Deputy Foley was in possession and has eight minutes left.
Financial Resolutions, 1989. - Financial Resolution No. 8: General (Resumed).
Debate resumed on the following motion:
That it is expedient to amend the law relating to customs and inland revenue (including excise) and to make further provision in connection with finance.
—(Minister for Finance.)
The key to job creation is adding value here to what we sell abroad. That applies to the agricultural industry and is certainly true in the case of tourism. Tourism adds a remarkably high value and almost all its input comes from the Irish economy.
Very little is imported by way of raw materials as happens in the manufacturing area. Tourism is now a £1 billion industry and its earnings are worth the same in terms of job creation as £2 billion in an industry with 50 per cent import content. We must start looking at tourism in this light. It is a major economic activity but too often it is seen as something simple and mundane. It is not simple, it is a complex industry or rather an accumulation of industries which must compete in a very crowded and expensive world marketplace in the same way as Irish butter, beef and other commodities we export.
Unlike the market for many traded products, the market for tourism and leisure is rapidly on the increase. World tourism is expected to expand at the rate of 8 per cent a year, and almost half of all international travel is between the countries of Western Europe — a huge market on our doorstep. There is no guarantee whatever that Ireland will get an automatic share of this growth. Our record to date shows how difficult it is to get a share of that business, especially when one considers we are a little known island off the mainland.
Approximately 65,000 people are employed in this industry which accounts for approximately 9 per cent of GNP. When one gets that big one faces a major task to hold one's own against one's competitors. Getting a growth of 15 per cent per annum is a major challenge but it is one that the tourism industry has taken on board because, as I said, the Government are now prepared to back them, to provide leadership, to assist where feasible and to provide funding to support the industry's initiatives. Late last year in order to get the marketing of this country underway early in 1989, the Government allocated £5 million to Bord Fáilte to be matched by the industry. We are now seeing the fruits of this investment. For the first time holidays in Ireland are being advertised on television in both Britain and America. Promotions involving a much larger number of Irish traders have been held in America and others will be held in continental Europe and Britain in the coming weeks. Never before has there been such a co-ordinated attack on our main markets by Bord Fáilte, fully supported by the industry.
The challenge facing us is not simply how best to market this country. When we speak of marketing we think of sales and promotions but in its full sense, marketing is identifying and satisfying customers' needs, even to the extent of revamping the tourism product, if necessary. It is in this respect that this budget represents a significant step forward. When we add the allocations for such projects as the restoration of King John's Castle, Limerick and the provision of a data base for Bord Fáilte to promote special interest holidays to the funding for tourism projects under the Office of Public Works and the funds we receive from the ERDF for new tourism product development, we see £18 million is being made available for capital works which will vastly improve and upgrade the range of tourism attractions we can offer potential customers. When we consider that Bord Fáilte only had £500,000 last year for development works we get some idea of the massive leap forward these funds represent, and that is only the tip of the iceberg.
Anyone involved in tourism or who has seen what some of our competitors have to offer, knows that Irish tourism has been badly under-capitalised for many years. There are reasons for this. We should not forget that our industry is made up of small operators who have found it difficult to compete on the international market. Profits have been few and far between for many operators with the result very little was available for reinvestment in, let it be said, a climate in which the tourist industry was treated as a Cinderella activity industry. There was no real incentive for people to invest in the type of facilities which are essential.
The Government have identified the potential in tourism and made a commitment to the industry by the business expansion scheme. In the first year, this brought forward tourism development projects costing £40 million more than manufacturing industry have been able to attract. Mr. Martin Dully, chairman of Bord Fáilte, speaking at a conference organised by the Commerce and Economic Society at UCC recently, said we are now seeing a level of interest in major tourism projects that is quite unprecedented. He said many of those projects are large scale, providing facilities which are weather proof — something we have been crying out for. He also noted that Bord Fáilte are currently holding discussions about projects worth £1 billion. Whether this interest translates into projects will depend, to some extent, on the support they will get from EC Structural Funds, but this is a dramatic development which we should not under-estimate. It indicates there is great confidence in Irish tourism at home and among potential investors abroad. It is crucial that EC funding for tourism infrastructure is made available because the industry need investment. If this funding is made available, I am satisfied that 25,000 new jobs will be created.
I am satisfied that we can look forward to achieving essential growth. It will not happen automatically. We need new facilities and we look like getting them. A new approach to packaging and marketing is needed and in this respect much is being done. Apart from catering for the general tourist, we have tremendous potential to develop a much wider range of special interest holidays. Bord Fáilte are doing that. Within the last year many new high quality products have been developed for activities such as golf, fishing, walking, cycling, horseriding and cruising. In all about 30 new products will be marketed in the coming year, and Bord Fáilte have identified about 100 new activities which can be catered for in this country.
The new chairman of Bord Fáilte is anxious to get rid of the "them and us" attitude which afflicts so many aspects of Irish life, including tourism. Usually the "them" are the Government and their agencies who are expected to do everything and deliver the business to the doorstep of the "us". Many people seem to think they have a divine right to that business. There is a need for more co-operation between the State agencies, the regional tourism organisations and their representative bodies, as well as the individual operators. This is happening but there is room for improvement.
