Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 5 Mar 1952

Vol. 129 No. 9

Tourist Traffic Bill, 1951—Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."— (Minister for Industry and Commerce.)

I think it is correct to say that the principle of this Bill has been accepted by all those who have spoken in this debate. It is true that there has been some criticism in regard to the fact that two boards are to be established under the Bill to control the tourist development industry and publicity. I do not think there is very much in the criticism that has been made in that regard if we take it that each board will have separate functions to perform. An Fógra Fáilte will be called upon to carry out an intensive publicity campaign not only in this country but, what is even more important, outside the country in order to encourage tourists to come here. An Bord Fáilte, on the other hand, will be called upon to promote the development of the tourist industry. Now, these are two separate specific functions which can be performed efficiently by each board. If we were to say, as some person might logically say, that all activities connected with tourism should be brought under the control of one board, it would follow, I think, that transport, which is a very important activity in regard to tourism, would also require to be brought under that board. Again, as regards the development of tourism, we have to consider that local authorities play a very big part in the provision of amenities in regard to the tourist industry. There, again, it might be suggested that they, too, should be brought under this board. I suggest that, if the matter is carefully examined, there is not any reasonable case for objecting to two distinct boards carrying out separate functions, provided, of course, that these functions are clearly defined.

As I have said, there is nothing perhaps more important in regard to the development of the tourist industry than efficient transport not only within the limits of our own territory but also in the conveyance of passengers to and from this State. When the Minister was a little younger and perhaps a little bit more ambitious, he did seek to establish a transatlantic air service for the purpose of bringing tourists directly from the United States to this country. That particular activity was cut short by the Minister's successors. I wonder whether, when they abolished that service, they did so from some constructive motive, or whether they were acting just as children act when they destroy other children's toys. Anyhow, it is not the intention of either An Bord Fáilte, or of Fógra Fáilte, which is being established under this Bill, to control transport, but I am quite sure that An Bord Fáilte will take a very keen interest in the transport services that have been provided to and from this country, and also in the transport services within the limits of our nation.

There is one other aspect of general policy outlined in the Bill which was referred to. I think that Deputy Giles, when speaking last week, objected to tourism on the grounds that it might possibly demoralise our people. His suggestion, apparently, was that the morals and the nationality of the Irish people are so tender that they require to be kept under a glass case so that they will not become contaminated by outside influences. I do not share that view. I think that our nationality and our religion are more robust than Deputy Giles seems to think. On general principles, I think it will be accepted that, while we will do everything possible to encourage tourism here, it is not the intention of this Bill, and I am sure it is not the intention of the Government, to lower moral standards in order to encourage tourism. There are small countries in Europe which encourage and promote tourism by developing intensive gambling systems, but I am sure that such an intention is not implied in this Bill. I do not think that would be the intention of any Government here.

So far as the provisions in this Bill in regard to the licensing laws are concerned, I am not too well informed on those matters, but, as far as I can see, these provisions seek merely to give to tourists, staying in our hotels, facilities similar to those which, in the normal course, would be enjoyed by people living in the country. Having regard to the circumstances under which tourists live, being only a short time in a country, it is necessary, I think, that hotels should have this additional accommodation. How far we may go in that direction is a matter upon which there might be considerable discussion.

The main purpose of this Bill is, as I have said, first of all to attract tourists to this country. For that purpose, there must be world-wide publicity. When I say world-wide, I mean that there must be publicity in those countries which are likely to send tourists here. In that connection, it would seem to me essential that Fógra Fáilte should be equipped with powers to advertise our tourist attractions, to advertise them in the Press and in the magazines of other countries where it is possible to do so. I would imagine also that the radio would be utilised for that purpose. Just as we have the Hospitals Trust sponsoring a programme over the radio each evening, there is no reason why Fógra Fáilte should not also have a sponsored programme directed towards people abroad who might be inclined to visit our country. In the same way, short films could be produced showing the advantage of this country from a tourist point of view, thus helping to attract additional numbers of visitors here. I assume that if and when shortwave broadcasting is adopted it will be possible to broadcast propaganda to the United States, and in that way bring not only to the notice of our own people there but to American citizens generally, the amenities and attractions which this country can offer to them.

Some Deputies seem to have a rather poor opinion of the "returned American." Very strong views were expressed in relation to him. The Deputies who expressed those views may have been a little bit unfortunate; they may not have met the right kind of "returned American". We all know that the Irish-American is inclined to boast when he returns home but I do not think we should assume from that, as one Deputy did, that when he goes back to the United States he will continue to deride us and disparage the country. He may express a certain contempt or disapproval of our attractions and amenities while he is here but I am quite certain that, if he runs true to form, he will proceed to boast about the fine country he came from when he returns to the United States.

There is immense room for development in relation to publicity. Large numbers of the citizens of the United States bear Irish names. These names connote for them a definite association with this country. I think it would be good publicity to publish in periodicals and newspapers circulating in the United States historical sketches of the various families whose members are now living in the United States. I am sure there are hundreds of thousands of Murphys in America and I am sure every Murphy would be anxious to know the history of the Murphy family, where it came from, the spot on which the ancestral castle stood and the part the family played in the making of Irish history. Information of that type would encourage Irish-Americans to visit the homeland.

In answer to those who sought to disparage our nation and its attractions from a tourist point of view, there is no harm in reflecting upon the views expressed in the Christenberry report. If that report does nothing else, it does at least encourage us to count our blessings. In the Christenberry report it was pointed out that from an American point of view tourism here to-day is comparatively cheap. That may come as a shock to those amongst us who talk so frequently about the high cost of living and high prices farmers are getting for their produce. In the report it is clearly indicated that Ireland offers an attraction to American tourists by reason of economy.

Another surprising feature mentioned in that report is the fact that our summer days are much longer than they are in parts of America. I must admit that I was not aware of that, but it is mentioned as one of the attractions here; we enjoy a longer period of daylight in summer than do the people in certain parts of America.

Again, we are not, perhaps, inclined to appreciate our ancient monuments. Yet our ancient castles are looked upon by tourists as an attraction. There is need in this regard for the Tourist Board to encourage a little more local knowledge on the part of our people in relation to ancient monuments, ancient castles and attractions of that kind. Local patriotism is always a good thing and it is equally a good thing that our young people should know and appreciate the historic features of their own parishes or counties. From a commercial point of view, that knowledge is also valuable in order that the tourist may be in a position to obtain information in relation to historic features from any local person he may happen to meet. If we had a little more instruction on these features, not only in the schools but also through the medium of lectures and classes in local areas, that would be a very useful national work and very helpful from the tourist point of view.

The Christenberry report referred also to the friendliness of our people. Politicians may be inclined to assume that we are not a friendly people. The conclusion was definitely reached in the report that we are on the whole a friendly people and, whatever little disadvantages we may suffer from the point of view of our climate, they are more than offset by this friendliness. I hope that will continue to be a characteristic of our people.

