³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

« Previous | Main | Next »

Wanted: Art Detective

Post categories:

William Crawley | 18:52 UK time, Thursday, 31 August 2006

sherlock.jpgThe of Northern Ireland is facing some severe criticism after an reveals that 52 works of art purchased with taxpayers money have gone missing. The missing artworks are valued at £28,000.

The Council is also unable to determine the wherabouts of another 56 artworks, jointly purchased through a partnership scheme; and the report notes that more than 70 pieces from the Council's collection were judge permanently lost in the 1990s and susequently written off. These write-offs include paintings by TP Flanagan and Neil Shawcross. The Audit Office has criticised the "poor management" of another art collection, comprising 346 works purchased as part of the Partnership Purchase Scheme (PPS), resulting in a missing 56 pieces.

The Council's : they are still looking for the missing works of art and will "exhaust every avenue of opportunity."

An additional finding, that about one in seven works in the whole PPS collection -- and no less than 77 artworks in the combined Arts Council and PPS collections -- were purchased from artists employed at the time by the Arts Council, will raise questions in some minds about a culture of patronage or favoritism at the Arts Council.

Comments

  • 1.
  • At 04:33 PM on 01 Sep 2006,
  • henry grant lee wrote:

This is an absolute disgrace. Obviously, no-one will resign and no-one will apologise. Quangos, tut.

  • 2.
  • At 09:01 PM on 01 Sep 2006,
  • wrote:

Why in hell is the government using taxpayers money to buy ART in the first place?

  • 3.
  • At 09:34 PM on 01 Sep 2006,
  • Miheal wrote:

As a taxpayer, I support the use of public money to invest in the arts community - just as I believe money should be used to invest in businesses and sporting facilities.

  • 4.
  • At 02:31 PM on 02 Sep 2006,
  • wrote:

Miheal:

Why should my money be taken from me to invest in art that I'm not interested in? Why should my money be taken from me to support people's businesses, when I myself have no business at all? Why should money be taken from me to provide sporting facilities I may not even use? What is wrong with the principle that people pay for art they want to see, or for sporting facilities they wish to use. As a taxpayer why do you think it right that my money is taken from me involuntarily to provide you with art and recreation? Pay for it yourself if you like it - stop thinking you have the right to force me to support your enjoyment involuntarily with the fruit of my labours.

SG

  • 5.
  • At 05:09 PM on 02 Sep 2006,
  • miheal wrote:

Stephen, come on. As a tax payer, I want money to be invested in things I value within our community. Youth centres. Sports facilities. Schools. Hospitals. And the arts.

  • 6.
  • At 08:11 PM on 02 Sep 2006,
  • wrote:

Miheal- Your right then, is to take your money and invest your money into things that YOU value, not to take other people's money and put it into things that YOU value! Can't you see the difference?

  • 7.
  • At 08:31 PM on 02 Sep 2006,
  • wrote:

Miheal: If you want money to be invested in things you value then please do it with your own money - not advocate the use of mine - forcibly and unwillingly taken.

SG

  • 8.
  • At 12:09 PM on 13 Mar 2007,
  • wrote:

Great information thanks.

  • 9.
  • At 12:11 PM on 13 Mar 2007,
  • wrote:

Great information thanks.

  • 10.
  • At 12:14 PM on 13 Mar 2007,
  • wrote:

Great information thanks.

This post is closed to new comments.

³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ iD

³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ navigation

³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Â© 2014 The ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.