Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 13 Mar 1968

Vol. 233 No. 4

Committee on Finance. - Vote 41—Transport and Power.

I move:

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £10 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending 31st day of March, 1968, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Transport and Power, including certain Services administered by that Office, and for payment of sundry Grants-in-Aid.

This Supplementary Estimate is necessary to provide an additional sum of £308,000 in the present financial year to cover expenditure by Bord Fáilte Éireann as follows:

(a) £52,000 to compensate for the effects of devaluation on the cost of the Board's committed marketing budgets in North America and the continent of Europe;

(b) £206,000 to exploit the opportunity presented by devaluation to attract more visitors; and

(c) £50,000 to supplement the funds of the regional tourism organisations.

It is proposed to provide these additional funds under Subhead F.1 of the Vote for the Department of Transport and Power from which the Board's general activities are financed. It has been found possible to set off against the amount required, savings of £307,990 on other subheads of the Vote with the result that the net amount now required is a token provision of £10.

The necessity for the Estimate arises mainly from the circumstances created by devaluation. As Deputies are aware, the £ sterling was devalued last November. A considerable portion of the promotional activities of Bord Fáilte is carried out in countries such as the United States, Canada, France and Germany which have not devalued. As a result of devaluation the cost in sterling of activities in these areas has increased by more than 16 per cent and Bord Fáilte have calculated that the cost of maintaining expenditure at the level provided for before devaluation took place will require an additional amount of £52,000 in the present financial year.

In addition, it is proposed to launch a more intensive publicity and promotional campaign abroad for the purpose of exploiting the opportunity which devaluation presents of attracting more visitors to this country. Devaluation will mean lower prices here for visitors from countries which have not devalued. There is the further consideration that costs in most European countries have increased for British holidaymakers. It is proposed accordingly, to intensify marketing activities in North America, continental Europe and Britain to secure maximum benefit in terms of extra tourist revenue from these areas.

It may not be generally appreciated that because of the improvement in the rate of exchange for visitors from North America and Europe it will be necessary to attract more visitors from those areas if we are to maintain our earnings in terms of the currencies of those countries at the level which obtained prior to devaluation. Bord Fáilte have calculated that before our tourist revenue begins to benefit from devaluation, it will be necessary to attract about nine per cent more visitors from North America and continental Europe than we would have had to do without devaluation. There is the possibility of course, that the more favourable rate of exchange which is now available here will induce visitors from non-devalued countries to spend more here than they would otherwise have done. It would be unrealistic however, to place undue reliance on this possibility and it is clear that the only certain way of increasing foreign currency revenue is to attract more visitors.

I think it is important that we should not exaggerate the benefits which devaluation will confer on tourist earnings or assume that we can obtain these benefits without effort on our part. While it is true that the better exchange rates will result in lower prices in this country for visitors from North America, France and Germany it should be remembered that transport costs to this country have not been reduced by devaluation; in fact in some cases these costs have gone up. Fares for travel constitute a large part of the cost of a holiday and in the case of United States visitors to Europe amount to about one-third of the total cost.

Most American tourists include a number of European countries in their itineraries and since prices in such countries as France and Germany have not been affected by devaluation, the response from United States visitors may not be as positive as the fall in the cost of holidays in Ireland would lead one to expect. However, devaluation does provide an opportunity to persuade more North American visitors to Europe to include Ireland in their itineraries.

The fact that France and West Germany are among the countries which have not devalued their currencies, coupled with the introduction of the new car ferry service between Le Harve and Rosslare next May, should provide a favourable opportunity to increase traffic from these areas. The Supplementary Estimate, accordingly, makes provision for additional expenditure on promotional activities on the Continent, mainly in France and West Germany.

It is hoped that devaluation will also result in increased tourist traffic from Britain to this country. The higher cost of holidays in most European countries for visitors from Britain together with the restriction on currency allowance for expenditure in non-sterling areas should help to influence British tourists who would otherwise have gone to Europe to visit Ireland instead. It is proposed to exploit this favourable situation as much as possible and the Supplementary Estimate includes a provision for additional expenditure on advertising and promotional activities in Britain.

Our prospects for increased tourist traffic from the United States must, of course, be viewed in the context of the proposals now under consideration in that country for the imposition of new taxes and restrictions designed to reduce expenditure abroad by American residents. As I have already informed the Dáil, we have made representations to the US authorities about the detrimental effects of these measures on our tourist industry. Bord Fáilte are convinced that there is a need for a carefully planned and judicious programme in the United States to present a constructive and positive message to the travelling public, travel agents and other members of the industry, and which would place a particular emphasis on student travel and other categories which are likely to be excluded from the restrictions.

Because of the present fluid situation about the American proposals, Bord Fáilte are proposing to embark on a publicity and promotional campaign which will permit the change or modification of their approach in the light of what may be the final outcome of the legislative proposals. In the implementation of the campaign the Board are aiming at the fullest possible co-operation with other interested organisations such as Aer Lingus, the British Travel Association and the European Travel Commission.

In addition to the amount of £258,000 which I am proposing to provide for marketing activities abroad, the Supplementary Estimate also includes an amount of £50,000 for issue to Bord Fáilte for the purpose of easing the financial difficulties of the regional tourism organisations.

Most Deputies will be aware of the activities in their areas of the regional tourism organisations. I am glad to say that these organisations, which are representative of the local authorities as well as tourism and general business interests, have gone about their task in a most vigorous way. In their few years of existence they have established a network of 100 tourist information offices providing a standard national service of information and general customer facilitation as well as a special room reservation service free to all visitors. In 1967, these offices serviced 1½ million inquiries and made reservations totalling 343,000 bed-nights.

The room reservation service is especially significant as it justifies our claim that it is easy for a tourist to be mobile in Ireland. The service has earned numerous commendations from motoring tourists and it is the most important means of marketing the supplementary accommodation being developed under the farmhouse and the special development area holiday accommodation schemes. In addition, the regional organisations have undertaken a wide variety of tasks including the expansion of supplementary accommodation and the provision of information literature. In 1967 they produced 88 items of literature comprising 3.75 million pieces.