Our much condemned weather receives kindly mention in the report. Some of us may think we have the worst climate in the world. Apparently people who endure prolonged periods of brilliant sunshine find a little shower of rain now and again very desirable. Our cloudy skies are sometimes more attractive from their point of view than the unchanging brilliancy of their skies. We should, indeed, feel that we have something to offer to tourists and we should have confidence in embarking upon a certain amount of public expenditure in view of the fact that people from outside the country have commented favourably upon the attractions the nation has to offer.

In regard to the activities of An Bord Fáilte, there has been a certain amount of criticism. Some appear to think that the grading of hotels constitutes an unwarranted interference with the ordinary day-to-day business of hoteliers. I think, in reason and common sense, if we are embarking on a fairly considerable amount of public expenditure with a view to bringing tourists to this nation, we ought at least insist that those people who are induced to come here will be given a certain minimum standard of comfort and catering.

I hope that, when this Bill comes into force, some justifiable criticism of the Tourist Board inspectors will have been considered so that it will be avoided in future. There are two particular types of inspectors who have incurred a good deal of displeasure. We have the inspector who comes into an hotel and who offends and insults the hotel keeper in the presence of his staff and in the presence of his guests. I think that is something that should not happen. It is unnecessary even for the improvement of hotels generally. A courteous and competent official could very easily achieve all the purposes it is intended to achieve without giving offence to the hotel keeper and certainly without giving offence to him in the presence of guests or the staff.

There is another type of inspector who has incurred considerable displeasure, and that is the inspector who is courteous to the hotel keeper and everybody in the hotel but, when he gets away out of sight and out of reach, writes a very adverse report which completely spoils the whole effect of the goodwill which he has achieved during his visit. There again that is not quite necessary. If an hotel is very badly run or very grave faults are found within the hotel, I think the courteous thing to do would be privately to bring its faults to the notice of the hotel keeper. With goodwill, courtesy and efficiency on the part of inspectors, a good deal of the dissatisfaction that has existed can be removed. Everybody who is reasonable and who wants to see the hotel business graded upwards will agree that inspection is necessary. All that is required is to make it as unobjectionable as possible while maintaining efficiency.

There is, however, another very important matter which, I think, I should mention because it will play a very big part in the development of tourism. This Bill provides for the improvement and extension of hotels but it must be recognised that there is another Department of State which, immediately an improvement of an hotel is reported, will send out another kind of inspector who will examine the building with a view to raising the valuation. In some cases comparatively small hotels have had their valuations doubled and trebled because they sought merely to bring the standard of the hotel up to modern requirements. I think it would be a very good thing —it would go a long way towards making this Bill more beneficial than it is —if a stay were put upon increasing the valuation. If, as I have said, a period of seven years were allowed to elapse from the time construction work is carried out until the valuation is increased, that would be an encouragement to the hotel keeper to spend money upon improvement work.

We all know that when we talk about hotels we are not talking about big companies with large finances developing a number of large hotels. In the main the majority of hotels are of the smaller type. We are talking about the small, privately-owned hotel. While we hope that tourism will continue to improve and expand, we have got to look at the two sides of the question. Tourism is purely a seasonal business and a hotelier, who depends almost entirely on tourism, has to maintain what is, in effect, "a white elephant" for eight or nine months of the year. He has to keep in proper repair a large building which is in many cases subject to damp, particularly if the hotel is near the seaside where it is subject and exposed to all the attacks of weather conditions.

I think it ought not to be assumed that, because tourism does show signs of becoming better, improving and expanding, the hotelier possesses something in the nature of a gold mine. I think he has nothing of the kind and I am in complete agreement with those who hold and insist that charges in the hotels should be kept at a reasonable level. It would be wrong and entirely bad for the tourist industry if excessive charges were allowed in view of those circumstances. In view of the fact that while their charges are regulated to a considerable extent and that their season for earning money is quite short each year, I think it is desirable that they should be encouraged to enlarge and extend their buildings. That encouragement should be given not only through the aids which are provided under this Bill but also through a temporary exemption from any increased valuation.

The Bill seeks to grade hotels so that any person coming to this country can see at a glance what is a first-class hotel and what is a second-class hotel. I think it would be a very good thing— I believe this was suggested in the Christenberry report—if some attractive sign were to be placed on every hotel if it were graded "A" so that a stranger coming into a town or a village would see at a glance where the hotel was situated. In the same way, it is desirable that road signs should be erected. The local authorities should erect road signs and all signs should be clearly defined and attractive pointing out places of particular interest.

In this connection, I might mention that in West Wicklow, through the activities of a county association and also through those of that very deserving body, the Dublin Wicklowmen's Association, we have in the Glen of Imaal, a monument provided in memory of Sam McAllister.

That monument takes the form of the reconstruction of the building in which McAllister lost his life. It was a very praiseworthy work, but the Glen of Imaal, as the Minister knows, is far removed from any kind of main road and tourists wishing to visit that particular monument would find it extremely difficult to locate. Therefore, good road signs in this connection are very desirable so as to ensure that tourists will not miss points of interest as they travel through the country and so that they will be able to reach them by the easiest and the quickest route.

Again, I am sure that steps will be taken to open up areas which are centres of scenic beauty but which are out of reach of the general public or the travelling public because of inferior roads. I hope the Tourist Board will find it possible to assist the local councils to improve roads leading to some of our outstanding beauty spots. Grants of that kind would be very well spent.

One does not like mentioning one's own constituency but it is hardly necessary to say that the various beauty centres of County Wicklow are to a great extent isolated by reason of the inferior roads cutting through the mountains. We would have no roads at all in the Wicklow Mountains if it were not for the fight put up by Michael Dwyer and the efforts to hunt him down, which made it necessary for the then Government to provide roads through the mountain districts of Wicklow. But there are certain of these roads which could be improved and by their improvement a centre of Wicklow would be opened up to tourist traffic. That would be an amenity and an advantage not only to tourists visiting this country but to our own people, particularly the people in the City of Dublin, who would find this attractive scenery a great boon, being quite near them.

In my opinion, one of the most important features of this Bill is the proposal for the establishment of local development companies and the provision of finance for the establishment of these companies. No organisation is really alive unless it is supported by local bodies. A big office in the City of Dublin may be run very efficiently but unless there is local interest and local support that body will be to a great extent a white elephant.

It is difficult to define what exactly is a tourist centre because there are many places in this country which are not regarded as tourist centres at the present time but which could, with development, be made very attractive to tourists. I believe that in every such local area there should be a local organisation whose primary purpose should be to improve that area from the tourist point of view and to attract tourists to it. One of the most important things would be the organisation of tours to the various centres. Assuming there is a local development company established, that company should undertake to organise bus tours or other types of tours to the various centres of interest around that locality. That is a work which a local body could do. It is not generally recognised that the majority of those who avail of holidays to-day are not exactly similar to the people who used to take holidays 50 or 60 years ago. To-day the ordinary working people of Great Britain, of other industrial countries, and of Ireland also, find that they can afford now and again to take a week or a fortnight's holidays, and it is only right that they should.

