The Minister referred to holiday accommodation and the question of the improved amount of money available to Bord Fáilte to deal with this. Would he give me a few examples of the kind of schemes he has in mind which might benefit from the pittance made available to him by the Minister for Finance to deal with this major industry?
Tourist Traffic Bill 1983 [Seanad]: Committee Stage.
Section 1 agreed to.
SECTION 2.
Question proposed: "That section 2 stand part of the Bill."
Is this the £25 to £30 million on expansion?
What kind of schemes has the Minister in mind for this extra money?
Those are to continue the existing schemes which have been in operation and for which commitments have already been entered into. This is mainly the provision of bathroom facilities in hotels in order to upgrade them.
That is the point. I take it from the Minister's winding-up speech or Second Stage that he is disposed to bring in a grant, an improvement, a renewal scheme for the existing hotel accommodation. Is it to be accommodated out of that money?
No.
Would the Minister indicate how much he is going to provide for that purpose?
As I have said, no provision goes beyond the existing proposals for the uplifting and upgrading of the hotels and the self-catering facilities as provided at the moment. An assessment has been undertaken which will be completed within two months and which will indicate the tourist accommodation requirements over the next four or five years. In relation to that assessment, details relevant to grant aid will be considered.
The Minister for Finance willing. He should have put it there.
Question put and agreed to.
Section 3 agreed to.
SECTION 4.
Question proposed: "That section 4 stand part of the Bill".
Section 4 is dealing with unauthorised use of titles. Does that concern all types of accommodation from hotels to the new added one of holiday homes?
Section 4 deals with registration.
No, it does not. It does not concern registration at all. It is a question of unauthorised use of title.
Yes. What is the problem?
Whom precisely has the Minister in mind?
Hotels, guesthouses, holiday centres, caravan and camping grounds. They are all listed.
While I see the point of having this included in the Bill, at the same time if I am the owner of a property and I decide to call it a hotel and as long as I am not displaying the shamrock to indicate that it is approved, listed or whatever by Bord Fáilte, is the Minister saying that I am denied the right to label my establishment a hotel, guest-house or anything else and that he is going to bring me to court and fine me so many hundreds of pounds if I do not comply with the regulations?
The hotel and guesthouse name must be protected. There is no prohibition on a person using his premises for accommodation but if "hotel" is up and if it is not of a standard required by Bord Fáilte, then the tourist, the consumer, possibly will not be getting the standards that the premises are advertising.
I must take issue with the Minister here. The whole idea of the maintaining of registers by Bord Fáilte was to allow that standard to be maintained and named, but I cannot imagine how it would preclude an individual who does not wish to be registered on any register maintained by Bord Fáilte from putting up a label outside his house whether it is a guest-house, holiday house or whatever.
There is nothing in the legislation to prohibit anybody from using his premises for accommodation but if he puts up the word "hotel" outside, which is the registered symbol of the tourist board of a standard, then he will be in conflict with the law if he advertises his premises as a hotel.
That is not the case. I put it to the Minister that a symbol has been developed by Bord Fáilte which indicates that a premises is approved, listed and on a register, and that is the only means whereby a tourist or anybody else can identify that as a particularly registered source of accommodation. I cannot imagine even the constitutionality of depriving a person of the right to say that his premises is a hotel, guest-house or whatever as long as he is not flouting the law in regard to the symbol.
I would advise Deputy Flynn that that law exists already in relation to a hotel.
Does the Minister tell me that he is applying it to all kinds of accommodation?
It is now being extended to all registered premises that apply to Bord Fáilte for registration, use Bord Fáilte means for promoting themselves and avail of grants.
That is a different matter entirely. If the Minister is saying now that they must be registered I have no difficulty, but I am talking about the person who does not wish to register or to be encompassed by the regulations and so on, of Bord Fáilte no matter what kind of accommodation he has. Will he then be proceeded against in the courts?
He will be proceeded against under existing law if he uses the word "hotel" to demonstrate his premises for sale. Section 33 of the Tourist Traffic Act, 1939 provides:
(1) It shall not be lawful for the proprietor of any premises to describe or hold out or permit any person to describe or hold out such premises as an hotel unless such premises are registered in the register of hotels and such proprietor is registered in that register as the registered proprietor of such premises.