The finances of the regional organisations to date have come mainly from the local authorities and Bord Fáilte. Local authorities' contributions amount to £62,000 in the current year. Bord Fáilte undertook to provide an amount of not less than £143,000. Notwithstanding these provisions, it has been clear that the programme of activity being pursued by the regional organisations requires a much greater income. The organisations have accordingly instituted a programme for securing finances through membership in the private sector, mainly from the business community and it is expected that income from this source will amount to a sum of the order of £60,000/ £70,000 in the coming year. In the meantime it is essential to supplement support for the organisations in the current financial year to the extent of £50,000. This contribution will not be sufficient to relieve the regional organisations of all their commitments, a substantial part of which represents capital expenditure incurred in the provision of information and company offices which was financed from income and overdraft in anticipation of a rise in financial support from local authorities and the business community. I have no doubt that Deputies who are aware of the valuable services being provided by the regional organisations in the interest of the tourist industry will agree that these bodies are worthy of adequate support for their activities.

I should mention that the greater part of the money to meet this Supplementary Estimate has been found from a saving on the provision for resort development. I wish to make it clear that this does not indicate any change of policy in the Bord Fáilte scheme for the development of major tourist resorts. The amount provided in the original Estimate for this purpose in the present year was £500,000 but it is now clear that actual expenditure will not exceed £250,000. As Deputies are aware, the scheme is carried out by Bord Fáilte in conjunction with the local authorities and other local interests and it is a condition of the scheme that there should be a substantial local contribution towards the works. In the current year, local authorities found difficulty in contributing their share of the costs because of other commitments. The Board have been conducting detailed negotiations with the local authorities concerned and it is expected that progress in the coming year will show an increase in this important work.

As Deputies will see, the general purpose of the supplementary estimate is to re-allocate available funds with a view to ensuring the most effective use of these moneys in the light of current circumstances. In view of the importance of the tourist industry to the national economy, I strongly recommend the Supplementary Estimate to the House.

This Supplementary Estimate instances quite clearly just how valuable Parliament is as a check on the activities of Ministers and of Government Departments. If it were not for the fact that the Minister had the need to come back here and seek a Supplementary Estimate of £10 because of the change of policy and because of the change of expenditure, we would never have an opportunity of expressing ourselves publicly on it. In fact many of us, speaking as an ordinary citizen, would not know anything about it.

Therefore, the first thing I want to refer to is the question of the reduction in expenditure on resorts. In so addressing myself, I would like to say first that of course this Supplementary Estimate is, like the curate's egg, good and bad in spots. One of the spots where it is bad is in the fact that the Minister has had to come and tell Parliament:

I should mention that the greater part of the money to meet this Supplementary Estimate has been found from a saving on the provision for resort development. I wish to make it clear that this does not indicate any change of policy in the Bord Fáilte scheme for the development of major tourist resorts.

The savings on Subheads E and F amount to a figure of £307,990; the saving on resort development amounts to approximately £250,000. One of the ways in which one could hope that private enterprise would build its hotels, would expend its own money for profit and therefore pay its rates and pay its taxes and increase the slice of the national cake which would be available for all is by the development of their resorts.

I speak now as Chairman of Louth County Council as well as a Member of this House. My experience has been that the development of the small tourist resorts we have in Louth, and they are small, being principally Carlingford, Omeath and Blackrock, has resulted always in the building of more hotels, more guest houses, the improvement of existing hotels and in one case—I refer to Blackrock—the stopping of the situation whereby the resort as such would have died in the past five years if we had not put a swimming pool there. These are things that it is necessary to expend money on because they result in expenditure by the private interest concerned.

If we are doing the right thing, as we are, in providing car ferries through another section of the Government's responsibility and if we are at the same time expending large sums on the encouragement of tourists from North America and Europe, then we must have somewhere for them to go. It is putting the cart before the horse not to have provided this money for resorts. I know that the Minister will say to me that the framework is there, that the local authorities did not co-operate, that this was wrong and that that was wrong. He must remember that local authorities are pressed by a rapidly increasing rate burden and that these local authorities are placed in the situation where new developments have, willy-nilly, to be postponed from year to year. Yet I can say that in my constituency, which is not a major tourist area, there are two places certainly where major expenditure is absolutely impossible. One of them is Omeath where there is necessity for a car-park costing £3,000.

When I came—and I want to make no bones about this—to fix the rate with my Fine Gael majority before we went to the meeting, just the same as the Minister for Finance sits with the Cabinet to fix a Budget before he comes down here, we looked at the question of the provision of a car-park at £3,000 for the village of Omeath and we looked at a further proposal from a councillor who is the Director of the North Eastern Regional Tourist Organisation to which the Minister referred—Councillor Tommy Elmore, Fine Gael — that there should be a removal of sides on the road and the widening of those sides to provide car parking for a few hundred cars. We could not face up to the £3,000 but we have spent £550 with the declared intention of spending a further £550 next year. As far as I know, we are getting no subvention in respect of this and this is a breakdown in communication, a breakdown in the arrangement through which Bord Fáilte disburses its money for the improvement of seaside resorts, and it is something quite wrong.

If there was available to us on that evening a fair share of the £3,000 for that car park and if the machinery was there to do it, we would have done it. We would have taken our grant from Bord Fáilte and produced a very valuable contribution towards tourist trade in that particular area. That is one example of a breakdown in negotiations. There is a need for that car park. At Blackrock five or six years ago we provided a swimming pool at a cost of £48,000. We got a grant of 50 per cent. As a result Blackrock has moved up. However, we have not got to the stage on Louth County Council at which we are in a position to say: "A car park will cost £X thousand: Bord Fáilte will provide £Y thousand. Therefore falling on the rates shall be £X thousand minus £Y thousand.