There are many sectors who benefit in a big way from tourism but who put precious little back into the industry. I saw in a newspaper recently that the Dublin Chamber of Commerce alleged that not enough was being done to promote the city as a tourist centre. They should ask themselves what have they done to encourage people to come to the city. As chairman of Cork/Kerry Tourism I know how difficult it is to get the commercial sector to invest in tourism promotion or to cater for the tourist market. Sniping at others will not bring in extra business; we should try to put that attitude behind us.
In conclusion, I would like to compliment the Minister for Tourism and Transport, Deputy Wilson, and his Minister of State, Deputy Lyons, for the tremendous job they are doing in regard to the programme set down by Government. I have no doubt that they will see this programme through and that all those involved in tourism and the country in general will benefit.
Deputies P. O'Malley and Sheehan rose.
I would ask the two Deputies to resume their seats. An agreed formula in respect of Government and Opposition speakers operates in this House. Under that formula it seems that Fine Gael's requirements have been met. I should point out that apparently some misunderstanding arose when Deputy Sheehan was here earlier. It is my function to proceed in accordance with tradition but, on the other hand, if Deputy O'Malley and Deputy Sheehan can agree on the distribution of time that might be satisfactory. I say that recognising the position while appreciating the disappointment of the Deputy who will not be called.
I have been here for quite a while. I have been in this Chamber since 11 o'clock this morning and my Whip told me before 2 p.m. that he was informed by the Progressive Democrats Whip that no further speakers were coming in. If the Deputy likes I will divide my time with him.
As I understand it, Sir, I am in order to proceed and you are suggesting that, in view of the difficulty in which Deputy Sheehan finds himself because he was here on an earlier occasion and most of the day — and I am sure he has a valuable contribution to make — I will speak for about 15 minutes.
Maybe you will let me go first.
Deputy Sheehan has a longer journey to travel.
We will take it that Deputy O'Malley will be in at 4.15 p.m.
In the 1989 budget this Government failed to grasp the possibilities of this historical moment. All Government decisions can be guided on the gospel's guideline phrase: "By their fruits ye shall know them". When the basis of this budget is evaluated it will be found that one-third of our population still continue to live in poverty. The Minister identified three priorities he wished to address in his Budget Statement, (1) to reduce poverty (2) to increase job creation and (3) to transform taxation. The Minister failed to tackle any of the three problems comprehensively. Certainly poverty was not given the priority it deserved in the 1989 budget. Taxation was reduced from 35 per cent to 32 per cent, a step in the right direction. However, this has been offset by the reduction in mortgage interest relief from 90 per cent to 80 per cent. This Government have reduced the mortgage interest relief by 20 per cent since they came into office in 1987. One fifth of the mortgage interest relief has been completely swept off. That is a cruel blow to the people who took steps to house themselves. This is not a step in the right direction. It is a policy of robbing Peter to pay Paul. Everybody knows that mortgage holders are young people who got married and had the initiative to take on their own shoulders the building or purchase of a house. What has been the result? They have been dealt a cruel, deadly blow by this uncaring Government who have taken one-fifth of their mortgage interest relief out of their pockets completely. What advantage is the three per cent reduction income tax to that category of people?
We see increases in the duty on beer, spirits, cigarettes, tobacco and petrol. We now have the highest rate of duty on those commodities in the EC. What attraction is there for tourists to come here with that kind of exorbitant taxation? What does the budget do for tourism? In south-west Cork and Kerry what did we get for tourism? We got a paltry £500,000, half a million, for a ferry service that played a Trojan part in 1988 in increasing tourists numbers to that area. The people of that region had to beg the rest of the money from the small shopkeepers, businessmen and hoteliers who are hard pressed to keep that ferry service going. At the end of the day we got an assurance from the Government that they would give us a further loan of a paltry half a million pounds — big deal. The loan is to be paid back by a company who were nearly strangled last year by other companies trying to cut their travel rates to grab tourists into their net.
What have the Government done on the other hand? They have given £11 million to B & I to run a service from Dublin to Holyhead as compared to a mere half a million pounds to the Cork-Swansea ferry. Is this equality for citizens in all parts of the country? If B & I are entitled to such a heavy subsidy from the Government last year, why did the Government not insist that they stay in the Cork-Swansea service and give the people of the south-west an opportunity to make a living from tourism? Remember the south-west region is known internationally as the Riviera of Ireland. We are not getting much assistance from the Government to keep this valuable service going.
Is it not going——
It is, thanks to the business people of Cork and Kerry.
You are two weeks too late.
I was prepared to put my money where my mouth was as well. I hope the Deputy did too.
The budget made no significant change to the vast majority of farmers. Forty-four per cent of all households headed by a farmer now live on the poverty line, according to statistics published recently.
What did the Minister for Agriculture and Food do in Brussels? He bungled the recent discussions there on agriculture and sold the farmers down the drain, instead of using his veto to make sure he would bring home a package worthy of our farmers. What did he bring home? A Mickey Mouse package, nothing more.
What did the budget do for horticulture? We have a Minister for Food, a colleague of mine from my constituency and a good man. Alas, the poor man's Department is treated as the hind tit of the Department of Agriculture and Food. He is a Minister for Food without one pound, shilling or penny to spend on food production or the food industry. His department are not getting fair play in the Department of Agriculture and Food. We have the finest climate in the world for vegetable and horticultural production, yet we are importing millions of pounds worth of vegetables. I am amazed when I hear about the drive that is to be made to expand our horticultural and food processing industry. We all know the drives that have been made. The co-operative in Skibbereen closed its doors a decade ago and has not been reopened, all because the powers that were at the time did not see fit to step in and ensure that that worthwhile factory would be kept going.