It is also not generally recognised that the people who seek holidays outside their own locality are not always very clear in their minds as to the enjoyment which they desire. It is because of that fact that organised holiday camps were established in recent years. The promoters of those camps are cashing in quickly upon a need which exists because there are numbers of people who cannot make up their minds as to what form of enjoyment they intend to take.

What is done by the promoters of holiday camps can be done more efficiently by a local development company in each area, that is to say, this local development company would not only bring tourists to a district and provide them with better amenities but would also take some measures to organise daily amusement for those people, to bring them together perhaps in a holiday centre and send with them a guide who would take them to the various spots of interest. That is work of a constructive nature. It is work that would bring a great advantage to any tourist area that would undertake it. I think it was Deputy McQuillan who expressed regret that the people of Roscommon were not allowed to shoot themselves. We in Wicklow might have a similar complaint. There are vast areas in Wicklow where the local people are not allowed to shoot.

There would be no objection from the Labour Party if you want to shoot yourself.

I do not think anyone would object to Deputy McQuillan doing so either. I believe what he really meant was that there are mountain areas and moor areas which are preserved and the local people are not allowed to shoot there. That is something which cannot be allowed to continue. Under this Tourist Bill measures ought to be adopted to correct that state of affairs. Where you have a large expanse of mountain or moor area which is at present controlled, and possibly reserved in some cases to people living outside our national territory, those areas should be acquired and, if possible, they should be acquired by the Tourist Board and leased then to a local body who would take care of the game rights of that area and would ensure that the game stock in the area was increased as far as possible so as to provide amenities, not only for the people residing in the county or the area but also for the people who would be invited there by the local authorities. In that way new attractions would be provided for an increasing number of tourists.

As I already said, one of the disadvantages from which this country suffers is the shortness of the season. I feel that the season would be greatly prolonged if we were to undertake this matter in a businesslike way. People who go on holidays so as to enjoy the hunting and shooting of game are not so much concerned about warm weather or about climatic conditions generally. We could attract a considerable number of tourists here by restocking our rivers. Of course, these rivers should be under the control of the local development company. These are attractions which are within our reach to offer. I fail to see why we should not be able, to an ever-increasing extent, to offer better shooting, better fishing and, even in a limited way, better hunting. It is true that many of our hunting clubs are rather exclusive and, perhaps, a little bit old-fashioned. I feel that that state of affairs ought to be remedied also and that our hunting ought to be developed with a view to encouraging more tourists into the country.

There was one matter to which the Christenberry report referred, and rightly referred, and that was the fact that bus conductors, taxi drivers and the like are not sufficiently versed in the knowledge of local tourist attractions. The suggestion that these people should receive at least some instruction with a view to their being able to impart to any passenger or tourist a knowledge of the district through which they are passing would be to the advantage of the tourist industry. Everything that helps to make the visitor to this country better satisfied with his holiday and better pleased with everything he has seen and heard will help to ensure that next year and the year after the number of tourists will continue to increase.

There is very little else left for me to say except to recommend this Bill to the House. There may be details of the Bill with which some of us might wish to express dissatisfaction. However, as far as the Bill in general is concerned it is a marked advance on existing conditions and I feel it offers to this nation hope for the development of what is, in effect, a new industry but at the same time one of our largest industries—second only to agriculture. Since it is second only to agriculture it will have to be fully developed so as to afford a substantial increase in our national income and so as to reduce that adverse balance of payments about which all Deputies feel so gravely concerned.

Before Deputy Cogan leaves the House might I ask him to read page six of the synthesis of the report on tourism and he will see there that the strictures which he passed on his colleague, now on that side of the House, Deputy Brennan of Donegal were unjustified and that Mr. Christenberry was most specific in stating that the word "breathtaking" was to be applied to Donegal, as it was applied by Deputy Brennan.

If Deputy Sweetman will read another page of the report, he will see that the word "breathtaking" referred to the country generally.

The difference between Deputy Sweetman and Deputy Cogan in regard to this tourist question is that Deputy Sweetman has tried to make himself familiar with the question by reading the whole of the report whereas Deputy Cogan is merely trying to persuade the people that by reading the report here and there he studied the question but, in fact, he did not. I was only tempted into that remark by certain other observations which Deputy Cogan made towards the end of last Thursday evening and by the provocation which was given by Deputy Burke in the speech which he made from the Government Benches.

I want to discuss this Bill on its merits and without regard to any question of politics, but for the benefit of Deputy Burke, if he ever does read this debate, might I suggest to him that if he looks up Volume 38, No. 1, of the 22nd April, 1931, he will find there a statement by the Tánaiste which, had he read it in advance, would have prevented him from having the exuberance to make the suggestions which were made here by him last week. However, I just want to make that reference in passing. I want to bury them so far as my contribution is concerned.

We have got to consider two problems in connection with this Bill— the general problem of tourism and the method of dealing with the problem. In his review, when he was introducing this Bill, the Minister made one fundamental omission and one fundamental mistake with regard to the general problem. Might I say, before I say anything else, that, in view of a certain position which I hold in another place, any views to which I may give expression are my own and not those of the body of which I happen to be a director? I feel that the Minister's one fundamental mistake is also inherent in the title which he has given to the renamed board. There is not the slightest use in our spending vast sums of money in this country to attract outsiders into it if, at the same time, we make no effort to ensure that our own people get holiday facilities in this country. There is no use bringing people here from Britain, no use from the point of view of balancing our import trade or from the point of view of the business of those engaged in tourism if, at the same time, we are sending out substantial numbers of our own people across Channel to the Isle of Man, to Blackpool, or to other tourist resorts in Britain or abroad generally. We have got to remember that there are two aspects to tourism. There should be the aspect of trying to provide for our own people. The holiday-maker's approach is apart from the tourist approach.

A tourist has, of course, been defined by the League of Nations—I think it was the last official definition— as a person who spends more than 24 hours away from the country in which he normally resides. The whole of the Minister's approach in introducing this Bill was towards getting at the tourists and there was no suggestion at all that it was also essential, as it is essential, to ensure that proper facilities exist for our own people and that proper facilities exist to develop a holiday traffic amongst, and for, our own people. One of the things that the Irish Tourist Association did in its early days, which has not been mentioned here at all, was to provide an incentive to groups of people of one kind or another in industries to build up holiday savings clubs and in that way to make certain that, when the time came for these people to take their holidays, they would have preliminary arrangements made to take their holidays in this country. Unless we take somewhat similar steps now and make sure that such people realise that they are welcome in holiday resorts in this country, we are not going to get towards the tourist industry as a whole that understanding and general appreciation necessary to make the industry a success.