We are not in a position to make our decision in this matter. I do not think it is sufficient for the Minister to say: "Well, your officials have not done their job. You have not set up the framework and the machinery whereby this should happen." That is not sufficient because the whole idea of the regional tourist organisations is that this correlation should exist. Our experience over the last few years is that there has been a complete stop on the kind of amenity grants which were available from Bord Fáilte for small tourist resorts and small areas. The only grant which I can point to in my own constituency was for the provision of certain tennis courts in the small seaside resort of Carlingford. I think there is nobody who gets to that resort more often than I do in the summer time.

Carlingford has benefited greatly by the amenity grant that provided those tennis courts. It is quite amazing the number of people who come with their children at the week-ends to Carlingford. The grown-ups probably go to the bar and young children play tennis. The same thing can be said with regard to the swimming pool I mentioned earlier. I have been to the swimming pool and I have seen carloads of people coming there from County Meath. The nearest point in County Meath would be 20 miles away. Those people bring their children so that they can receive swimming instruction. Therefore, the question of not spending £250,000 because of the credit squeeze is a slow up. It is very bad policy in a year in which, I submit, very soon we shall be told that there is surplus revenue in this year's account. When the Minister for Finance produces his Budget there will be a surplus on revenue account. It is a dreadful thing that while we are providing means to bring tourists here we are still not doing our job for those small resorts. There is no doubt that those small resorts benefit from the sort of amenity grant to which I have referred.

It is quite ambiguous, to say the least of it, and to put it as kindly as possible, for the Minister to say:

I wish to make it clear that this does not indicate any change of policy in the Bord Fáilte scheme for the development of major tourist resorts.

That referred to the saving on the particular subhead in relation to the provision of amenities at resorts. One of the good things about tourism over recent years is the emphasis on farm guesthouses, as mentioned by the Minister, and small guesthouses of all kinds. Those places need this very badly and this is one of the areas in which regional tourist organisations can do very good work. They can tell people where those places are. They can describe them, indicate the sort of accommodation offered, the cost and any other information required.

This is the sort of development which has pleased everybody. There is no doubt that if you want the most comfortable place to sleep and the best breakfast, the Irish housewife is probably the best person to give it. People will be as comfortable in the farm guesthouses mentioned by the Minister as they would be in any large establishment from the Intercontinental down. This is the kind of development I want to laud. I hope it will progress much further in the future.

I notice that in the Minister's speech there was no mention of the great tourist potential from Britain. It seems to me that because of the expense involved in continental holidays at the moment—the Leas-Cheann Comhairle and I who have been at the Council of Europe know how often we put our hands in our pockets—we can attract a very much larger number of visitors from Britain than we have ever attracted before.

The provision of the car ferry is, of course, the key to this whole matter because if two married couples share the cost of the car it is the cheapest holiday you can get. The same thing can be said about Irish people who go to England or the Continent. I remember going with Deputy John O'Donovan, his wife, and my wife to Larne, crossing over to Stranraer, driving up to John O'Groats and it was probably as cheap a holiday as we ever had. Therefore, I say the movement will be both ways.

We have done a good job in providing this service. We have been really ambitious in creating the Le Havre-Rosslare ferry. People do not realise how near we are to France. If I remember rightly, it is about 280 miles from Rosslare to Le Havre and steaming at about 10 knots an hour you would spend one day and one night on the ferry. Perhaps, I may be wrong; it may be a little longer. However, one arrives on the Continent, or alternatively Continental people arrive here, after a journey on this ferry. This is something which should balance out in our favour, although I do not go the whole way with the Minister in what he said, because of the expense of holidays on the Continent in relation to holidays here.

Even on the Continent you can go to certain hotels in large cities such as Paris where you will find that the cost is prohibitive. At the same time, if you go to some of the small places you will discover that they are not prohibitive and you will find the change of food, the change of climate and the change of habit very pleasant. It is probably no dearer, and perhaps cheaper, than at home. Therefore, the car ferry can be of advantage both ways.

I am a bit unhappy that touristwise we have not got the advantage of Italy or Spain because in those countries if you stay in small places, eat the food and, perhaps, drink the wine, if you are so inclined, you will find that you can have a very inexpensive holiday. You could also spend as much money, if you stay in the larger hotels, as you would if you stayed in the Intercontinental Hotel in Dublin.

The good point about the ferry to Le Havre is that people who have a fortnight's holidays to spend on a fixed amount of money probably will not go as far as Italy or Spain. They will probably spend their holidays in Brittany, Normandy, or some other place in the North of France. They may, perhaps, venture further afield to Germany or Switzerland but it is unlikely that they will take a trip down south.

While the regional tourist organisation have done an extremely good job in co-operation with the farm guesthouses, the Minister must accept criticism because of the saving on resort development, because of the crying need for this expenditure and because of the state of revenue, and, indeed, the state of capital funds in this country at the moment as far as Government resources are concerned. When the Minister is replying, instead of defending himself, he should resolve to do better next year and see to it that if there is a breakdown in negotiations and in profitable contact between the tourist organisations, the local authorities, Bord Fáilte and his Department, this breakdown in contact should be mended, and it should become more easy to do these things that are so necessary for the resorts.

I note the Minister's line has also been to spend money on major resorts. I do not think this is wise either. I know there are major schemes that must definitely be approached, started and completed, but, at the same time, the small seaside resorts and hotels of our country are something that can be developed. In relation to the small hotel, reasonable prices and excellent food are things that people can dream about and come back to for years and years to come. I remember going into an hotel in Ballycotton where two ladies who had returned from abroad had begun business. The painters had not gone out and I was awakened in the morning by the sound of a large load of blocks arriving, but I have never been more comfortable or so well fed so cheaply.

I was pleased to see recently that the Bord Fáilte emphasis was on the price of food. This is a change for the better. There was too much accent on big development seven or eight years ago. Nobody now, even the very rich, has the sort of money that allows them to spend £6, £7, £8 or £9 for bed and breakfast. That is something that is quite obvious, because of the facilities, taxes and so on. Even those who have money do not want to pay for this type of service because they can get something more homely, more comfortable and less pretentious to which they would be happy to return again. Therefore, I am disappointed that the saving announced by the Minister is there. I am glad there are expenses over and above that voted on other heads and I would be glad if the Minister would accept my criticism in relation to the saving.