It is five years. What were you doing for the five years?
If we are serious about tackling the problem let the Minister for Finance and the Taoiseach give some money to Deputy Joe Walsh's Department to get him off the ground. Do not have him on the poverty line. His hands are tied. He is muzzled completely and nothing can be done to improve the horticultural industry with that spirit and initiative from the Department of Agriculture and Food.
We are told there will be a major drive to improve the export of agricultural products to other countries within the EC. It is well known that one cannot buy a bottle of Cork Gin in another European country or a pound of Irish rashers or sausages. Does that amount to progress in the right direction? There is a growing demand for Irish products on the Continent, particularly in Spain, Italy, Greece, the Canary Islands and the tourist resorts that Irish people frequent. We must establish a centre on the Continent from which our products will be distributed throughout Europe. We cannot afford to sit idly by and let the opportunity of exploring those markets pass us by. We have a glorious opportunity to boost our exports of bacon, beef and mutton. I cannot understand why the Department, and the Government, are so naive in regard to the export of those products.
What incentive is there for our farmers to expand? Our young farmers cannot get advice on how to do so. What have Teagasc done for our farmers since they took over from ACOT? We should ask ourselves if ACOT was a good substitute for the county committees of agriculture who provided a tremendous service for our farmers over decades. For 25 years I was a member of a county committee of agriculture and I am aware of the progress that was made under the old system. Such committees nursed the agricultural industry for years. However, some bright chap in the Department of Agriculture thought fit to axe those committees and replace them with ACOT. Seven or eight years later a similar idea was put forward and some bright person suggested that the Minister should axe ACOT, form a new group and call it Teagasc. They are the farmers behind closed doors but they do not give much advice to our young farmers. I invite the Minister for Agriculture and Food, and the Taoiseach, to visit my constituency to judge if that body are giving any advice to our young farmers.
There are many shortfalls in the Government's agricultural policy. Why are off-farm incomes taken into consideration under the cattle headage scheme? Where off-farm income does not exceed the magic figure referred to by the Taoiseach yesterday, £30,000 annually, such farmers should not be excluded from that scheme. The Taoiseach has told us that those with an income of less than £30,000 will not be excluded from the child benefit scheme and the same should apply to the cattle headage scheme. Many small farmers on the western seaboard are forced to take off-farm jobs to augment the meagre income from their holdings. Some are forced to work on the roads or engage in fishing to augment their income and rear their families. The Taoiseach should tell farmers that those whose income does not exceed £30,000 will be entitled to a grant under the cattle headage scheme. Such a move would increase the national herd and improve the lot of many small farmers.
The Deputy has two minutes.
I wonder if the Chair is cutting me short?
I have always been generous to the Deputy.
I should like to ask Government Deputies to tell me about the better way that Fianna Fáil promised Irish people in the last election campaign. During that campaign they displayed an Irish passport on advertising hoardings between Dublin and Cork and Cork and Skibbereen and suggested to the electorate that there was bound to be a better way than a passport from the country. Under Fianna Fáil in 1988, 32,000 people emigrated, the greatest number since the State was founded. What about the codology Fianna Fáil went on with two years ago? The Government have failed miserably to curb emigration. The only solution to emigration is the creation of more jobs and the improving of living standards for our people. We must prepare a long term programme to increase jobs and tap the unlimited markets for our products abroad. I would describe the budget as the birdie song budget, a little bit of this and a little bit of that, ending up with a little bit of nothing.
That represents a big change from what the Deputy said last year.
The budget will go down in history as the birdie song budget. It lacks initiative, development and expansion. Few jobs will be created as a result of its provisions. It is a lack lustre budget.
At the conclusion of his interesting contribution Deputy Sheehan described the budget as a birdie song budget and earlier he said it was a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul but I suggested to him that it was more a question of robbing Peter to pay Peter. Any benefits to taxpayers, arising out of the tinkering with the taxation system, were taken back under the cut in mortgage interest relief and the relief on life assurance premiums. We should also remember that the PRSI ceiling was increased. I am not aware of any sector that will benefit to any extent from the budget. It has been suggested that the average family with two children with an income of £14,000 per annum and subject to the usual outgoings for mortgages and insurance policies did not gain anything under the budget. We have been told that the budget did a lot for the lower paid and other speakers pointed out that a single person, earning £3,000 per annum, or approximately £59 per week, would be better off under the terms of the budget to the extent of £3 per week. Are the Government suggesting that that amounts to looking after the poor and improving their lot? It will be easy for the public to make up their minds on that.
An important point to make about the budget was that the Government have lost an opportunity to introduce changes in view of the consensus that exists here and throughout the country. All are agreed on the action that is required to tackle the problems in the economy, in particular unemployment. We are all aware that unemployment figures are at a horrific level. The Government had an opportunity in the budget to do something fundamental and radical about that problem and the Minister was assured of the support of the parties on this side of the House if he made such a move. It was an opportunity that was lost, unfortunately. A sustained programme for really tackling the fundmental problems in the economy should have been initiated this time round. From that point of view the budget is a severe disappointment.