Apart from that aspect, that it is essential that we should cover our own people as well as covering those coming from abroad, we must get, I agree entirely with the Minister, a much wider understanding of the effect that the tourist industry will have and can have on the national economy. One thing that did a considerable amount of damage to the tourist industry was the antagonistic atmosphere that was created some years ago by the famous luxury hotels speech. That did more damage to the cause of tourism than anything else that ever happened in this country. It was because of the wrong approach that was made at that time, because of the wrong understanding that was deliberately engendered amongst our own people by that luxury outlook, that we had some of the difficulties that arose. I accept without question the new outlook that has now been adumbrated in this regard as envisaged by the speech made by the Minister. There is now to be clearly, as there was not then, a policy of co-operation with those in the industry, a policy of co-operation particularly with those in the hotel industry, and there is not to be, as there was then, a policy in which the State, through the medium of the Irish Tourist Board, was to set up a number of new hotels and to operate these hotels in opposition to hotels run by private enterprise and in opposition to existing hotels.

The outlook which the Minister has indicated as being his outlook in 1952 towards the industry is one that in my view is going to get infinitely better results than his previous outlook but, while there has been over the years through the efforts, I think I can fairly state, of the Irish Tourist Association an appreciation by those directly concerned with the industry of the benefits that the industry can bring, there has never been, and still is not, any appreciation amongst the people as a whole of those benefits nor is there any appreciation of the divergent ways in which the money brought in by tourists, or money spent by our own holiday-makers at home, seeps right down to a great many phases of our national life.

The last analysis I was able to find of the manner in which that expenditure was distributed between various trades is one that is quoted in a White Paper, the Interim Report of the Planning Advisory Board in Northern Ireland. In that it is stated that of the moneys spent by tourists—that is to say by persons at home who go on holidays within the country or by persons coming in from abroad to spend their holidays here—merchandise accounts for approximately 26 per cent.—that is to say, that about one quarter of their expenditure takes place in the shops. Restaurants, cafés, hotels and guest houses—using the word "guest house" in the sense not merely of a registered guest house but of all room accommodation—account for approximately 37 or 40 per cent. Yet it has been regularly considered that the only people who are going to get any benefit out of the tourist trade would be those operating hotels or restaurants. In fact, they account for only approximately 37 to 40 per cent. of the total expenditure of tourists. Garages, through the sale of petrol, motor spirit and transport of one sort or another, account for approximately 18 per cent. of the expenditure and theatres and amusements for about 8½ per cent. Small confectionery and incidentals are set down in that report as accounting for the balance.

But even that is not a full and true picture of the situation because that would imply that only one-quarter of the expenditure was incurred in regard to merchandise. It is more than that because a considerable quantity of Irish agricultural produce is consumed by these holiday makers. It is very much better to feed our people here at home and to feed British people here on our cattle, our beef and our mutton rather than that we should send that beef and mutton on hoof to be eaten by them in Britain. We obviously get much more from it by having it consumed here at home and we save from the point of view of transport.

I think that one of the first things that should be done by An Bord Fáilte when it opens up is to extend the distribution of the very useful little booklet published by them a short time ago. It is an excellent little booklet except in one respect. It does not give the date on which it was published, therefore, I cannot refer to it by date, but if that small little booklet were thoroughly circulated throughout the country—it is entitled "What does Tourism mean to you?"—one would get a far wider appreciation of the benefits that tourism brings and a far richer appreciation of the manner in which the full value of the industry can be obtained than in any other way.

I can understand the Minister's disappointment that so few copies of the synthesis were bought throughout the country. I think that that is a great pity. I can, however, understand that before people have read this synthesis of reports on tourism, they are inclined to believe that it involves something which is inordinately heavy. It is not quite as bad as all that and it is possible to read it through without the agony that might be suggested by its names. Something, however, much more bright and breezy—something that, in a diagrammatic way, shows the dollar revenue, as this little pamphlet shows in a diagrammatic way the manner in which our exports in 1949 contrasted with the tourist trade—would ensure that our people would understand very much more quickly what this trade could mean to them. It is essential that our people should understand what the tourist trade could mean to them. Only if there is very general understanding of that position throughout the country can we get the proper approach to the problems of those people who are coming here on holidays or who are going for their holidays here to another part of the country.

In the modern world, the work of the industrial worker has become a matter of repeating, ad nauseam, the same motion. He does not build an article right through all its different phases of production—his task is to concentrate on one particular part of the finished article. Obviously, such a worker has a much greater need for recreation and a break than a worker under the old-fashioned system of work where the tempo was entirely different and where the various operations that had to be carried out by any individual worker were such as, themselves, to form a type of distraction and a type of relaxation. In modern days, when the industrial worker has to repeat the same action again and again and again, it is very necessary for him to have a break. From that point of view, therefore, we are going to see in the future, as to some extent we have seen since the end of the war, a different type of holiday-maker and a type who is entitled to get his holiday just as much as anybody else. We should make a particular effort to cope with that situation.

With regard to the holiday-makers' question, on which I slightly chided the Minister at the beginning, might I mention one small analogy? We are accustomed to think of Switzerland as a place where tourism has been developed par excellence.

It has been estimated that 50 per cent. of the entire money spent in the tourist industry in Switzerland is spent by Swiss nationals themselves travelling from one part of Switzerland to another, holiday-making in Switzerland. If 50 per cent. of the expenditure on tourism in Switzerland comes from their own people, when they have the name of being the first-class and the primary tourist country in Europe, surely we can make an effort here to make certain that our own people can get the type of holiday in this country which will prevent them from yearning to spend their holiday, when the time comes for it, on the other side of the water or in the Isle of Man. If we do not do that, we shall be throwing aside to a very large extent the benefits which we may get by bringing in people from abroad.

A difficulty that has always existed in regard to tourist traffic in this country has been the question of hotel accommodation. There is only a limited amount of hotel accommodation available throughout the country— accommodation which, at the peak time of the year, is always entirely insufficient. In the Christenberry report and in the other reports referred to in this synthesis, the building of new hotels is suggested. Quite frankly, I think most of us were rather appalled at the cost of construction of new hotels and at the estimate of the cost of the type of hotel they have in mind. They suggest £2,000 a room. If 350 new rooms are required, the cost would be £700,000. Between the 1914-1918 war and the 1939-1945 war there was a very long period in American life when their hotels were almost entirely empty because, to some extent, they had over-built hotels. In almost every town of any size in America there was a big hotel which had been forced to shut off one or two of its floors and to operate on a very much reduced scale.