In case anybody wants to come in on this further, perhaps I might explain?

(Clare): Is the Minister concluding?

To help Deputies, some of the projects to which Deputy Donegan referred come under minor resort expenditure and we spent all the money that was available under that subhead. The saving occurred in relation to major resorts for which local authorities had not yet prepared their contribution but the minor resorts——

You spent about one-fifth of what you should on minor resorts and you spent none in my area in which the county council could help you. We had as much chance of getting to you as to the North Pole.

Whatever Bord Fáilte budgeted for was spent in the minor resort areas.

What has Deputy Tully to say?

In so far as development of tourism and expenditure of public funds towards that end is concerned, it is essential that the money voted by this House, year in year out is utilised to the best advantage. This Supplementary Estimate raises the old matter I have heard raised here again and again and which I intend repeating, that is, the desirability of some information on the expenditure of this money being available to this House. We have discussed the role of State-sponsored bodies on various occasions and I have maintained, Sir, that in dealing with this Supplementary Estimate and in dealing with the general Estimates for State-sponsored bodies, the only information available to the Members of this House are the broad headlines: that we propose to give a grant-in-aid of £2,250,000 under section 2 of the Tourist Traffic Act, 1961, that we propose to expend in 1967-68 £500,000 on resort development and that we propose to expend £700,000 on the development of holiday accommodation. Then you have in the leaflet submitted with this Estimate an indication that there is an additional sum under the Tourist Traffic Act.

We have a statement from the Minister which does not give any detailed information. I am a firm believer in the Members of this House, the elected representatives of the people, being fully conversant with the details of the expenditure of Bord Fáilte or any other public body. We cannot pass judgment, because of the lack of information, on whether we are getting value for this money or not. I am quite in order, I am sure, Sir, in maintaining that we should have a sub-committee of this House, something akin to the Committee of Public Accounts, in so far as these State-sponsored bodies are concerned, where more detailed information could be made available to the Committee.

I do not think there would be any breach of confidence in doing that. I have in mind getting information on a reasonably comprehensive basis. I have in mind that the disbursement of the money referred to in the Minister's statement here and the grant-in-aid for development of holiday accommodation should be disclosed. The Minister may say that would be most undesirable, that it would be a breach of confidence in relation to applications for such loans, but I think that where substantial grants are given from public funds, the representatives of the people, that is, the Members of this House, are entitled to know about them.

I do not want to interrupt the Deputy but he proceeds to deal with F.3.; the Supplementary is F.1.

The Minister has referred to F.3 in the course of his statement, even though the leaflet only refers to F.1.

The major resort expenditure for the year 1966-67 is published in the Bord Fáilte report.

That report gives little information. Information in that report is on the decline. Some years ago there were many more details given but the report now is so broadly based that it does not give any information on the questions I am discussing and which the Leas-Cheann Comhairle had doubts about being in order.

It gives details of ten places in West Cork on which £70,000 was spent. Surely there is enough information in that for the Deputy?

I am sure the Minister is aware that what I have in mind is detailed particulars of these grants, which should be available to a Committee of this House.

It does not arise on a Supplementary Estimate.

That is the point.

Now that I have expressed a general opinion, which I thought appropriate as a preamble to observations on the Supplementary Estimate, I am agreeable. We have been told that £52,000 of the £308,000 needed is required to compensate for commitments in America and the continent of Europe. We should like to know, therefore, some more about the results of our missions in North America particularly—how many additional tourists from the US and Canada have visited this country as a result of our expenditure. People who possibly have not got the knowledge have made certain assertions and the Minister, his Department and officials of Bord Fáilte might let us know, for instance, if a sizeable percentage of those visitors are of Irish extraction, of Irish origin or descent. We should like to know if they would be coming along in any case to visit the motherland.

That is a question which is difficult to answer, but it is no harm to put it because, possibly with the information available to him, the Minister might be able to enlighten the people throughout the country who are in doubt. I agree we should do everything possible to attract as many visitors from the US as we can. We have close ties with the US; we have many friends and relatives there who have, I am sure, an interest in this country. Possibly, due to their ties with this country, they would give us preference during their holidays if they thought reasonable value would be forthcoming from visits here. It is accepted that they are getting reasonable value. Devaluation will help this year and our accommodation is improving. If the Minister believes such results will flow from this expenditure, I agree with it.

I am doubtful, however, if in recent times we have been too favourably disposed to that country and I do not think that will help our drive to expand tourism. I regret that American representatives when they visited Cork city—certainly the American Ambassador's representative who visited the city recently—did not get the reception they should have got. I do not think that type of action on the part of any of our people will help tourism in so far as the US is concerned. There are few countries with which we have such close association. We get money back from friends and relatives in our difficult periods. There are so many people of Irish descent in the US that we should be favourably disposed to their representatives.

Deputy Donegan referred to a reduction of £250,000 which is referred to in the Minister's statement. It is peculiar that there should be such a reduction, that it is not possible to utilise the money on major resort development. It would not confront Bord Fáilte with any great difficulty to transfer the money to other activities running short of funds. In the part of the country I have the honour to represent, the south-west Cork coast in particular, we expected much more from Bord Fáilte than we have got. Maybe our expectations were set too high; maybe we expected more than our just slice of the loaf that was being divided. In that area, the local authority and the voluntary organisations have been endeavouring to develop tourism. They are anxious to get as much help as possible from the Minister's Department and Bord Fáilte. We had a visit from a Bord Fáilte representative recently. He attended one of our meetings and we hope to have him soon again. We hope that as a result we will be getting a slice of the money being provided in this Supplementary Estimate for what could be termed minor development in particular.

Major development is necessary in large tourist centres, but on the Cork coast there are several small villages with big tourist potential. On a number of occasions we were pleased to welcome the Minister to that part of the country. He is particularly conversant with the Berehaven Peninsula which he has kindly commended to the public as a place worth visiting. We are thankful to him for having given the district favourable publicity and we are satisfied that he will be helpful in having provided the grants necessary for development there.

