open for determination by the new board and the Department working together. I firmly believe, however, that the new institution must form a relationship with district councils--on the one hand, to keep in touch with the views of the community that the board serves, and on the other hand, to encourage and support the district councils themsleves with local museum provision, which is much less developed than in the rest of the United Kingdom. I also believe that it is important that the new board should consult the education and library boards in view of the importance of developing further the new isntitution's educational role.
I am satisfied that requiring the district councils to be consulted on the exercise of the functions of the new institution and on appointments to the board should allay any fears that the district councils will be unable to play an influencing role in relation to the management and development of this important institution that is to serve the Northern Ireland community.
Another example of a new power for the Board is the ability, under article 8, to form companies. That ability will provide greater flexibility for the board in carrying out its functions, and is in line with provisions for other national museum institutions across the rest of the UK.
Conversely, but again in keeping with other UK museums legislation, article 5 places stricter controls that currently exist on the disposal of objects in the collections. Those controls were introduced to meet the strongly expressed views of the three museums.
Article 6 provides for the transfer of any body, by agreement, to the new institution. The primary purpose of the article is to enable the board to enter into an agreement for the transfer and management of the Ulster American folk park on agreed terms and conditions, which will be approved by my Department. There has been considerable discussion about the fact that the article goes a step further. To meet the concerns of the folk park's staff, who are the employees of a private trust, provisions have been added to confirm that where staff are transferred as part of a transfer to the new institution, their terms and conditions should be no less favourable than those of their counterparts in the other two museums, whose contracts will transfer as a result of the Order.
Another main issue, which emerged from consultation was the degree of influence and control by the Department of Education over the new institution's procedures and activities. Many of the comments received stressed the importance of ensuring an arm's length relationship. I have carefully considered those comments and I have also taken into account the need for the Government to be assured that a public body is properly accountable for its actions. Obviously, this is a tightrope. Having reflected on the matter, I have introduced changes to the legislation. First, article 9, which sets out the financial provisions and provides for the Department to pay grant to the board, has been reworded to achieve the necessary balance between faciliating the arm's length principle and retaining the line of accountability to Parliament in relation to the proper use of public funds.
Secondly, in schedule 1, I have relaxed various provisions. In relation to the membership of the board, I have removed the requirement that the vice-chairman should be appointed by the head of the Department and substituted a provision enabling the trustees to elect one of their number as the vice-chairman. I have also deleted all provisions for the appointment to the board of a Departmental nominee. That was discussed in the Wilson report. In relation to staff, I have removed the power of the Department to give a direction with respect to the number of staff employed by the board. In relation to committees, with the exception of the mandatory audit and staffing committees, I have removed the requirement for the Department to have an approval role in the appointment by the board of other committees and sub-committees, and I have modified the number of trustees on such committees and sub-committees from one half of the membership to one trustee.
I have made two changes that strengthen the provisions. A trustee may be removed where he or she fails to comply with the terms of appointment, and the Department will approve the standing orders of the board and its committees and sub-committees. I believe that those changes will generally be welcomed--they achieve the right balance between autonomy and accountability.
Inevitably, there will be a degree of reorganisation to facilitate the merger. A smooth transfer will be essential to maintain stability while the museums move to a single management framework. The detailed transfer provisions are contained in schedule 2 of the order. In particular, the provisions will ensure that staff transferring to the new institution do so on the basis of existing terms and conditions. That is in accordance with requirements relating to the transfer of undertakings regulations, which have come to be known as TUPE. Any changes to those terms and conditions will be negotiable through the normal course of industrial relations.
Finally, I wish to deal with articles 12 to 14, which are largely a continuation of existing legislation empowering district councils to provide museums and galleries. However, the order will remove the need for the Department to have an approval role in relation to district council expenditure. Instead, I have introduced a modified control requiring district councils to consult the Department, and any body that the Department may determine, on museum provision. I have in mind, for instance, the suggestion that the district councils should consult the Northern Ireland Museums Council, which is a non-statutory body, part of whose remit is to advise on local musuem provision. I believe that that alternative arrangement will assist in promoting a more strategic approach to local museum provision.
I have dealt with the main provisions of the order. The remaining provisions are largely of an administrative nature in relation to such matters as byelaws and the provision of annual reports and accounts by the new merged institution. I commend the order to the Committee.
4.59 pm
| 
