I understand, a Cheann Comhairle, that you have ruled my amendment out of order? May I make my point on Section 2?
Committee on Finance. - Tourist Traffic Bill, 1959—Committee and Final Stages.
Section 1 agreed to.
SECTION 2.
Question proposed: "That Section 2 stand part of the Bill."
Is this amendment on the Order Paper?
It is on the Order Paper at page 478.
My amendment was to delete the word "major" from Section 2, subsection 1 (a). The Ceann Comhairle ruled it out of order because it conflicts with the Money Resolution which was passed. I am not very familiar with the procedure of the House but the Money Resolution was put down subsequent to my putting down the amendment.
The Money Resolution is based on the information given by the Government as to the amount of money that may be expended.
Was the Money Resolution put down before or after my amendment?
I do not know. It is based on the terms of the message received from the Government and on Constitutional procedure.
But it is rather hard on a Deputy who puts down an amendment when subsequently the Government puts in a Money Resolution and something in the amendment conflicts with the Money Resolution which the Deputy has not seen——
I see the Deputy's point, but I have no remedy for that.
I think the Chair has a remedy and that is to indicate to the Deputy that if he wishes to pursue the matter he may propose an amendment to the Money Resolution.
In a Money Resolution there is a charge imposed, as the Deputy knows, and only a member of the Government may move to impose a charge.
Suppose it is an amendment to reduce the amount in the Money Resolution?
That is a different matter.
It is a fait accompli now. Deputy Dillon has made my point. By putting down this Money Resolution the Government has, in effect, negatived the amendment. I suggest that the Minister could consider eliminating the word “major”. I know from personal experience how difficult it is to interpret these words once they are written into an Act. I am aware of a small number of what I would not describe as “major tourist resorts” but which nevertheless are growing resorts and resorts which might benefit from assistance under this Bill. Taking out the word “major” does not in any way stop An Bord Fáilte from refusing grants to centres which they might regard as not worthy of consideration or too small for their purpose. It does not affect the purpose of the Bill if the word is deleted but it could affect it, if it is left in.
Over what period is it proposed to expend the money?
Over a ten-year period.
When we consider the amount of money put into tourism and compare it with what is being injected into agriculture I think the amount for tourism, which is considered to be our second greatest money-spinner, is too low and that we should not be tied to that amount over ten years. I come from an area affected by tourism, where we have major resorts, and I find that we have undeveloped raw material in our wonderful scenery. In tying ourselves to that amount of money over ten years we are not playing fair with tourism.
Deputy Russell will appreciate that the Tourist Board may come to the assistance of small resorts in any case out of annually voted money. The purpose of introducing the word "major" was to ensure that some worthwhile projects will result from making grants available. In reply to Deputy Coogan, the £1,000,000 is not intended to cover the entire cost of resort development envisaged in the Bill. The intention is that the local authority or local development group would be required to raise a substantial portion of the money. This £1,000,000 will be used only by way of subvention of whatever moneys are raised locally. I think that principle cannot be departed from. There is an obligation on local authorities to provide in such cases a substantial proportion of the funds to be expended.
To revert to Deputy Russell—under the original Tourist Act there is a provision whereby An Bord Failte assists in the formation of local development companies and may secure or guarantee loans for local development purposes that may be raised by the company.
Is that the only way to assist minor tourist centres?
They can get direct grants but this provision is for the specific purpose of helping bigger projects.
I take it that when the Minister, with the consent of the Minister for Finance and in conjunction with the Government generally, desired to provide this money he was equally desirous that it would be spent after allocation. I want to impress on the Minister the necessity for taking such steps as are necessary in order to see that the development of national tourist resorts and holiday accommodation will be accomplished. My reason for that is that some local authorities, notoriously in my own County Mayo, have not expended one penny of tourist grants of this kind that came their way. In a county where the provision of good motor roads and adequate signposting are important from the point of view of access to sea, lake, mountain and places of historical interest it should be part of a plan where co-operation with Bord Failte is absolutely essential.
We have failed to take advantage of the grants—not very generous ones but nevertheless our fair share in County Mayo, I take it—owing to the intractability of local officials who will not co-operate in the promotion of the plans unless they get five per cent of the amount of the grant—and this from people on inclusive salary rates.
I thought the North Coast Road had been fairly well taken care of?
That is true. That road is excellent and has been tremendously improved as has the road from Mulranny. But there was, for instance, a grant of £500 for Cushla pier and another grant for the improvement of the Atlantic Drive in Achill. I do not know whether the Minister knows it or not but it is very scenic and equally dangerous. There was an unspecified grant for that and none of it was spent because the local authority officials refused to operate the scheme unless five per cent of the grant was forthcoming. I think the Minister should interest himself in that matter with the Board and even consult the Minister for Local Government so as to ensure that local authorities co-operate fully with An Bord Failte in the administration of these grants. The salaries of such people are adequate. Also they are inclusive and it requires very little additional attention to operate such schemes.
I should like to point out that very often grants of this kind, particularly tourist road grants, are confined to a certain area. It is notorious that the bulk of the Tourist Board grant of £55,000 for County Mayo is being spent in the Clew Bay area. That may be attractive for Frenchmen during the deep sea angling for a few weeks of the year, but there are other places in North Mayo and South Mayo which are just as attractive and important from the point of view of the development of our tourist trade.
Question put and agreed to.
Section 3 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment, received for final consideration and passed.
This Bill is certified by An Ceann Comhairle as a Money Bill within the meaning of Article 22 of the Constitution.