I will not take up more time on this Supplementary Estimate by going over the many demands being made on Bord Fáilte for funds for various essential works in so far as tourism is concerned. Let us hope that Bord Fáilte representatives will be down with us next month and will give us information on the grants that are likely to be available. I am reasonably conversant with the position in the Allihies region: I know they have to be attended to also. I think my part of the country is quite pleased and will be satisfied if they get their fair share. They are not looking for anything more than what is justly due to them.

The farm guesthouse scheme has been a magnificent success. Farmers down my way, who did the minimum of advertising, had guests from Germany, France, Britain and America. From discussions I have had with the proprietors of these farm guesthouses, I gather that the visitors were very pleased. Some of the guesthouses were eight, nine, ten or 11 miles from the sea—inland places. I am quite satisfied that what such visitors require is a nice clean house—cleanliness is the first item—and good food, which is to be had in farmhouses, food of possibly a higher standard than would be available in hotels, which is only natural, seeing that the farmers have fresh vegetables, and so on. I understand that the limited number of farm guesthouses which are available, and which are up to a reasonable standard, are booked out again for this year and that the proprietors have no problem other than the problem of sufficient space to meet bookings.

The scheme has now gone beyond the experimental stage so far as West Cork is concerned and possibly the same applies to other districts. I should like the Minister, in any discussions with Bord Fáilte, to try to develop that scheme as much as possible. It has great potential in the 12 western counties. The Cork development team is very anxious about this scheme. I was a member of that team for two years. We discussed the great potential of this scheme and I know the discussions are continuing.

I do not want a reduction in standards but I should like a reduction in the number, where required, of additional rooms under the farm guesthouse scheme. It could be a difficult matter for some people, perhaps, because of the layout of their house. Take a house with five rooms, as an example: there could be difficulty in adding, say, five rooms to such a house. If applications were accepted even for an additional two rooms, it would be a great help. Of course, applications would be scrutinised by an inspector from the board to see what kind of people were making application. That would be a factor in determining the availability of grants if this regulation is made. Furthermore, it would be necessary to make sure that the house is clean and well looked after. Is the present accommodation up to Bord Fáilte standard? Is the house well located? If it passes that examination, if the inspector or supervisor reports that the family seems to be one that could cater for visitors, that their present housing is up to the standard one would expect for visitors and that the premises could be included in Bord Fáilte's list, I believe that such a family should get help for the building of two or three additional rooms.

In that way, the scheme could expand and more farmers and more rural dwellers would be likely to avail of this source of additional income. Everybody now appreciates the problem of the small farmers and the rural dwellers. They deplore emigration. Here is a hope for farmers in areas where land is poor, where productivity is low and where the potential is not very promising of developing a sideline which will help to supplement their incomes from arable pursuits. I recommend that as strongly as possible to the Minister. I do so as a result of reports I have received from a number of people who at present are catering for such visitors in their farmhouses.

I shall not take up the time of the House now with the subject of the regional organisations. I am reasonably conversant with the Cork-Kerry one. I am sure they are doing the best they possibly can in endeavouring to expand tourism. The members of the regional boards are all men of the highest integrity and most of them are well qualified to deal with tourist development.

I do not know if it is in order to mention hotel service as the matter is not mentioned in the Minister's opening speech on the Supplementary Estimate. We have hotels as fine as any in the world. However, sometimes one hears complaints. Seeing that we expend roughly £3½ million under this particular heading, we should ensure that people who get grants, and so on, provide a service of which we can be proud. Bookings are plentiful in the months of July and August and, when there is no trouble in getting guests, some hotel-keepers are not as courteous as they might be: the same remarks apply to some of the staff also. I do not like to refer to the bleak side or to the black side but it is important that these factors be taken into account. We should try to ensure that our visitors will receive courteous and reasonable attention and will return home as advertisers for tourism in Ireland. Such satisfied visitors could do better work, possibly, than our office in their country from the point of view of attracting more visitors.

I am in agreement with Deputy Donegan's suggestion that the erection, if necessary, of additional hotels with State aid is desirable, particularly if we can contain the prices. I believe that when we ask for more than £2 per night for bed and breakfast, we are going outside the pockets of many people. We should keep the cost of bed and breakfast as near as possible to the 30/- mark.

I realise that these are items more appropriate to the main Estimate and, therefore, I will conclude by voicing the support of the Labour Party for the token Supplementary Estimate, in the hope that when the time for the general review comes at a later stage, the Minister will have something to say about the point I have raised here again and again, that is, the desirability of giving more detailed information to the Members of this House as to the activities of Bord Fáilte because, as I have said, it is very difficult, on the kind of information made available to Deputies, to assess the value or worth of Bord Fáilte. The information is too limited.

The provision of the additional sum of £308,000 for the items specified by the Minister is fully justified. We realise, of course, that savings of £307,990 on other subheads of the Vote will be set off against it.

Whatever may be said about the provision of £206,000 to exploit the opportunity presented by devaluation to attract more visitors, in my view, the time has come when as much as possible of our resources must be put into marketing. We can no longer depend on tourists coming to spend holidays here just because they have read stories about leprechauns and other fairy tales of Ireland. We must go out and sell our country abroad. We must inform potential tourists of the type of holiday available here. We must spend money in publicising the accommodation available, the climate, the tranquillity, the good roads, the beautiful scenery and all the other tourist attractions.

The Minister has told us that the sum of £52,000 is necessary to compensate for the effects of devaluation on the cost of the Board's committed marketing budgets in North America and the continent of Europe. This expenditure is unavoidable.

I am in full agreement with the provision of the sum of £75,000 to supplement the funds of the regional tourism organisations. It has been obvious to me for some time past that these organisations, having such worthy aims and objects, have been in serious difficulties because of lack of financial assistance. The local contributions amount to only £62,000 per annum. Bord Fáilte undertook to provide not less than £143,000. Having regard to the useful work which these organisations are doing, they should not be deprived of the necessary provision, even capital provision, for adequate office accommodation and for printing, publishing and other expenses.