While I do not think there is that danger here in the immediate future, or even in the foreseeable future, nevertheless I feel we should bear in mind the fact that if we were to construct a number of large hotels we should be engaging in a very expensive operation for a very short season and that, therefore, it would be infinitely preferable if we could increase the number of rooms available in another way. I think that it might help if a proper attempt was made to stagger holidays. I understand that at present the Minister for Education is considering questions in regard to the dates upon which children should take their holidays. The result of all the investigations on staggered holidays which have so far been made in this country has been that it is clear that people want to take their holidays when they can bring their children with them. A problem which it would be well worth the Minister's while to consider with the Minister for Education is whether it would be possible to connect them with a staggered holidays plan. We get just as good weather in May in this country as we get in July or August. I think it would not be unfair to say that in Ireland most months of May are, on the average, better than the month of August. However, our people here cannot take their holidays in May because at that time their children are not available to go away with them.

I suggest that the Minister should consider with the Minister for Education whether a method could not be devised to connect the staggering of holidays with any new arrangements which the Minister for Education may make in regard to the time at which schools will close. We should endeavour to ensure that, during the months of the year other than those in the peak season, we can switch from our peak season to these other months people who wish to take their holidays at that time. We would thereby increase our hotel accommodation in the peak months just as surely as if we were to build new accommodation—and we should be providing that accommodation far less expensively and in a way that would not have the same repercussions at all.

One of the difficulties about the prices that hotels are entitled to charge and have to charge in order to make a profit is that in many areas hotels are only filled to capacity during such a short period of the year. If an hotel has only got three months during which it is 100 per cent. or nearly 100 per cent. filled, if during another three months it is only 50 per cent. filled and during another three months only 25 per cent., if it is not closed, it is clear that it will have to spread its overheads in a way which will mean that its costs will be higher than if it were able to get a reasonable level throughout the whole year. For that reason, in regard to any new accommodation, I urge the Minister to put it to the board very strongly that the suggestion made in the reports that new buildings should be by way of annexes rather than integral parts of the hotel itself would be far less likely to impose an undue strain on the overheads.

If we can do anything to stagger our tourist trade in order to ensure that it will not be during the peak period that all the demand will come, then we will have done something which will be just as valuable as building new accommodation. Fishing and all forms of sport are things that, to a large extent, take place and attract people during the non-peak period. Other countries make a great effort to have continuous festivals of one sort or another. I do not mean anything as big as some of the festivals which have taken place. There are, however, small shows of one industry or another periodically in the Mansion House here. Something much bigger than these and much more continuous could be organised for the purpose of ensuring that there would be attractions during the non-peak period.

So far as the question of our tourist industry being attracted towards getting us dollars rather than sterling is concerned, I believe that far the best step ever taken or that ever could be taken in that regard was the block-booking scheme started by the Irish Tourist Board. If hotels did not know that they were to have a certain proportion of their accommodation taken for a definite period, then obviously it would have been unfair to expect them to turn away good customers for six nights of the week because they were to have dollar customers on the seventh night. The block-booking scheme meant that the hotels could see where they were and in that way put aside an adequate proportion of their accommodation to meet the opportunities of attracting American traffic. I want to congratulate the Irish Tourist Board on the introduction of that scheme and I sincerely hope that the Minister, if he is giving a valedictory message to his renamed board, when he does go to rechristen it will include in that message an urge to them to go ahead with the block-booking scheme to every possible degree that it can be operated for American tourists.

Apart from the general question of the Tourist Board, I want to say a few words on the Bill as such. I dislike the name the Minister has given to the board for the future because it ignores the aspect that I consider so essential of catering for our own people as well as for those who are coming here. The welcome is primarily a thing which one considers in regard to a stranger coming in rather than a Kildare person, shall I say, going down to Kerry. For that reason I am not a bit happy about the name itself. I am not enamoured altogether by some of the new functions which the board are to have, as set out in Section 5, but the Committee Stage is a more proper place to discuss those in detail.

So far as Part III—the guarantee of loans—is concerned, that is one of the parts of the Bill with which I am in wholehearted agreement. The old Tourist Board had powers and at one time actually had a scheme by which loans were to be made available to hoteliers to develop and improve their premises. It was a scheme which, if it were ever used, certainly fell into disuse very quickly. I think it was practically never used. As I understand Part III of the Bill, moneys will be made available by banks on a guarantee from the Minister. I know it would not be proper as an amendment to this Bill as such, but I urge on the Minister very strongly that he should make an effort with his gloomy colleague, the Minister for Finance, to ensure that the Valuation Acts will be amended in such a way that a person will know before he makes an improvement to his premises the extent of his commitment if an increased valuation is to be made. Increasing any valuation is bad enough, but there is much worse than that—the fact that a man does not know to what figure his valuation will be raised. It is that uncertainty which has done more than anything else to deter people from making improvements to hotels, or any type of business premises in fact. If the Minister can ensure that the Valuation Acts will be amended in that respect, with particular regard to these premises which are part and parcel of our tourist industry, he will be making it much more easy for the persons concerned to budget for what they will have to meet if they improve their premises and, in consequence of that, to determine whether the improvements are worth while.

Certain other Deputies suggested that it is not right that there should be registration or inspection of premises. I do not at all agree with that. I am not a bit happy about the system of grading as it was operated by the Tourist Board. I think that the board have only dropped their grading this year because they were not themselves happy about the system and because they were not happy with their personnel in operating that system. I hope it will be possible to have a new system introduced and, when it is introduced, that it will be possible for those engaged in the industry to know what it is. In that way, they could make their own estimates and see what would be required before they would go to the particular grade they were aiming at. I think that more could be done to make the investigation by the inspectors easier for the hotel keepers and more lasting in results to the tourists who visit the hotels in question.

On the Bill itself, where the Minister and I will be in categoric disagreement, though I am not without hope that the Minister will change his mind, is on Part V. I think that the institution of Fógra Fáilte is a very bad step. I think it is not going to have the effect which has been put forward as a reason for its setting up. The case, of course, made by the Minister for it was that it was the only way of linking up the activities of the Irish Tourist Association with the scheme under the new Bill, and that it was necessary. I can understand the case which the Minister made that it is not possible for a body like the Irish Tourist Association, without statutory direction, to be given control of the very large funds which are going to be made available under this Bill. Since 1925, when the Irish Tourist Association came into existence, it has done a great deal of very valuable pioneering work. I think the Minister would be the first to admit that it has done so. But the work it did was, one may say, on the most minute scale compared to the work which has now to be done. It was work that was only made possible by the generosity of the local authorities, but even that generosity, though large for the local authorities, was on a very small scale compared to the work which has to be done for the tourist industry.