We were also told that the social welfare recipients had a major improvement conferred on them as a result of the budget proposals. The only good thing in the budget was the optics of it and the way it was presented. The presentation was good. At first sight it appeared that a lot was being done for the taxpayer, for those on lower incomes and for people on social welfare but when one got down to analysing the budget one found that circumstances were not being improved for anyone.
In terms of social welfare, this year we are proposing to spend less in real terms than we spent last year. In 1988 social welfare accounted for £2,644 million or 27.4 per cent of total spending. In this area in 1989 we propose to spend £2,692 million or 27 per cent of total spending. That is a reduction and if we allow for inflation, spending on social welfare will be 1 per cent less in real terms.
In relation to some of the developmental proposals in the budget — I am reluctant to call them developmental because development was almost non existent particularly in the tourism industry — the Government have set very ambitious targets for tourism. They propose to double the number of visitors and revenue and to create 25,000 new jobs in that sector over five years. This is all set out in the Programme for National Recovery. These targets have not been maintained despite claims to the contrary by the Government. The Government claim they met their targets but will not publish the statistics that will enable us to judge accurately whether these targets are being met. The Government's claims are being shot down by the people in the tourist industry. The Irish Tourist Industry Confederation which is the representative body for all our tourist interests have stated that the Government targets for last year cannot be achieved. They know what is happening and that is their assessment at this point. If the Government are to achieve the targets set they have to achieve a 15 per cent growth each year in compound terms. They have had a very good start to their programme in the sense that there was a marvellous kick start given to it by virtue of the fact that the access fares to this country have been so dramatically reduced, particularly the access fares between here and the UK. The point about that is that we must look at that as a once off contribution to the attainment of these targets, because the access fares between Ireland and the UK will not continue to go down. Already there are applications for increases from Aer Lingus and British Airways. Where is the next segment of growth to come from? How will the Government get their 15 per cent this year and the year after in order to attain the targets set? These targets set by the Government are really nothing more than aspirations, no more than a wish list.
The Government have not published a plan that the tourist industry can regard as a plan that will assist in attaining these objectives. This industry is always held up to us as being an industry with major employment potential. If that is the case it behoves the Government to look at it seriously and to do something serious about it. What have they done? In the budget the Minister announced a number of grants for the tourist sector. He announced £100,000 for the restoration of King John's Castle in Limerick. The balance of the £3.6 million required to complete that project will come from national lottery funding and from the European Structural Funds if we get them. The Minister also mentioned that he was giving a grant of £250,000 to enable Bord Fáilte to develop a data base system. I welcome that as it would enable Bord Fáilte to target their marketing properly. The other grant announced was an allocation of £500,000 to the Irish Racing Board to help them with ongoing refurbishment of various race courses. The total Exchequer grants announced in the budget for the tourist industry which is supposed to be one of the major employment industries and the one that the Government are looking to for the most growth amounts in the budget to £850,000. The Minister for Finance said that if he gets £75 million from Europe he will allocate £14.5 million to the tourist industry, but he might not get it. The Minister for Tourism has not outlined how this money will be spent nor has he consulted with the tourist industry or given them a blueprint so that they will know that there will be continuous funding in a planned way over the balance of the programme set out in the Programme for National Recovery.
There were some anti-tourism measures in the budget. They were not described as such but they will definitely have a very adverse effect on the tourist trade. I refer to the increases in excise duties on petrol and drink. We know that we have a very high cost environment here and at the same time we go ahead with these increases. This is contrary to what the Government are trying to achieve in terms of growth in the tourist sector. The petrol increase has wider implications because it affects industry and increases costs to the consumer in a whole range of areas. The Minister confirmed that because of the movement downwards in the price of oil on world markets we had been due for a decrease of 5p per gallon at the pump but that he was now taking away that advantage and was putting a 5p increase on excise on petrol. The cost of petrol here is at a disgracefully high level. It was most unfortunate, not just from the point of view of tourism but from the point of view of every other industry and of consumers, that the price of petrol is now at a level beyond which it should not have gone. We should have got the benefit of the decrease that would have been coming to us as a result of the movement downwards in the world markets.
The high cost of petrol is partly due to the compulsory off-take regime that is operated by the Irish National Petroleum Corporation. There is no justification for that regime continuing in existence. The only way that the performance of the INPC can be measured is by considering if it does a job that reduces the cost of petrol to the consumer. The system whereby all distributors have to compulsorily off take 35 per cent of their requirement from Whitegate at a cost that Whitegate determine and which does not necessarily bear any relation to world market costs cannot be supported any longer.
It was your colleague, Deputy D. O'Malley who planned all that.
The Minister is wrong The INPC were set up initially to operate the Whiddy storage facility.
It was when Deputy D. O'Malley was Minister for Industry and Commerce.
The INPC subsequently acquired an interest in the Whitegate refinery. Whether the INPC should be in the refining business at all is highly questionable because their main function was to ensure supply. There was no necessity for them to become involved in refining. The fact that they did become involved in refining has definitely resulted in petrol costs being much higher here. If one looks over the last five-year period one will see that that can be proven in that the spot market prices, on average, have been 15 per cent cheaper than the price the Whitegate refinery charge the Irish consumer for petrol delivered here. That is a disgrace. I am a member of The Oireachtas Joint Committee on Commercial State-sponsored Bodies. On many occasions the committee have required that company to come before them to justify their existence, to tell them what they did and spell out to them why it is they should continue to be in the refinery business. They have refused on spurious grounds. They say they are tied up legally. In any event they have never answered satisfactorily the allegations I have made. Undoubtedly the INPC are increasing the cost of petrol to the Irish consumer.