The Opposition have criticised Bord Fáilte for not spending a sum of approximately £300,000 in respect of the development of major tourist resorts. I know from my experience as an official of a local authority how difficult it is to get many of these projects off the ground. For instance, difficulty is experienced in the acquisition of land and rights of way, in making adequate provision for maintenance and for water and sewerage schemes to serve the resorts. The fact that local authorities in particular and local development associations will now know that a certain amount of money made available this year for these purposes was not expended will make them more active and they will ensure that schemes are properly documented, prepared and presented for the information of Bord Fáilte so that grants can be allocated early in the financial year.

I think it was Deputy Donegan who stated that very few amenity grants were being paid. In this respect the experience of Kerry has been fair enough. Again, I think that too many organisations and individuals have been waiting for the State to do something for them. Too many development associations have been waiting for Bord Fáilte to pay out money and to tell them how to develop their areas. Personally, I think development associations should prepare schemes and submit applications for amenity grants well in advance of the close of the financial year.

I should like Bord Fáilte to direct more money towards the repair and improvement of quiet by-roads leading to little piers and harbours in scenic rural areas. Money could be spent on the provision of small car parks in these areas. Within the next few years, our main roads and even county roads, particularly in the principal tourist areas, will become choked with traffic, and if we are to maintain the attractiveness of our country to tourists the small piers, harbours and quiet coves should be developed, access roads improved and car parks provided.

I should also like to refer to the provision of a telephone service in one particular tourist area.

That would be a matter for another Department —the Department of Posts and Telegraphs.

I should like the Minister to give special consideration to the question of making a contribution to that Department.

It does not relevantly arise on this particular Estimate.

I will conclude by saying that we in Kerry are satisfied with the work of Bord Fáilte and the Department of Transport and Power during the past few years.

(Clare): I rise to say a few words on this Estimate not because I disagree with the general policy of Bord Fáilte but because it has seemed to me for a long time that Bord Fáilte have lost sight of a particular facet of the tourist industry. They have spent a great deal of money in helping to provide accommodation, and the Minister and Bord Fáilte always stress the necessity for providing accommodation, but accommodation, as we understand it, means more rooms, more hotels and more guesthouses. It is pitiful to see the facet upon which I have remarked being neglected, that is, in regard to the middle income tourist, or the lesser income tourist. He is not provided for to the extent he should be and he would bring money into the country.

The Minister may say that money is provided by Bord Fáilte for the provision of accommodation for that type of tourist but that is not so. The same facilities are not given for this type of tourist as are provided for the millionaire tourist. All you need do if you are an American millionaire with the name McNamara or Finucane, or something like that, is buy a castle and immediately you will get a grant from Bord Fáilte. However, let us take an employee of a hotel, a chef, a porter, or anybody like that who has been saving up for four or five years in order to set up business for the small income tourist. There is a grant of £5,000 given for five years free of interest, but if he saves £6,000 or £7,000 and buys a house, then he has no money to continue and he cannot get that loan of £5,000 because he is not registered as a guesthouse or as an hotel. He has not got the money to do that.

Therefore you are catering for the millionaire who can come here and buy a castle and you are forgetting the chef or the porter or anyone of that kind who desires to contribute his quota to the accommodation which is necessary. If the employee of the tourist industry did get the £5,000 free of interest for five years, he would have paid it back in that time and interest would not be accruing. I would ask the Minister to get Bord Fáilte to consider that point. It has been staring Bord Fáilte in the face for the past ten or twenty years. Practically nothing has been done for the person who is endeavouring to cater for the middle income class.

I notice that the Minister says that £52,000 is required to compensate for the effects of devaluation and that it is proposed to intensify marketing activities in North America and on the continent of Europe. This is something which has been referred to again and again in this House — the expenditure on tourism in North America. I feel, as do others, that a great mistake is being made and that we are over-rating the value of American tourists to this country. Many tourists do come from America because they have Irish connections and most of them would come, whether or not a shilling was spent on promotional activities. Many more of them who come, come on package deals and spend the smallest amount of money they possibly can in this country. In addition, we have been spending far too much money on the luxury type of accommodation which these people demand, whether or not they are used to it on the other side. We should be concentrating on a different type of tourist.

However, apparently the amount has been committed and as it is about the end of this financial year that we are talking, it must be spent before the end of March. I suppose the money has already gone so that there is no point in talking about effecting a saving. I have expressed a view on more than one occasion that we seem to have, particularly from this Government, a crop of Supplementary Estimates for large amounts of money being presented just before the end of the financial year. This is an exception. In this case there is only a token sum of £10 required. Perhaps it is an extraordinary coincidence, or maybe it is more than a coincidence, but the money which is being spent saves the taxpayers; the finding of this money is saved on the resort development grants. For 1967-68 the amount provided was £500,000 and the amount spent in the previous year was £260,000. There was an increase of £240,000. It is extraordinary that the saving is £250,000. We are spending almost exactly the same amount as we appear to have spent last year.

The second point about this is that if there were a better system whereby money could be spent, not entirely on the larger resorts—and this again is something on which the Minister and I have crossed swords previously—there would be more than a possibility of having a considerable amount of this money spent during the year. There is no point in putting a sum of money in the Book of Estimates and saying that we are giving this amount under a particular heading and then, when the year is over, finding that it has not been spent and that later on it is put back under another heading.

Deputy Donegan referred to the smaller resorts in Louth, and in the adjoining county, in Meath, we also have small resorts. We find that it is not easy to get money. I was interested in Deputy O'Leary's comment about what local development associations should do. I am chairman of a development association and we are doing everything possible to raise money to try to improve the resorts. We cannot raise money on the required scale and therefore we must depend on grants and on rates. The county council have spent as much as we could possibly expect them to spend in the area and Bord Fáilte have occasionally given us a few hundred pounds—as much as £690 on one occasion. Is it any wonder that we are angry with Bord Fáilte when we get £690 and a large over-developed area which has got almost everything gets £30,000 or £40,000 free grant? We believe that we could develop the area: we have the scenery, the sea and everything else except the money, but Bord Fáilte give us the pennies while other areas already more than provided for receive substantial amounts of money.