Deputy Corry the other day expressed surprise that he saw nothing in the way of advertisements about Irish tourist resorts when walking around Dublin or Cork. I suggest that part of the responsibility for that must rest on the Deputy's own shoulders as a member of the Cork County Council for not placing larger sums of money at the disposal of the Irish Tourist Association to enable it to advertise more widely beauty spots like Glengariff and others which he had in mind. In my opinion, the setting up of this third tourist organisation, far from helping to keep alive the Irish Tourist Association, which is the reason the Minister has given for the setting up of this board, will do more than anything else to kill it. I think that the Minister could have made a much stronger case, on the same lines, if, say, he tied in Fógra Fáilte with the Tourist Board. Notwithstanding the fact that the Tourist Board is already in existence, I believe it would have been quite possible to do everything which the Minister hopes to do with Fógra Fáilte, and in exactly the same way, as between the Irish Tourist Association and the Irish Tourist Board. I think that if the Minister carefully examines the matter, he will find that the effect of setting up this board will be to relegate, even further away, the Irish Tourist Association than would otherwise be the case. I am not at all sure that the more decent way, if I may use the expression, of burying the Irish Tourist Association, would be to cut it off completely than to have it this way with Fógra Fáilte.

This is going to have the result of creating what one may call a rather hypocritical approach—the suggestion that the Irish Tourist Association is still there, that it is still being kept alive, that it is operating as agents for this board, that it is operating certain bureaux and on that account is really operating. I do not think that is going to be true. I think the result of that is going to be that, instead of vitalising in one way or another the goodwill that there is behind the Irish Tourist Association—the local touch that there is behind it—the Minister will, by setting up this third organisation, kill the association effectively and prevent it from adding its assistance to the tourist industry as a whole. I have tried, in the comments which I have made on Part V, to avoid being political in my approach to it. I quite understand the statutory difficulties which the Minister saw, but I think this is going inevitably to be considered by the country as a whole, and by the local authorities, as another set of jobs. I think it is quite inevitable that that is the interpretation which will be put upon Part V of the Bill. I think that is not going to assist but rather to hinder the whole case for the development of the tourist industry.

I would ask the Minister to consider between now and the next stage of the Bill whether he could not bring in a tie of some sort or another on rather the same lines as between Fógra Fáilte and the Tourist Association. I see no reason why the Tourist Association would not operate the bureaux in this country as agents for the Tourist Board just as they are going to operate as agents for Fógra Fáilte. There is no fundamental difference at all. They can do just as well as agents for one as they can as agents for another. I think there is an even greater case for it on the lines I suggest, because one of the functions on which the Minister laid great stress was this, that the main board is to develop local initiative and local enterprise. What better representation could there be of local initiative and local enterprise on the main board than that of the Tourist Association? The members of it would be in a position to judge not merely local feeling but of how local feeling would react. Quite apart from having a third organisation, I think that the main board itself would be immeasurably strengthened by having direct representation on it from the Irish Tourist Association. In that way there would be more interest in the association and more anxiety amongst the directors of the association to be able to put forward schemes which would help the development of tourist traffic as a whole.

I should like to ask the Minister at this stage whether there is any significance in the fact that there is nothing equivalent in Part V of the Bill to Section 14. Section 14 is the section which provides for the superannuation of the staff of the main board. It does not appear to be a section dealing with superannuation schemes.

That is in paragraph 9 of the Schedule.

I am relieved, because I thought it was the same provision.

It is the same provision.

What was worrying me was the fact that it was being provided by a section in one respect and by a schedule in the other and I failed to grasp the significance of the reason as to why the powers of the main board were provided by section and those of An Fógra Fáilte by schedule.

The 1939 Act is still in existence and deals with the Tourist Board. We are adding to the powers of the Irish Tourist Board whereas in the other we are defining what the powers are.

There is a difference between scheduling them and including them in the main sections of a Bill but it is not one that lessens the effectiveness of the provisions.

Not necessarily.

Staff that has been for many years with the Tourist Association will presumably be temporarily seconded to An Fógra Fáilte and ultimately transferred absolutely to that body. I thought that when it was put in the Schedule it was purely enabling and did not mean that it would be carried through, as it will be carried through, in respect of the other.

I want to refer once again to the fact that all of us are agreed on the desirability of extending our tourist and holiday trade. The only difference of opinion is as to the way in which that should be done. I hold that the more direct way is the easiest and best way in the long run; and the more direct way is to tie in the Irish Tourist Association into the main board rather than have a separate section of that board with representatives from An Bord Fáilte and the Tourist Association on it. If the Minister rules against me on that, we shall have another discussion on the Committee Stage. In regard to the appointments to An Fógra Fáilte I would strongly urge that there should be specific mention of the fact that these appointments should be composed partly of the main board representatives and partly of the members of the Irish Tourist Association. I am more interested in the Tourist Association but, notwithstanding the fact that the Tourist Association has representation on that board, I think this is a bad way of dealing with the matter and the Bill would be a much better Bill without Part V. The Minister could get all he wants by adding three additional members to the Tourist Board, renaming it as has been suggested, from the existing Tourist Board and thus get representation on that body of the Irish Tourist Association. That would have all the benefits and none of the disadvantages.

I want to reply to some of the criticisms that were made here last week in relation to facilities at the Port of Cork. It must be many years since the Deputies who criticised have visited Cobh because they do not seem to be aware of the conditions prevailing there at present. Deputy Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll said that one cannot land a car at Cobh, and that the same applies to Dún Laoghaire. I am not concerned with Dún Laoghaire but I am aware that motor cars are regularly landed and loaded at Cobh. The Cunard Company does it regularly. I understand that the United States Line does not carry cars. Facilities for loading and discharging cars are quite adequate and that work is regularly carried out at Cobh.

At column 1390 of Volume 8 of the Official Report, Deputy Corry asked:—

"What must be the first impressions of people coming into the town of Cobh to-day when they are met by an antiquated tender belonging to the Cork Harbour Commissioners —an antiquated tender flying the flag of this country, though the flag is in such a condition that one could not possibly discern its colours?"

The General Superintendent of the Cork Harbour Commissioners, Commandant-General Tom Barry, is as interested in the National Flag as Deputy Corry ever was. It will not help the Port of Cork if comments like those are made about the facilities there.

The remarks are true.

Deputy Hickey at column 1396 of Volume 8 of the Official Report said:—

"They mentioned about the fine harbour at Cobh, but regretted the treatment of passengers when coming off the liner. If those people speak about that to their friends in Philadephia or Boston and tell them of their experiences, it is not going to encourage them to go through the ordeal which passengers experience at Cobh. If they are coming to Ireland they will decide to go on to Southampton rather than get off at Cobh."

At column 1395, the same Deputy talked about passengers coming by direct liner to Cobh and he said that—

"they are still exposed to the elements on the tender of which Deputy Corry has given a description."

I am surprised at two Cork Deputies especially criticising their own port in that manner. After the last war the harbour commissioners found it impossible to induce the company which had carried on a tender service prior to the war to come to any agreement with the liners. Rather than let the people of Cobh and Cork suffer, they expended a sum of close on £100,000 in providing tenders to carry on a service to the liners. At least half that sum was spent on repairs and overhaul in Rushbrooke dockyard in order to make the tenders as up-to-date as possible. These tenders are registered at Lloyds to carry from 1,000 to 1,500 passengers. At most, 300 passengers normally disembark at Cobh and there is ample accommodation on these tenders to accommodate that number comfortably in the saloon. There is, therefore, no necessity for them to be exposed to the elements.