This has been law since 1939.
Even if it was law since 1839 and it is bad law that does not make it any better now. However, I will say no more on that except that I believe there is an infringement of a man's constitutional rights by that provision.
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 5.
Question proposed: "That section 5 stand part of the Bill".
There is reference here to the raising of fees that might be applied to people seeking registration and a fee not exceeding £2. I am developing an abhorrence for figures being included in legislation in this House and I would have been happier had the Minister left that open-ended, added to by order and made £2 for the time being. I take it that the last time this was amended was in 1939.
Yes, 1939.
The Minister for Finance would be very happy to understand that amounts must increase a little more quickly than from 1939 to 1983, and fees and licences are included in that matter. I am not making an issue on changing it now, but in future if a sum is to be put in there the wording could be arranged whereby it could be increased every so often. Can the Minister give an indication as to how much the £2 will be as against the 2½p that has been there since 1939? I am doing this for the Minister for Finance because the Minister is short of cash despite the fact that we left the coffers full when we left office.
(Limerick East): Full of what?
In view of the fact that this is governed by the number of applications I would not know at this stage what the amount is.
The Minister must know what it brought in last year at 2½p.
At 2½p.
What did the fees bring in last year to Bord Fáilte? If the Minister has difficulty with it he can send me on the information at his convenience. I will not press the matter.
I will send it on.
I wanted to establish how much money has been made available to Bord Fáilte now by increasing it by 4,000 per cent, or is it 400 per cent?
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 6.
Question proposed: "That section 6 stand part of the Bill".
This is a new departure for the Department of Trade, Commerce and Tourism in that it allows Bord Fáilte to become involved in foreign consultancy exercises. I must ask the Minister if this provision will involve extra expenditure other than that already provided in the Estimate. Will it involve the recruitment of extra personnel and has authority for such been received from the Minister for the Public Service?
I am glad that the Deputy raised that point, as I can put his mind at ease. On a few occasions Bord Fáilte were asked by some foreign interest to give a consultancy report on development. This did not involve recruitment or a financial commitment for Bord Fáilte. This is not being encouraged and will not be undertaken except with regard to a completed application from some country. This is what Bord Fáilte and the ESB have been doing on a very limited basis.
I cannot accept that. While I accept the bona fides of the Minister, a special section has been included in this new Tourist Traffic Bill providing arrangements whereby Bord Fáilte can become involved in consultancy practice and it stipulates three different aims, which makes me think that this did not come out of fresh air and that some people are gearing themselves to getting involved in the business of export consultancy work in a tourist way. I am now asking will this involve extra expenditure and have extra personnel been allocated or is it intended to do so for this type of consultancy work? Yes or no?
The position is that substantially prior to my appointment as Minister here Bord Fáilte did carry out consultancy work in three centres, Zambia, Tanzania and another country, for which no additional staff were recruited. This did not impinge on their normal functions and these services were of a short duration. I explained in my opening speech that section 2 of the Bill was being put in purposely to legalise what had been done, as had been the case in connection with the ESB. No Bord Fáilte staff are at the moment involved in consultancy work and there are no applications for this work.
This takes on a more serious tone than I thought. The Minister is now suggesting that Bord Fáilte have acted ultra vires on a number of occasions in the past and have undertaken consultancy work without the legal cover of any of the Tourist Traffic Acts. It is not for me to criticise the board in this matter, but out of the Minister's own mouth he is condemning them for acting illegally on a number of occasions and now wants the position to be legalised retrospectively by having this section included to cover any exigencies that might arise in the future. This is a very serious departure from the existing provisions of the Tourist Traffic Acts of 1939 to 1983. The line “and shall have all such powers as may be necessary for those purposes” indicates that Bord Fáilte intend becoming involved to a much more serious extent in consultancy work. There is no way in which they can do that satisfactorily within their existing budget and with their existing personnel and there would need to be an increase in both. The practice in CTT, who have the legal framework to cover their activities in this regard — this legislation being duly passed here before they became involved in the work — was to recruit staff and have special expenditures made available for the purpose. Are Bord Fáilte going into the business of consultancy work in the tourist area or not? If they are not and do not contemplate doing so, why is this section included in the Bill?