If the Minister had more ability to spread around the money he has, he could have spent it well with very good results during the year. Instead of that, it is tied down because it is listed under a specific heading; and, because local authorities were not able to find the money to back the big money he was giving for the big resorts, this amount comes back again into the kitty. I am not blaming the Minister: I am blaming the system. The system is wrong. There may be some way by which this money could be more evenly spread.

There are one or two other matters in the Minister's speech to which I should like to refer. While he has set out as well as can be expected the headings under which the money is to be found and spent, he might, I think, have given us a little more information. I am a director of a regional tourism organisation and, like every other tourist organisation, we are short of money. A few years ago, some misguided individual sold to the tourist organisations an idea that there was such a thing as picking up substantial sums of money under what was termed "Planned Giving". The result was that a non-national organisation was hired by practically all the regional tourism organisations which went around and asked business people, hoteliers, publicans and others for money to help tourism. Since this was helping out these people themselves, there was no reason, I suppose, why they should not be asked to give something. But I think the whole thing was a mistake.

To give people the idea that the only way in which you can raise money for tourism is by going and asking those to give now and give again, while a great many people who would possibly be in a much better position to give give nothing—if they do not want to give it cannot be got from them—are allowed off scot-free is a bad thing. It is a mistake. The whole business, in my opinion, lowered the tone. Eventually the organisation was dispensed with and I believe it is now attempting on a limited scale to raise this money. I think Bord Fáilte were trying their hand at it.

I am sure the Minister appreciates what I am saying. Again, I am not blaming those who believe money must be got if we are to develop tourism, but I am blaming the people who recommended that the organisation I have referred to should be allowed to do this. I am sure the Minister is aware that very substantial sums were collected by these people from the tourism organisations, not from the people who were supposed to give the money, and the result was, to put it bluntly, they were a dead loss. That net loss to the whole tourist organisation as a result of the activities of these people was very high. Fortunately, some saner mind eventually decided that this had to be stopped.

Two things have gone wrong. First, the idea was not a good one at the start but, having been started, it is really too bad that the tourism organisations have now put themselves in the position that they have to send someone around to mend a situation which was very badly handled. A great many people are pretty sceptical about the whole thing and are not too inclined now to dig into their pockets to find money for this purpose. An effort should be made to raise money which can be given to the regional tourism organisations. It is unfair that they should be asked to do a job and then not given the wherewithal to pay for what they are doing. People like myself act on the committee. We do not claim expenses of any kind. We often travel pretty long journeys at personal inconvenience to ensure the business of the organisation is carried out properly. We might as well face up to the situation: if we are really serious in asking the regional tourist organisations to do their job properly, then this House and Bord Fáilte must be responsible for seeing they have the money to do it.

Tourism is a big money-spinner. It has raised a colossal amount of money over the past few years. I do not agree with the system by which the money spent is assessed. Giving people a sample card to mark is not a good method. The results could not be expected to be accurate. At the same time, there is a great deal of money spent and I believe the encouragement those interested in tourism are getting is not anything like sufficient. Our development association have gone to a great deal of trouble and not a little expense in getting out brochures to assist tourists. That sort of thing should be encouraged. When we find that the amount of money available is not sufficient and the tourist organisations find themselves in the red—they should not be in the red—it is a little disheartening. They do not spend money lavishly. They count every penny. That is only as it should be. They should be treated better and I appeal to the Minister now to make an effort when next year's Budget is being prepared to ensure that adequate money is available to the regional tourism organisations to enable them to carry out their job and save them from having to go hat in hand to ask for the money which is going to be spent in the area.

It may be argued that the people who will benefit are the people who should help, but, while there are generous people and people who appreciate that one must pay for everything one gets, at the same time, there are a great many people who want to get everything they possibly can without paying. The present system is not a fair one. Perhaps the perfect system is impossible to find. I am sure the Minister—he has a deep interest in tourism, I know, and knows a great deal more about it than most people— knows that what I am saying is correct and I trust he will try to remedy the defects when the Budget is being prepared.

Finally, I am sorry that the £250,000 was not made available to the minor resorts. Had it been made available, a tremendous amount of work could have been done during the year. I am sure the Minister will agree with that.

I thank the Deputies for their constructive and helpful criticism. The first point I should like to emphasise is a point raised by Deputy Hogan from Co. Clare. We have been developing, or helping to develop, accommodation in the medium price and lower price range and I must make it quite clear to the House that the idea that a millionaire gets a grant automatically simply is not true. There is no preference for any particular level or category of accommodation. Grants and loans are available for all grades. These are the facts. The B, C and D grades of hotels and guesthouses and supplementary accommodation increased from 16,690 in 1963 to 24,392 in 1967, or approximately 46 per cent.

Is this the number of beds?

The number of bedrooms, yes. In the year 1966, there was an increase of 15 per cent in supplementary accommodation alone as compared with the previous year.

Do these bedrooms include holiday camps?

No, they do not include holiday camps. The Report of the OECD Tourism Committee shows that this was the largest increase recorded in any of the OECD countries. The next highest was Spain, 14 per cent; Norway, 12 per cent; Italy, nine per cent; Belgium and Denmark, seven per cent each.

Our starting point was lower. Increases are quite natural.

All I am saying is that we have been able to secure a lot of this moderate priced accommodation. I think I made it clear in the general Estimate last year that I am still worried about the development of a certain grade of hotel. I am glad the Deputies have approved of the farmhouse grants and I hope this grade of accommodation will continue to expand in the future. However, there is a definite lack of 35/- to 45/-accommodation in hotels of about 100 bedrooms for package tour holidays. We are making a tremendous effort to see what we can do about that particular grades whose development seems to be lacking at the present time.