This budget constituted a lost opportunity. Had the Government had the courage to radically tackle the major problems obtaining, particularly in the area of taxation reform, they would have had the support of this House. Taxation reform is essential if we are to make any real inroads into the huge unemployment levels obtaining.
Deputy Jacob has a valuable contribution which I should like to allow him to make by sharing my time with him.
Could we have the agreement of the House to the Minister's proposal?
It means that I would have 20 minutes and Deputy Jacob ten minutes.
Then, with the agreement of the House, I shall indicate to the Minister at 4.50 p.m. that he give way to Deputy Jacob.
Last year saw a continuation of improvement in economic performance. Both output and exports continued to grow, inflation rates remain historically low and the substantial reduction achieved in interest rates has been maintained. The level of annual borrowing has been substantially reduced and the national debt is close to stabilisation. This in turn has reinforced the mood of economic recovery that is reflected in output and investment trends and is again visiable in many areas of our economy and generally in people's attitudes. Hope has now replaced despair and we are better prepared for the challenges ahead.
These challenges remain formidable: the adaptation of our industrial and commercial strategies to our strengths, the creation of employment opportunities for our growing labour force and continuous preparation for and response to the opportunities and challenges that are arising with the approach of 1992. However these all continue to indicate to us the necessity to continue the policies we have been adopting over the past two years. It is imperative that we continue our efforts to reduce the national debt to more manageable proportions. There can be no turning back from this task. All of us have learned a hard lesson from the experiences of the last two decades. We must never again allow short-term issues or pressures to deflect the State from pursuing the proper long-term goals and policies or objectives.
There has also been positive advancement and development in marine matters during the past year. That work will be continued during the remainder of 1989. Bord Iascaigh Mhara have completed and published a report on the development strategy for the seafish industry and have launched an ambitious programme for the full realisation of the industry's potential. We are intensifying our campaign to improve the image and status of Irish fish and fishery products, both nationally and internationally. The Government have recognised the importance and potential of this industry and have provided an additional £1.7 million to BIM in 1989.
The aquaculture industry was targeted for investment because of its potential to create jobs and wealth, particularly in areas which are lacking in other resources. We have been able, through our promotional agency, to prime the industry which has now developed a momentum of its own. During 1989 I intend to sustain if not accelerate the growth this sector is now achieving.
The Government remain committed to the development of inland fisheries despite the destructive campaign of some angling groups and individuals over the last year. We are pressing ahead with the preparation of a new development programme.
The Government policy for the development of the harbour infrastructure of five major fishery harbour centres, supplemented by a number of strategically located secondary harbours, has been enhanced by the works carried out last year and those planned for 1989. Major works were carried out in 1988 in Greencastle, Killybegs and a number of other small harbours and landing places. The 1989 allocation of approximately £3 million will provide for major development works at Greencastle, Rossaveal, Dingle, Killybegs and a number of other locations.
Government policy in relation to commercial harbours is that we have an infrastructure of effective, cost-efficient harbours located at strategic points in the country to ensure that our exports and our essential imports can be handled in a manner which meets the need of economic sectors. As part of this policy I hope to initiate a review of the legislative code within which commercial harbours operate. Some of my ideas are evident from the Shannon Estuary Development Corporation Bill which I introduced last year and which I hope to be in place in 1989.
The final step in bringing the Ringaskiddy freeport into being was taken with my appointment of a manager supported by an advisory committee to run the freeport. An order defining the land area had been made by me in June 1988. I am confident that the new arrangements will generate new economic activity in the area.
Marine safety has been a priority of my Department since its establishment. The programme of improved communications has been implemented and will be substantially completed during 1989. I have also placed increased emphasis on ferry safety and supervision.
Work has commenced within my Department on identifying potential marine related leisure projects, facilities and activities which can be targeted for development and promotion. Every effort will be made to facilitate and accelerate maritime and aquatic sports and activities.
The Attorney General's Office is currently finalising the draft of legislation for the setting up and operation of the Marine Research Institute.
Bord Iascaigh Mhara have now completed and published a development strategy for the seafish industry. We aim by 1991 to virtually double fish production; to more than double exports; and create 4,400 new full and part time jobs. It is the Government's intention that the plan will revitalise all sections involved in fishing and, above all, instil a new confidence and competitiveness into the industry.
The fish processing industry is a vital element in any strategy for the fish sector. Supplies have been a major constraint to the development of the sector. It is intended to pursue every possibility — quota fish, non-quota fish, fishing in third country waters, imports and aquaculture to maximise the supplies to the country's fish processing industry. Marketing, processing and related product quality issues feature prominently in the plan. It is apparent that, with increased landings and expansion in fish farming, it will be imperative that we adopt a much more co-ordinated and dynamic approach in the market place.
Finally, the Department of the Marine have recently finalised arrangements designed to put the national ice supply network on a more rigorous and commercial footing. I am satisfied that as a result of these arrangements, the availability of ice nationally to fishermen, so vital in ensuring a quality product, will be significantly enhanced during 1989.