The effect of this section is to confirm Bord Fáilte's power to provide consultancy services. The Comptroller and Auditor General queried Bord Fáilte's involvement in overseas consultancy work. The advice of the Attorney General was sought. He gave the opinion that he could not say that the activities do not come within the board's powers. Nevertheless, he recommended that any doubts in the matter be removed by the appropriate amendment. The section provides that the board may provide services alone or with other persons, as on a number of occasions Bord Fáilte have provided the service in co-operation with another State-sponsored body or private company such as Stokes, Kennedy and Crowley. Services may be provided, whether for award or otherwise. In normal circumstances such services would be provided on a profit-making basis. However, it was felt that a certain amount of flexibility is required to allow for special circumstances.
That is not the answer which I sought. What the Minister is saying is that the Comptroller and Auditor General drew the attention of the Department to the fact that Bord Fáilte were acting illegally——
(Limerick East): No, the Minister did answer the question.
I can only take it from that that to regularise business the Minister is asking for this section to be included. I take it that Bord Fáilte, by using this section of the Bill, are intended to become involved in consultancy work inside and/or outside the State. Seeing that they have been performing illegally without the cover of the Tourist Traffic Acts, could the Minister give the three instances in which they were involved, the kind of money involved, who paid it and was the work carried on inside or outside the State?
The work was carried out in Zambia. It has always been funded by the EEC. Bord Fáilte have acted in co-operation with some other national or international body.
The Minister made reference earlier today to the fact that Bord Fáilte were stretched both personnelwise and finance-wise in dealing with their remit under the existing Tourist Traffic Acts. Now the Minister says that there will be no need for extra personnel or money to accommodate this section.
That is correct.
The Minister is suggesting that these people were over-staffed in the past and could allow some of their personnel and money to be moved in the direction of consultancy work. They are now regularising the whole matter so that they can be involved in a permanent way in consultancy work. I cannot accept that that is sufficient information for me to agree to this section. Just as was the situation with regard to another State organisation involved in outside consultancy work in the provision of services, I would have to be assured that any involvement by Bord Fáilte would be self-financing. If the Minister gives me that undertaking today, I suppose I had better agree. I insist on that guarantee, however.
The Deputy can rest assured that the provision with Bord Fáilte is that any of this work has been on a profit-making basis, involving no loss.
I want a ministerial understanding that any involvement in consultancy work inside or outside the State by Bord Fáilte will be self-financing.
I can certainly give that guarantee.
The Minister is giving that guarantee to the House.
These involvements happened between 1978 and 1982, for portion of which time the Deputy himself had ministerial responsibility for this office.
While I did not seek to chastise the Minister in that regard——
I know.
——I will point out that he has the facts a little wrong. I was not in the office which he holds at any time within the period he mentioned. During the period mentioned I did hold one office, but it had only a very slight connection with the tourist traffic.
(Limerick East): The charitable returns company.
The only traffic that the Minister will be involved in is the oneway traffic out of that main gate.
The Chair is trying to make up his mind whether that is fighting or friendly.
He may become involved in any consultancy work that he likes, but that is all that he will be able for.
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 7.
Question put: "That section 7 stand part of the Bill."
Will the register of holiday apartments be a graded standard register similar to the one applied to hotels and guest houses?
It will be a register completed following inspection by a Bord Fáilte officer of the standard of the apartments.
The Minister misunderstands. As we know, in hotels and guesthouses——
It is now 5 o'clock. Will the Deputy please report progress?
Could the Ceann Comhairle give us some time?
The Chair's hands are tied.
In five minutes we could deal with the matter and get it off the Order Paper.
Standing Orders are Standing Orders.
Is there any device by which we could be accommodated?
If I had discretion in the matter I would exercise it in favour of the Deputy. I am sorry I have not.
Progress reported; Committee to sit again.