Deputies are perfectly right to ask for some proof at regular intervals that Bord Fáilte expenditure is justified. I dealt with it before and I will deal with it very briefly. One can judge the effect of this Bord Fáilte expenditure by the number of inquiries that they receive at the numerous offices they have in Great Britain, in Europe and in America. One can judge their effectiveness by the replies to couponed advertisements in the newspapers. There are independent marketing organisations who have been asked by Bord Fáilte, without disclosing from whom they come, about the effectiveness of all national tourist offices, and they have approached, in the case of Great Britain, some thousand travel agents. I am satisfied myself that this organisation is an extremely tough one and if it wants to give an unpleasant report do just that, and Bord Fáilte tourist offices were at the top of the list among 927 travel agents whom they asked: which do you think is the most effective national tourist office in Great Britain. Then in relation to specialised campaigns where you had to see the actual results to know whether or not the Bord Fáilte promotion was successful, there was the angling campaign which was more than successful, and some others which were also worthwhile. We can also judge Bord Fáilte by the number of travel agents in each country who set up package tours which are directly derived from and originated in the assistance given by Bord Fáilte to enable them to develop a package tour. I am satisfied, therefore, that the expenditure by Bord Fáilte is effective and that it is justifiable as far as this House is concerned.

Deputy Donegan referred to a number of resort works. Unfortunately, under the rules of this House, it is not possible to transfer a grant-in-aid from a subhead to minor resort expenditure. The major resort development expenditure was not reached for reasons I have already indicated. Deputies will be interested to hear that because, as I indicated when the last Tourist Traffic Bill was passing through the House, the major resort scheme as such and in its present form is ending, and because tourists are becoming more mobile and spreading over the country Bórd Fáilte is now developing, under the heading major resort development, a general plan for infra-structure development and preparing new schemes that will not be concentrated only in specific resorts, and the failure to spend money under the heading in question would mean the money would be related to what was being spent in certain classified areas, in areas such as West Cork, Killarney, Galway and a number of other centres. In some cases a whole county was included and in other cases simply a particular area.

Surely if the Minister could not transfer expenditure, he could come in here for a Supplementary Estimate, as he has done tonight? He came in here for a token sum of £10, having over-expended £308,000 on one subhead. Could he not have come in here for a Supplementary Estimate if he wanted to?

I suppose it would have been possible.

The Minister has lost a year.

The expenditure of Bord Fáilte under all these heads is substantial and I did not want to embarrass the Minister for Finance by making too many excessive demands. There has been a tremendous increase in Bord Fáilte expenditure from £500,000 in 1958 to £3,500,000 in the passing year under capital and current account, and I think that shows progress.

Nobody could embarrass the Minister for Finance.

Deputy Donegan, perhaps, read my statement very quickly and may not have noticed that there is some supplementary expenditure provided for in the case of Great Britain. If he reads the first paragraph on page four he will see that we are spending some of this money in Great Britain in order to encourage English people to come here because of the position of other countries in having devalued and the necessity of attracting British people here in the prevailing circumstances.

Unfortunately we have a lot of them coming with a car and with the week's supplies in the boot of it. That is not helping.

Deputy Tully referred to the regional tourist organisations and the difficulty they had experienced in raising funds through the services of a special organisation. I agree with Deputy Tully that there was quite obviously a mistake in the manner of so doing. Regional tourist boards inevitably have their teething problems. I think they are going to raise funds in a new way, but I hope I have not misunderstood Deputy Tully; it is absolutely essential that garage owners, hoteliers, guesthouse keepers, hotel proprietors, souvenir shopkeepers, publicans, who really do benefit from tourism should be asked to make a voluntary contribution to the regional tourist boards, however cynical Deputy Tully may be about the attitude of some of them. I think if they are approached in the right way, not in the wrong way as undoubtedly they were in some instances, they will contribute.

It has been spoiled by the Board now, and the generous people will contribute and those who are not generous will not.

The matter will have to be re-examined and is being re-examined at the moment. In countries like Italy where there are provinces, where the people are no better off than they are here and where in many cases the people are poorer in certain regions, they do regard the collection of local funds equivalent to two per cent of the tourist expenditure in the area as an absolutely sound investment. On that basis Deputy O'Leary who spoke about the regional tourist organisation and Deputy Michael Pat Murphy who also spoke about it would like to know that the local people interested in tourism in Cork and Kerry would between them have raised about £150,000 a year on the Italian precedent. I hope we will be able to reach that position. We are very far off it at present.

Deputy M. P. Murphy referred to the farmhouse grants. I should say the grants are given in the 12 western and north-eastern counties, including West Cork, to assist raising standards where necessary. The grant is at the rate of 66? per cent, subject to a maximum of £500, and is available for additional rooms, bathrooms, toilets and improvement of appearance, etc. They will actually be given if only one bedroom is made available to tourists. On the other hand, for the registered guesthouse, to reach a satisfactory standard and to ensure no abuse of the grant facilities, to insist on a minimum of five rooms is, I think, reasonable. We have reduced it from ten, as it was. We may take another step in the future. At the moment I think we are getting a reasonable enough response so we can leave the registered guesthouse minimum at five rooms.

The Deputy complained of some cases where there was failure to provide polite service to tourists. Of course, Bord Fáilte and I and everybody else interested in tourism emphasise the necessity for friendliness and what I might describe as the natural Irish interest we have in human beings. Politeness and interest in human beings as such are almost more important than all the money the Government give to tourism if we want to be successful. It is one of the most successful factors in stimulating tourists to come here.

Deputies referred to the difficulty local authorities have experienced in regard to their rates. I quite understand their position. Nevertheless, I think the capital invested in tourism in an area, although it may seem to be a burden—and I know there are many other important social priorities— results in making it easier to carry out rate collection from the people who live there. As a result of tourism and the widespread expenditure of money by tourists the collection and paying of rates is made easier. I think some of these investments that could be carried out would be found actually to help to bring in more rates. I hope county councils will take the most liberal view they can of the grants towards infra-structural improvements of an area. I think I have answered all the points made.

Vote put and agreed to.
Votes 26 and 41 reported and agreed to.
Top
Share