The harbour commissioners have always co-operated with the liner companies in improving the tenders and the landing facilities. They have appointed a liaison officer to help the passengers disembarking from these tenders. The tenders are equipped with radio telephones. They have installed a wireless station at Tivoli, a station much appreciated by the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs when the Valentia station was put out of action during a recent storm. The Minister wrote to the harbour commissioners thanking them for lending that station to his officials. Apparently others think more of the work that is done by the Cork Harbour Commissioners to help tourism than do those who reside there and who benefit most from it. The liner companies also asked the harbour commissioners to provide up-to-date baggage trucks for handling the passengers' luggage and the harbour commissioners went to the expense of providing that. They provided public announcers on the tenders. They have done everything possible. Everything they were asked to do they did it. They provided facilities in regard to teas, minerals, etc., for passengers even on this short trip from the liner to Cobh. They have provided such facilities for the Irish Tourist Association on board those tenders. As far as they as a body are concerned they could not possibly have done more than they are doing. They guaranteed £10,000 or 10 per cent. of the cost in regard to the recent improvements in the facilities for the handling of passengers and luggage by the customs. Anybody who has been to Cobh recently must know of the big advance that has been made in regard to the handling of passengers and baggage by customs and for the inspections by the customs authority at Cobh.

I do not know whether those people who have been talking about Cobh have been down there for the last ten or 20 years. By the way they were talking it is evident that they were not.

I am one of those who believe that a lot of that money spent at Cobh was needlessly spent. I would impress on the Minister the desirability of exploring the possibility of having those tenders sent direct to Cork. They would reach the City of Cork in three quarters of an hour from the time they left the liner. It seems a completely senseless bit of business to me to have this double handling of passengers and goods by making them go to the customs at Cobh, get into the train and then go to Cork. There is no necessity at all for that. By going up the River Lee they would see the best scenery in the country and, as a Deputy said here last week—I think it was Deputy Byrne—"first impressions are the best." They are, perhaps, more lasting than others. I can assure the Minister that there are plenty of facilities for handling the customs in Cork City. Portion of the quay where the bonded warehouses are near the harbour commissioners could be closed off. There passengers and ‘passengers' baggage could be inspected without any delay and it would be much more convenient to the centres to which the people might desire to go.

I think it is my duty to reply to those remarks. People should not be talking about things they know nothing about. It is a wrong thing to say that motor cars cannot be landed in Cobh when they are being landed there regularly. I do not want to say much more in regard to this Bill, but I think that the Minister should, if possible, induce the Tourist Association to have a ground-floor office in Cork. Tourist or strangers coming to the City of Cork find great difficulty in finding the Irish Tourist Association offices. That is not as it should be. I would impress upon the Minister the necessity of having a ground-floor premises, if not in Patrick Street, then in some one of the principal streets in the centre of Cork City. I think that would be a great help to those people.

I think it is generally admitted that the outlook of the public on the tourist industry has changed considerably for the better during the past ten years. There may be a number of reasons for that upon which I will speak later but it is certain that the ordinary man in the street now recognises the value of the tourist industry as a method of bridging the gap between imports and exports.

The Tánaiste has given us the figure of £32,400,000 as last year's expenditure on tourism. He has stated that tourism has become the second largest industry in the country. While that is known and appreciated by the people, I wonder if sufficient credit has been given to the Tourist Association for the wonderful work they have done in this country to bring about that state of affairs? Starting as a voluntary body and depending on limited contributions from local authorities which were given some years and the next year not given at all, it must be stated to their credit that they did a wonderful job of work and I think they deserve the gratitude of the people of this nation for giving us that industry which has now taken second place in the life of the nation.

Because of the importance of the tourist industry, it is essential that any proposed legislation or any Bill that comes before this House dealing with that industry should be very fully debated. It should be criticised and examined and amended, if necessary, by the Opposition and all the more so when we realise that, arising from actions carried out under the 1939 Act, the sum of £311,000 has now, to quote the Tánaiste, "practically to be written off". Under the 1939 Bill, the Irish Tourist Board went into competition with the ordinary hotelier and they erected, equipped and ran luxury hotels. They purchased land which was to be used for tourist attraction and tourist development but the net result of their endeavours has been a loss of over £300,000.

It is well that that is not to be repeated and it is well, in view of such a thing happening once, that every Act or every Bill that will come before this House should be examined and criticised and, as I said before, amended, if necessary, by this House in the interests of the country in general.

There is no doubt that, due to the financial position in Great Britain and to the fact that a financial limit has been put on people leaving Great Britain for the Continent, we will have a big quota of tourists here this year. What we should concentrate on is examining what type of tourist is most likely to return if treated well and then to set out to make his or her stay as enjoyable as possible. I would suggest that the type of tourist who will come back again to Ireland is the ordinary person from Great Britain of limited means going on his annual two weeks' or maybe three weeks' holiday. While we will very likely have a good number of the rich or wealthy class who will come here because the Continent is practically closed, they will, immediately the ban is lifted in years to come, return to their haunts on the shores of the Mediterranean, Monte Carlo and elsewhere. Ireland and Irish tourist resorts have very little interest for these ladies and gentlemen. There is, of course, the hunting, shooting, fishing element who will come here. They will come at first because of the fact that they are invited to stay in the country and fish in the rivers. There are the wealthy few who will come to shoot over the farms of Ireland where gaming rights have been preserved from the time of Cromwell. To my mind, that type of person is not worth inviting to this country or to any country in the world. I would have no truck with parasites.

However, if we endeavour to attract here some of the 40,000,000 working-class people of England or of countries outside England, then we will be attracting here people who will return to us again and who will appreciate what is being done for them. Because of that, I feel that the new board should concentrate on hotel improvement and on the improvement of the modern kind of ordinary hotel or guest house which will cater for the ordinary tourist. A good deal of attention should be paid to hostels and provision should be made that grants could be given to the local authorities to develop camp sites by laying on sanitation and water to that hikers could be attracted to this country, knowing that in an ordinary day's travel they would find a convenient hostel or a convenient camping ground or, if neither of these were available, a hotel or guest house with charges within their ability to pay. Contented visitors returning to their homes are the best method of propaganda. No matter what board be set up, the power of human speech, be it for good or bad, is what is going to matter. I suggest that if we treat these ordinary hikers and even the ordinary people who come to this country for two weeks' holiday in a proper manner by satisfying them by the food they get, by our charges and by the accommodation with which we provide them, they will come back here and speak of our country in a way which will attract here members of their own family and many of their friends.