In the EC context, the Common Fisheries Policy continues to be the frame-work within which we continue to operate. Obviously the most important aspects of the Common Fisheries Policy are the quota allocations made available to the Irish fishing fleet. While the mackerel quota obtained for 1989 last December in Brussels was lower than in 1988 because of conservation requirements, other increases, especially in herring, provide for continued expansion and development in the industry.
I should like to place on record the regular and constructive liaison between my Department's officials and the various branches of the fishing industry. Again I pay tribute to the responsible and positive attitudes adopted by the industry over the last year towards the management and conservation of these valuable stocks. This will be essential in the future if we are to keep the maximum benefit from that resource.
Regarding structural and research projects, I will continue to press for maximum uptake of EC funds. These financial contributions will help the industry meet the challenges facing it in the future.
I am pleased to say that the problems experienced in recent years arising from the activities of so-called "flag of convenience" vessels should ease during the coming year. An amendment to the control regulation adopted by Fisheries Ministers at their Council meeting in October last now comes into operation. New controls are now being imposed on such vessels, which will greatly assist us in managing our quotas more effectively and generally protecting stocks which again is essential if we are to fully develop the industry.
I would like now to discuss briefly progress in the development of aquaculture in the State. I have advised the House already on a number of occasions about the potential of this industry to create jobs and wealth, especially in areas which are often lacking in other resources. The aquaculture industry has come under a more critical eye over the last year or so with more concern being expressed about its potential environmental impact. I want to take the opportunity to affirm my confidence in the aquaculture industry. That confidence is based on the fundamental fact that it is an industry which is uniquely suited to this country because it is based on one of our natural resources, clean water. We have the capacity to produce the goods, the markets are there, linkages are being made with the rest of the economy in that feed-stuffs and cages for the salmon industry are now manufactured in Ireland, while the processing sector for aquaculture products is set to grow and to become more sophisticated, in tune with market demand.
Our salmon farming industry, for example, was worth over £25 million to the economy in 1988 in primary output alone, with approximately 1,300 full and part-time jobs available.
In addition, we are working closely with the two State agencies who promote aquaculture directly — BIM and Údarás na Gaeltachta — and the European Commission to see that the State and EC support which is available for aquaculture development is used to best effect.
I want to return briefly to environmental concern. One of the positive features which assists us in marketing our aquaculture produce is the perception abroad of our environment, especially in Donegal, the west and the south-west, where most of the output is farmed. We have an aquaculture industry because we have clean water and we will continue to have an aquaculture industry only if we maintain the standards. As Minister for the Marine, I accept my responsibilities towards the environment, and my Department will work with the industry and all relevant agencies to ensure that aquaculture is developed in a way which is consistent with maintaining water quality. There is no other way.
Inland fisheries is widely acknowledged as one of our finest natural resources. This Government are committed to developing the resource with a view to creating additional employment.
The fisheries boards at my behest have been involved during recent months, in consultation with angling interests, in preparing programmes for inclusion in the development plan for EC structural funding.
I must emphasise however that progress can only be made through co-operation and that obstructive or destructive action will be harmful for all of us.
The Government's commitment to the development of inland fisheries continues. To achieve the desired results however all interested parties must be prepared to make a meaningful and constructive contribution towards the financing and management of the fisheries structure and particularly in identifying, preparing and implementing planned improvement programmes. I want to re-iterate that the contributions which anglers will make to the over-all finances of inland fisheries will go directly into that fisheries development. Returns will match investment. Any shortfall in investment will mean shortcomings in our development programme and lack of development in fisheries.
The development philosophy for fishery harbours is the concentration of resources in five major fishery harbour centres — Castletownbere, Dunmore East, Howth, Killybegs and Rossaveal. These in turn are supported by a network of strategically sited secondary harbours. This centralised approach enables proper provision to be made for landings, handling, storage, processing and distribution. It also permits the provision of facilities for the maintenance and upkeep of the fleet and for a whole range of ancillary services. The Government have allocated approximately £3 million for this work in 1989.
The bulk of this amount is proposed to be spent on four major works at Dingle, Greencastle, Killybegs and Rossaveal with the remainder being spent on a number of lesser harbours where for many years they have been awaiting developments. We should be able to undertake some work on those this year.
The importance of the commercial harbours to the economy is high-lighted by the level of total trade-in volume terms, 80.0 per cent, and value terms, 65.0 per cent handled by seaports in 1987. In 1987 these ports handled over £12,000 million of Ireland's total external trade of £19,000 million and almost £7,000 million of our total export trade of £10,439 million. This makes it imperative that our harbours take all proper measures to ensure the safe, efficient, cost effective movement of traffic and cargoes through their system for the overall benefit of the Irish community in a manner responsive to customer requirements.
The established Irish ports policy is that each port should, in principle, be operated as a commercial undertaking and be financially self-supporting with State grants intended to be made and requests for EC fund assistance supported only where improvements are essential to meet well defined commercial needs.
Because of the financial constraints under which we operate at present Exchequer assistance for commercial harbour projects has had to be reduced and the 1989 Public Capital Programme contains provision for the payment of State grants totalling £429,000. The majority of this money is earmarked for Drogheda harbour where major quay reconstruction works are about to commence.
