Ardmore Studios

In a post during October about the Irish Film Board's other capital spending in recent years I put together a table which included payments to Ardmore Studios totalling €500,000 for operational purposes over 2006/7.

There was no public discussion of these payments at the time. Nor was there any announcement made which explained the virtue or the necessity of this money being offered to Ardmore.

The payments were not made public until the annual reports for 2006 and 2007 were published, respectively, in 2008 and 2009. The annual reports record these as operating grants rather than recoverable loans.

In a 'Sounding Off' piece for the current issue of Film Ireland I mentioned several of the pressing issues in the film business that we do not openly discuss. Nor do we encourage any wider public discourse or engagement with these issues, one of which is Ardmore Studios.

This is what I wrote, The Irish public owns a piece of Ardmore Studios [32%] but its fate is not a matter of public discussion. What’s going to happen to Ardmore when the new studios open at Ballyhenry? Ardmore has been directly and indirectly supported by the Irish taxpayer in recent years but we won’t talk about that. Is Ardmore now going to cost us more money?

Ardmore raises another serious matter that is implicit if unstated in the 'Sounding Off' article - potential conflicts of interest in the sector and the perception that decision-making could be compromised by those potential conflicts.

In the 2006 annual report the Irish Film Board provides the following information on disclosure of Board Members' interests:
Board Members - Disclosure of Transactions
In the normal course of business the Irish Film Board may approve assistance to film projects and enter into other contractual arrangements with undertakings in which Board Members are employed or otherwise interested. The Irish Film Board has adopted procedures in relation to the disclosures by Board members and these were adhered to during the year. The members and the Board complied with the Code of Practice for the Governance of State Bodies covering situations of personal interest. The members did not receive any documentation on the transactions nor did the members participate in or attend any Board discussions relating to the matters.
The report notes under the above:
Kevin Moriarty Ardmore Studios 400,000

The IFB annual report for 2007 notes:
Board Members - Disclosure of Transactions
In the normal course of business the Irish Film Board may approve assistance to film projects and enter into other contractual arrangements with undertakings in which Board Members are employed or otherwise interested. The Irish Film Board has adopted procedures in relation to the disclosures of interests by Board members and these procedures were adhered to during the year.
Kevin Moriarty Ardmore Studios 100,000

This is clear. What is less clear is how, for instance, a Board member who is the director of a film or TV project funded by the Board would not be part of the decision-making on that project for the reasons above. Whereas the owner or director or employee of, for example, a facility business which might benefit far more substantially (than a director) from IFB funding for a project would be permitted, as a Board member, to be involved in approving that project for funding.

In 2006, for example, an 'International Production Fund' loan of €500,000 was made by the IFB to The Tudors. Presumably this loan was a factor in the decision of the production to shoot in Ireland at a time when S481 was both less competitive and less generous than it is now. The series filmed at Ardmore.

However, the standard disclosure is not made in respect of this loan so did the Board comply with the spirit of the Code of Practice for the Governance of State Bodies covering situations of personal interest?

A contact has brought an article by Gavin Daly in last Sunday's Sunday Business Post to my attention. The article is headed Ardmore in talks with Film Board and states, The issues under discussion are understood to include funding plans for Ardmore

To quote further from Daly's article, Kevin Moriarty, managing director of Ardmore, said that he was in constant contact with the film board but was "not in a position to comment" on any funding talks. "We always have discussions with the film board. We talk to them about upcoming film productions and they talk to us. That's normal," he said.
He said the studio was "very busy at the moment" despite the difficult economic environment. Filming began at Ardmore last week on Byzantium, a vampire film directed by Neil Jordan and starring Saoirse Ronan and Gemma Arterton.

It is not stated in the article that Mr Moriarty has been a member of the Film Board since 2005.

In recent months the IFB approved a production loan of €1,180,000 for Byzantium. One can only assume that Ardmore Studios will benefit substantially from this loan, and that the production would not be taking place, or would not be taking place in Ireland if this loan was not forthcoming.

One must also assume, in the ordinary course of events, that any number of facility and service providers will be contacted by producers who are pricing facilities for forthcoming productions and that this information will be part of the budget documentation that is submitted to potential funders for consideration.

One can only presume, notwithstanding the very many sound reasons for supporting Byzantium, that all necessary disclosures were made by any IFB Board member(s) who might either benefit directly or indirectly from the production, or be in competition with other providers to other productions who themselves might stand to lose out by virtue of this (or any) project being funded while others were refused.