THIS is the first general election in which the arts have been an issue. The creation in 1992 of the first cabinet ministry for the arts revolutionised the way people see their role in society.
The fact that he has been the first cabinet Minister for the Arts gives Michael D. Higgins a much higher soap box than the spokesmen and women on the arts from the other parties. They are producing policies on the basis of there being a full cabinet minister, yet the very concept of the ministry is inevitably seen as a Labour one.
As the first of his kind, Mr Higgins seems to many in the arts constituency like an emperor who has a wonderful empire but no heir. There is a fear this empire will vanish into the sands of time after June 6th, which is not surprising in a sector which has been told or shown by a long line of administrations that it is peripheral and expendable.
The fear is probably unjustifiable, however, because it looks likely that the empire will stand, even without Emperor Higgins. The arts sector has seized the opportunity of the last five years and has proved its importance. Of the other party spokespeople, only Donna Cooney of the Green Party intimates that a junior ministry might adequately deal with the sector (she sees a cabinet minister for community as having a role in arts development).
All the others would retain the cabinet status but might vary the component parts of the portfolio.
While many would see the coupling of the Gaeltacht with the arts as having given Irish its rightful place as a part of our living culture, Mairin Quill of the Progressive Democrats thinks the Gaeltacht would fare better under education, as does Ms Cooney. Both would add heritage to the arts minister's portfolio, while Fianna Fail's Sile de Valera would have it all and more: "Arts, heritage, Gaeltacht and the islands".
No party is suggesting the reduction of Mr Higgins's plans for the arts. The message from every party is "more, bigger, better", though none has had a chance to prove it is capable of winkling more substantial funding from the Department of Finance after an election.
The Arts Council's ambitious three year plan, which was commissioned by Mr Higgins and is scheduled to run until 1999 seems to have been adopted as a working model by all the parties. The expressed hope of the chairman of the Arts Council, Dr Ciaran Benson, that the plan would become a fact of life regardless of political change has been fulfilled. The council is working on a midterm review of the plan and is talking of a second to run into the next millennium.
This is despite the fact that a new council must be appointed by the end of next year by the incoming minister.
Mr Higgins, who after the presentation of the Labour manifesto on Tuesday expressed an interest in keeping his job, is confident he can secure the funding to complete the plan by 1999, bringing Arts Council funding to £26 million. He had originally planned to bring funding to this level by this year.
Sile de Valera made strong reference to this "abject failure" in her Fianna Fail ardfheis speech last month, stressing there was a £12 million shortfall in funding for the plan. She has undertaken to meet the £26 million target in 1998 - a year before Mr Higgins. In return for this, however, the Arts Council must introduce a transparent code of practice and must adhere to short deadlines for funding approvals.
The most controversial element in the three year plan was the designation of cities outside the capital as "centres of excellence" for different art forms: Cork for the visual arts, for instance, and Waterford for theatre. Fianna Fail would discard the centres of excellence idea altogether, saying it smacks of elitism and bureaucracy", but Mairin Quill would foster it, so "Ireland's cities would develop in the direction of the old city states of medieval Europe".
The establishment of the Department of Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht has led to tension between it and the Arts Council over who has responsibility for what. For instance, Mr Higgins favours the funding of the National Theatre from his own Department, as IMMA and the National Concert Hall are funded, while the Arts Council has long argued that the National Theatre should continue to take its chances with other theatres for Arts Council resources.
It seems unlikely that a change of government would relax these tensions, as any minister for the arts would probably want to be associated directly with large projects, particularly high profile and demonstrably excellent institutions like the Abbey. Sile de Valera tends towards the same position as Mr Higgins.
A more obvious trophy for any politician would be the building of an opera house in the Dublin docklands, for which the Arts Council announced its support in a sudden statement a few weeks ago. Labour's manifesto makes no mention of the project, which has many opponents. Fianna Fail stops short of saying it would build it, but comments: "An opera house is a missing ingredient of Dublin's cultural life."
It is obvious that the activists who have been at work in the last decade have succeeded in setting the arts agenda when one sees how the parties sing from similar hymn sheets on the issue of access.
The provision of arts education in schools is given priority by all, but there are different emphases. Labour's inservice training is less radical and less attractive than Democratic Left's teams of artist teachers.
This scheme would also alleviate the poverty of artists, which is mentioned by most but addressed by no one; the Progressive Democrats speak of artists having the same rights as any other workers but have no practical suggestions as to how this could be achieved. It is surprising that the Green Party does not stress its old plan for a minimum wage - since taken up by Fianna Fail - in its arts policy.
All parties refer to the issue of the culturally disadvantaged, but there are no new ideas. Labour's development of the scheme run by Creative Activity For Everyone (CAFE) among the long term unemployed is at least concrete. It is cheering, however, to see that the crucial role of the local authorities in arts provision is not overlooked.
The party which commits most funding to local government will probably be the one which would bring the greatest benefits to the arts world - benefits which would last far longer than the sparkle of any trophy projects.