However, the Government decision of July 1987 that European Regional Development Fund assistance may now be sought for public sector entities other than the Exchequer is already proving of major benefit to future necessary harbour development. The Commission of the European Communities has recently approved commitments in regional aid totalling £3.5 million for two projects in Cork and Dublin harbours. With the coming into operation in 1989 of the EC's Regional Structural Funds system harbour authorities were requested to submit their harbour development plans for the next five years. These plans, indicating the minimum requirements over the five year period, have been forwarded to the Department of Finance with a view to having them included in the national development plan which Ireland is required to submit to the European Commission in order to qualify for assistance from reformed and enlarged Structural Funds.
The Government are anxious to see the development of marine leisure facilities and are therefore pursuing a policy of encouraging the development of marinas so that they can contribute fully to the tourism and leisure facilities in Ireland. The Department of the Marine in co-operation with the Department of Tourism and Transport and Bord Fáilte will facilitate private investment in marinas and will encourage suitable development plans.
Ireland is vulnerable to marine pollution in the form of distressed ships and their cargoes, including oil. This is due to our geographic location near busy shipping routes and the stormy climate of the North Atlantic.
Our experience in recent years has made us aware of the cost of pollution to the environment and the economy, through damage to fishing, aquaculture, tourism and clean-up costs. These experiences have made this Government determined to remove the threat of pollution by enforcing the wide range of national legislation and international agreements, by legal actions if necessary.
All stages of the Oil Pollution of the Sea (Civil Liability and Compensation) Act were passed last year. The introduction of the Local Government (Water Pollution) (Amendment) Bill 1989 is a major breakthrough in the fight to protect Ireland's aquatic environment and especially its valuable inland fisheries resources. The Bill considerably strengthens powers of fisheries boards and the levels of penalties are substantially increased.
My Department are at an advanced stage in preparing legislation to deal with the problem of disposal by ships of garbage, sewage and other pollutants, and we shall continue to take whatever action is necessary for the protection of the community and the environment, through legislation and enforcement.
Safety of life is a major preoccupation of my Department. One of the most cost effective means of reducing the risk of loss of life at sea is the provision of a chain of remote controlled VHF radio stations around the entire coast. VHF transmitters are relatively inexpensive and do not require specialist knowledge to operate. They are already carried on almost all fishing vessels and many larger yachts. A 24-hour listening watch for emergency calls is provided by VHF radio stations.
A major expansion of VHF emergency communications is being carried out. In continuing this development a station at Mine Head, County Waterford will be completed shortly. An additional station around the Galway-Mayo area is also planned for the first half of 1989. These developments will complete the marine VHF network.
To meet our international commitment to safety of life at sea, the up-dating and replacing of medium frequency radio telephony equipment at the two coast radio stations, Valentia and Malin Head, will continue during 1989.
Telecom Éireann have been requested to install, as a matter of urgency, a leased line linking the Marine Search and Rescue Co-ordination Centre at Shannon with Valentia Coast Radio Station.
Computerisation of the two Coast Radio Stations — Valentia and Malin Head — should be completed by the end of the year.
I have given a detailed list of the initiatives we are at present involved in and the action we propose to take during the present year to press ahead with the over-all development of our marine resources. It has been said in the course of this debate over the past few days that there was lack of co-operation on the part of Fianna Fáil when in Opposition, with the then Government. During the course of most of my speech this afternoon there was no one on the Opposition benches. I totally reject the complaints about lack of co-operation from Fianna Fáil when we were in Opposition. I would remind Deputies who made this complaints of the kind of co-operation that I have received on these benches in regard to legislation which they supported when it was going through the House before Christmas. Parties supported legislation in the House and then, because there was a particular grievance from one section of the community, they were prepared to give in to all kinds of pressures and make so many U-turns that they do not know where they stand. I would remind those Deputies who criticised Fianna Fáil's position in Opposition that we never left the House empty during our period on the Opposition benches.
I appreciate very much my senior collegaue, the Minister, Deputy Daly, being so generous as to give me some of his time. As my time is severely limited I will just refer to a couple of points. Everything that this Government have done in the past few years in the economic sphere has been geared to ensuring that the correct climate should exist for the creation of solid sustainable jobs and thereby reducing dramatically the huge unemployment figure. The unemployment problem together with its twin malaise of emigration is and has been a blight on our land. It is therefore more than gratifying that in the past year 20,000 new jobs have been created. The Government have committed themselves, as their main objective for 1989, to continue to ensure this further and ongoing job creation policy.
In this context I would mention my own constituency and county of Wicklow. The ESRI in their report have identified Wicklow as a county in need of special attention in the context of job creation. Consequent to this the Minister for Industry and Commerce — I sincerely thank him for it — deemed Wicklow to be a designated area, thereby ensuring its attraction to industrialists. We in Wicklow have been expecting great things by way of industry and jobs coming to our county. However, to date this has not materialised and I am getting progressively more irate on that account.
The town of Wicklow, particularly in the aftermath of the closure of the Veha factory, has serious economic and unemployment problems. With the run-down of the pottery and fertiliser industries, Arklow has lost over 2,000 manufacturing jobs in recent years and the rural south and western areas of the county have been also badly affected. I compliment the Government for identifying County Wicklow as an area requiring special attention and I thank them for providing us with the designation instrument and indeed for providing the appropriate economic climate on a national basis. However, my anger and bitter disappointment are directed towards the State development agencies, particularly the IDA. Their gross inaction and apparent ineffectiveness in addressing this problem in Wicklow are to be highlighted and condemned.