On the whole, I agree with the registration and grading of hotels, though I do not agree that there is much use in the present system. Any hotelier can get registered and charge any prices he likes as long as he has displayed that charge list in his hotel. It should be said that competition between the hotels would induce hoteliers to be reasonable in their charges. I would instance the case of a small town. Visitors either passing through that town or coming there on holidays will find there very small hotels which, if graded, would be graded B or C, but which are charging grade A prices. A ring has been formed among these establishments, and the visitor has no choice but to pay or stay out on the road. In Dublin during certain periods of the year, for instance the eves of football or hurling matches, at times of shows or of some other attractions, 30/- to 35/- per night is charged for rooms which could normally be secured for 15/- per night. There was an instance of overcrowding of bedrooms on the eve of a certain Soccer match only a few weeks ago. I learned that the actual team taking part in the match were forced to sleep five in a room in an hotel which is registered by the Tourist Board.

I would like to know the manner in which these hotels have been inspected and at what period of the day. Certainly, if the inspectors copied our police force and carried out night raids, they would find that the hotel bedroom, which was shown on inspection in the daytime to contain one or two beds at most, was packed so tightly after 11 p.m. with stretchers and additional beds that they would find it impossible to enter the room. Still, there appears to be no check at all upon that. Mr. Christenberry in his report assessed, as far as I could make out, that the hotel bedrooms available divided by the number of visitors in any one week allowed about 1.7 visitors per bedroom for the week. I am sure he must be either a very charitable man or a very gullible man. He must not have visited many of the Dublin hotels.

It is the small things which give the bad impression even of the best hotels, such as the absence of bolts in bedroom doors or the absence of keys. In an excellent bedroom, fully equipped with electric light, one will find that the electric bell does not ring at all. One will find dirty knives on the best laid tables, complete with flowers. These are the things that should be investigated, along with the ordinary inspection of toilet necessities and facilities for sleep.

However, there is one thing which amazes me in all the Tourist Bills and in all the suggestions as to what we should do to make a good impression upon our visitors; there is very little good in giving a visitor the best food that Ireland can produce, cooked to the best advantage unless it is served at the time it is ready, and unless it is served in a willing manner. How can anybody expect services from people employed in hotels who have to work for an 80-hour week at a weekly wage ranging from £1 to 30/-and their keep? When the Tourist Board inspectors go to an hotel, they never visit the accommodation of the staff. The staff may be housed in the basements with the beetles, but it is of no interest to the Tourist Board inspectors. Whether sanitation is provided, whether proper wash-up facilities are there, whether they are paid decent wages or whether they get decent hours are matters of indifference. But I suggest that as long as the people who serve at the tables, as long as the people who wait on the guests or visitors are discontented, as long as they are badly paid and badly treated, so long will you have bad service for our tourists. It is the duty of the board, be it Bord Fáilte or under any other name, to see that the people who serve in these hotels get good conditions of employment and pay that will give them the right to say: "We work for the second largest industry in this country and we are paid accordingly."

Is it possible that we can afford the loss of £32,400,000 of an industry because we do not deem it worth while to see that the worker is by legislation protected in his employment, so that he, in his turn, will tend to welcome our visitors, will do everything possible to make them happy and will be glad to see them return?

In regard to the licensing laws, there is a point I would like to put to the Minister. While, on the whole, I welcome the extension of hours, I would say that all our visitors to this country do not stay at hotels, holiday camps or guest houses. Quite 50 per cent., I would say, come here to visit and to reside with friends in ordinary homes. They are visitors and they need increased facilities for liquid refreshment just as much as those who stay in hotels. Should any extension be given to holiday camps or to hotels, I would suggest that the Minister should consider an extension of the ordinary publican's licence between some particular dates in the height of the season, say, between June and the end of August or September or some other appropriate date.

From my own knowledge, I am aware that last year in the County of Waterford, visitors found it impossible to secure butter. There was no rationed butter available and when they went to purchase butter off the ration they found that was not available either. Therefore, a good deal of strain was placed upon the people who had those visitors staying with them. The ration of the people in the house in which they stayed had to be divided between the visitors. I understand that later on something was done on that score but I would ask the Minister to take ample precautions to see that this year such a state of affairs is not likely to happen.

There was a number of points on which I intended to correct Deputy Cogan but in his absence I feel it would be wasting time to make any further comment than to say that it is strange to hear him advocating the rights of workers to holidays and saying that workers should have two weeks' holidays when he found it impossible to cross the barrier to give agricultural workers even one week's holidays a couple of months ago. It is strange how he changes his mind at different times.

On the question in regard to which he stated that bus conductors and those who drive public vehicles transporting visitors should be better instructed on the places of interest, I feel it is wrong that it should be alleged in this House that bus conductors on Córas Iompair Éireann tour buses or any of the other company buses operating in the tourist industry are not capable. In fact, they have been repeatedly complimented by the visitors on their extensive knowledge of local history and of local beauty spots, and I feel that Deputy Cogan should not be allowed to get away with a remark such as that unchecked.

He should go on a bus tour himself.

Mr. O'Higgins

Far away.

Because of the importance of the Bill, I think it should not be treated in any Party spirit and I feel also that the Minister should not treat it in any Party spirit on the amendment stage. As far as possible, he should allow a free vote on any amendments that are tabled. I feel that all of us will agree with him in hoping that when this Bill goes through the House it will be a Bill that will attract to Ireland an everincreasing number of visitors from next year on.

I agree with the principle of the Bill and I agree that it is important but, like other Deputies who have spoken before, I feel that we do not need three boards to deal with our tourist industry. To make for cohesion and efficiency I think we would be far better off with just one board. The functions for which these three boards are created are, of course, necessary but it would be better if the Minister saw his way, if necessary, to extend the personnel of the existing board to cover all the functions that are required to be put into effect by the boards in one unified command.

I think we all accept the fact that this year probably will see into this State of ours and we hope into the whole of Ireland, a greater influx of tourists than possibly we have ever had before. Our first duty in the interests of these people who intend to visit us is to make it possible for them to get into this country. After all, there are only two ways people can come to Ireland; the rich can come by air; the ordinary person comes by sea. None of us can be proud of what happened last year. I agree, of course, that this country is not entirely responsible for the unfortunate state of affairs that obtained throughout last summer but I think that if we stop to consider the matter for a few minutes it is possible to rectify that unhappy state of affairs.

The principal gateway of Ireland, at least so we have been told by Deputies, is by Dún Laoghaire or Dublin anyway. Over the ships that bring the tourists or the visitors to this country our national transport has no direct control. It has no control over the British and Irish Steampacket Company; it has no control over the London, Midland and Scottish boats; it has no direct control over the other boats that go to Cork, Waterford and so forth. But there is one port of entry in Ireland, the port of Rosslare, where we have a joint control over the ships with British National Railways. Therefore, we should be in a position to control and remedy any congestion on that line, over and above what we can do on the other ones I have mentiond before. I move the adjournment of the debate.

Debate adjourned.
Top
Share