Thurles Information

A Possible Budget Leak – With Questions Still Unanswered.

Reports ahead of Ireland’s Budget 2027 suggest that all 16-year-olds could receive a €100 voucher for arts and cultural activities, with a possible extension to 17-year-olds in Budget 2028. The estimated first-year cost is €7.5 million. This remains a reported proposal, rather than a confirmed entitlement.
Whether the announcement has emerged through a deliberate leak has not been established.

Helping young people experience culture most certainly is a worthwhile ambition. But taxpayers are entitled to ask what this particular measure would achieve, and whether another approach would achieve much more.

Cultural Spending on those aged 16 year does not automatically mean education
A play, concert or creative workshop can spark an interest that can last a lifetime. Enjoyment and shared experiences have value also. However, redeeming a voucher does not prove that someone has learned something new or discovered an activity they would otherwise have missed.

France’s experience offers a warning.
Its national auditors found that the ‘Culture Pass’ mainly reinforced established cultural habits, while its ability to broaden participation remained limited.
Ireland should learn from that experience, before assuming a voucher will overcome barriers to culture.
The test is whether the Government sets clear objectives, publishes the costs and commissions an independent evaluation. Success should mean reaching young people who currently miss out, not simply announcing how many vouchers were spent.

Could It Free Money For Alcohol or Drug Abuse?
If a teenager already planned to buy a concert ticket, a voucher could leave their own money available for something else.
But it would be unfair to assume that the money would go towards alcohol or drugs. It might pay for transport, food or savings. There is no evidence presented here establishing that this proposal would increase substance use.
Will Ticket Prices Rise And Who Gets the Money?
Extra purchasing power could put upward pressure on prices where popular events already sell out. At venues with empty seats, it could instead increase attendance without raising prices. Most popular bands on Tour entering Ireland already cost well over €100
Some spending could benefit wealthy performers, major promoters and ticketing platforms. Other spending could support local theatres, musicians and cultural organisations which command much less cost.
The Government should monitor prices and publish where the money goes. Public subsidy deserves scrutiny even when the product being sold is culture.

Could €7.5 Million Expected Spend Achieve More Elsewhere?
A comparison might be sustained music tuition, youth clubs, instrument lending, school cultural visits and transport for disadvantaged or rural teenagers.
A voucher cannot solve the problem of having no accessible venue or no way to get there. Supporting participation may require people, facilities and transport as well as purchasing power.
Poorer children deserve cultural opportunities too. The question is which approach gives them the most meaningful access.

“For Ye Have the Poor Always With You”
The moral question remains relevant for Christians; does this prospective spending meaningfully help those excluded, or mainly subsidise those already well able to participate?
Matthew 26:11 should be read in context; Jesus defends a woman’s anointing of him, with expensive perfumed oil, which he connects with his burial. We should not interpret it as permission to neglect poverty.
Deuteronomy 15:11 (Second Law) acknowledges that poverty persists while calling for generosity towards those in need.

My Own Personal View: Let’s Test this Before Expanding It.
I would support a limited, independently evaluated pilot, with extra support for disadvantaged teenagers and opportunities to take part in local creative activities.
France’s experience shows why this matters. Its national auditors found weaker participation among young people from less advantaged backgrounds and questioned how far a primarily financial scheme could overcome existing inequalities.

Create Opportunities to Make and Perform
To my mind the pilot should offer opportunities to learn an instrument, join a drama group, make a short film, try photography or attend a series of creative workshops.
Taking part in an activity over several weeks offers a much better chance to develop skills, friendships and confidence. The pilot should test both approaches, while preserving young people’s choice.
Here in Thurles Co. Tipperary, as in many other Irish communities, we already have organisations that could greatly inform this work.
Music Generation, for example, supports local access to vocal and instrumental tuition for children and young people. Partnership opportunities should be explored, with funding for any additional places and teaching required.

Measure What Changes Because of the Support. The independent evaluation should ask:

• Did teenagers start activities they would otherwise have missed?
• Did the scheme reach those with the greatest barriers?
• Did participation continue six or twelve months later?
• What did participants learn, enjoy or find difficult?
• What was the full cost, including administration, transport and additional support?
• Did spending support local provision, and were there changes in prices or fees?

Researchers should record participation before any pilot and use a fair comparison, such as a phased rollout, to help distinguish the scheme’s effects from changes that would have happened anyway. They should also speak to teenagers who never used the offer or stopped attending.
If the results are strong, expansion would have a credible foundation. If benefits mainly go to teenagers already participating, the scheme should be redesigned.
Support would rest on a clear purpose; giving young people a fair chance to discover, enjoy and develop their creativity and showing that public money greatly helped make that possible.

Before expansion, the Government should demonstrate new participation, fair access and reasonable value for money.