The economic climate is there; the designation instrument is there; the infrastructure is there; the co-operation and support of the local authorities and particularly of the county manager in Wicklow and the county development team is there and, God knows, the work-force is there. I make this strong appeal to the Minister for Industry and Commerce that he instruct these State agencies to avail of what he and the Government have laid at their disposal and to take positive and speedy action to tackle the unemployment and emigration problems in County Wicklow.
The construction industry is going through a difficult period — indeed, this has been the case for years. While an improvement in this industry will inevitably follow the uplift in the economy generally, it is important that all efforts be made to expedite this. The construction industry is so important in the context of providing jobs, both directly and as a spin-off, that this cannot be over-stressed. However, the signs are now good for the industry in that the forthcoming additional EC Structural Funds will certainly be instrumental in providing a substantial number of jobs in the industry.
In the area of agriculture I must mention the Government's positive action during the year in extending the terms of the western package to all areas of the country which are deemed to be disadvantaged. This had the effect of enabling two-thirds of the country to qualify for the benefits contained in that western package. Consequently, many grants to which people were heretofore not entitled are now accessible to those in the disadvantaged areas of Ireland. Grants of 45 per cent for animal housing and 55 per cent for anti-pollution measures have been available to farmers, and I understand that similar funding in areas such as agri-tourism is in the offing. This level of funding emphasises the importance of the disadvantaged areas structure both to the farmers concerned and to the economy of the country in general. It is important therefore that the exercise of extending the areas deemed to be disadvantaged be proceeded with expeditiously with a view to every possible acre being included in the interests of our farming community and the country's economy generally. I know this is the intention of the Minister for Agriculture and Food.
The excellent news that particular attention is to be given to the roads of Ireland, both county and regional, is more than welcome. For years the county roads in particular have been allowed to deteriorate. Negligible funding was allocated for the purpose of maintaining these roads. I have always felt that even in the context of the nation's severe financial difficulties, this neglect was false economy. To allow a project, into which many millions of pounds of taxpayers' money had been poured, to crumble and deteriorate would have to be viewed in the category of a national scandal. It is gratifying to see that the Fianna Fáil Government are now tackling this problem in a major way as evidenced by the announcement that £150 million will be spent in the next three years. This will be greatly welcomed by the public generally and by industry in particular. The proposed expenditure makes good, sound economic sense.
Forestry is another area in which the Government can be seen to be making significant progress. In 1987 the level of State plantings was the highest in history at 11,000 hectares. This was further surpassed in 1988 with 15,000 hectares being planted, 5,000 hectares of which were planted by the private sector. The Government's action in setting up a new State company to manage and develop our publicly-owned forests is a welcome and innovative measure.
This new company, Coillte Teoranta, will have as their objective the achievement of profit for the nation from a national resource that has been reglected and under-managed in the past. That is not intended in any way to downgrade or diminish the excellent work carried out by the foresters and forestry workers in the past several decades. We have the cream of talent and expertise in this area in the persons of our qualified foresters who have been regularly turned out year after year from our forestry colleges. These people are directly responsible for the wealth that has been planted in the lands and hills of Ireland.
It is my sincere hope that, whatever we will see unfold in the plans of Coillte Teoranta in the coming months and years, there will continue to be a role for these highly capable and qualified people who have served Irish forestry and the people of Ireland for so long and whose labours and achievements have been perhaps under-appreciated. It is extremely lamentable that our Irish foresters, despite their studying, their schooling and their vast experience in their profession, are left at the end of the day without any degree or other certification of their expertise and qualifications. Perhaps even at this late stage this extraordinary oversight could be addressed and rectified.
With the changes currently taking place in the area of agriculture it is necessary that farmers look to new methods and new alternatives. In this context forestry is an obvious and realistic choice. The Government are taking positive action to promote and encourage private tree planting with the increased domestic grants for broadleaf and coniferous trees which were introduced last year. This measure will be complemented by the extraction from the EC of greater financial incentives for the promotion and encouragement of private planting. This increased funding will no doubt continue to be forthcoming as the Europeans are only too aware of their own disadvantages and limitations in the growing of trees as compared to the wonderful, God-given, agronomic climatic and environmental advantages that Ireland enjoys.
This particular measure has great significance for my own county of Wicklow which percentage-wise has more of its area planted than any other area in Ireland. Forestry and the timber business in general plays a huge role in the county's economy. The industry in providing more than 1,000 jobs is, in fact, the county's largest employer. It is gratifying to note that Irish timber has now a new level of acceptance and currently accounts for a 60 per cent share of the domestic market. The top sawmills are now doing extremely well and are achieving record throughputs. However, while this latter situation is ultra welcome, it is of vital importance that the small operator in the timber business be assisted and facilitated in every way.
In Wicklow there are many small operators, mostly family concerns, who have been involved in the timber business for generations. The livelihood of these traditional operators is of paramount importance. They must not be neglected or maltreated in the progress towards improvement for the larger operators. In this context the regular availability of timber of the type necessary for their particular operation must continue to be guaranteed to the small family-type concern.
Debate adjourned.