Desmond J. O'Malley
Question:9 Mr. O'Malley asked the Minister for Tourism and Trade the steps, if any, being taken to improve the seasonality of Irish tourism. [2939/95]
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Off-Peak Tourism.
Eric J. Byrne
Question:27 Mr. E. Byrne asked the Minister for Tourism and Trade the funding, if any, that is being allocated in 1995 towards special seasonality marketing initiatives to promote off-peak tourism; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2911/95]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 9 and 27 together.
Seasonality is a problem not only for the Irish tourist industry but the whole European tourism industry. Nonetheless, efforts are being made to overcome the problem. Under the terms of the Operational Programme for Tourism 1994-99 expanding the season or improving seasonality is one of the prominent priorities.
Specific targets have been set in the operational programme for improving the performance of the off-peak season, and moneys are available to promoters with good ideas to expand the season. The rate of support for marketing proposals is weighed towards the off-season — 50 per cent support — with 30 per cent support for the shoulder season and 20 per cent for the peak.
Last year, £1.3 million in Exchequer moneys was approved by my Department to promote off-season business. These funds were largely matched by the industry, for marketing in the United Kingdom and Europe. Examples of the sort of programmes aimed at getting tourists here in the off-season were week-end/short breaks, shopping tours, direct marketing of Irish festivals, incentive travel and corporate meetings.
Although it is too early to give final figures on the number of additional visitors as a result of these efforts, initial pointers are encouraging. The total number of tourists was up from 3.3 million in 1993 to 3.6 million in 1994. In addition, a number of sectors within the tourism industry, like hotel groups and ferries, have reported bumper results in 1994.
Finally, there is the ongoing commitment to construct a national conference centre to cater for up to 2,000 delegates. This would clearly have a major impact on developing an all-year-round tourism product. I intend to advance this project significantly by the end of this year, in keeping with my general intention to keep seasonality high on my agenda for future decisive action.
Would the Minister agree that it constitutes an extravagant waste of valuable resources invested in providing modern tourist products to have them lie idle for a substantial part of the year? Furthermore, would he agree that part of our difficulty here is tourists experiencing problems gaining access to the Irish market, particularly the high air fares which are a major obstacle to travellers from the Continent, as is the case with people from certain provincial cities in England? They have to pay very high air fares also as do visitors from North America. Would he agree that it is crucial to make the maximum use of the new facilities installed at very substantial cost to the investor/entrepreneur, the State, and European Union Structural Funds? Does he agree that gross under-utilisation of the tourist product constitutes a waste of that investment? Furthermore, does he agree that strenuous efforts must be made to stretch the tourist season, at its shoulders, particularly in the off-peak period, since there are now marvellous facilities nationwide.
I agree absolutely. Many organisations and promoters work very hard to achieve success in installing a facility whereas marketing has not followed through in terms of its usage; therefore, many facilities can run down and become obsolete. It is precisely within that context that we are giving seasonality priority within my Department. The matter of access to this country is another problem which has been clearly identified and on which I am in consultation with my colleague, the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications, in order to ascertain whether we can improve it. These are two matters of priority specifically identified by me within the Department and I can assure Deputy Molloy that we are working very actively on them.
The Minister will have our full support in his endeavours.
In replying the Minister mentioned the commitment to construct a national conference centre to cater for up to 2,000 people. Can he indicate where that conference centre might be located? For example, would it be located in the Phoenix Park, or does he have a view on the proposals for such a conference centre, including a casino, to be constructed in the Phoenix Park?
He is going to construct it in Salthill.
Can the Minister give the House the benefit of his views on the recent public statements he made on the possibility of providing conference and casino facilities and where he would envisage their location?
I can inform Deputy Andrews that the Operational Programme for Tourism 1994-99 contains a sum of £23 million for the provision of a national conference centre. When this proposal was examined, as a stand-alone conference centre, its analysis showed that it would not be feasible or viable as a stand-alone unit. It was in that context that the issue of including a casino came into the picture. No decision has been taken, either in regard to a location for either the proposed national conference centre, alone, or with any other facilities. Indeed, no decision has been taken in regard to effecting an amendment to the Gaming and Lotteries Act in respect of casinos. A number of proposals have been received in my Department. A committee operating under the secretary to the Department of the Taoiseach and my Department is dealing with this. In due course we will draw the proposals together to decide on the best option. No decision has been taken either in respect of a location or the development of a conference centre as a stand alone unit with or without other facilities.
If I correctly understood the Minister I am absolutely amazed that he is considering the establishment of a casino here.
I did not say that.
He said it was being considered by the secretary of his Department.
The Deputy did not hear me correctly. I did not say I am considering the establishment of a casino. I said that a sum of £23 million has been included in the operational programme to build a conference centre. When this question was mooted various proposals were put forward in respect of building a conference centre with or without a casino. Obviously one is duty bound to receive proposals but they have not been drawn together for consideration and a final decision has not been made in respect of either proposal.
I did not say a decision had been made, I said I was astounded to hear that a proposal to establish a casino is under consideration. The Minister stood up to deny that but he confirmed it.
The provision of a casino will depend on a Government decision to amend the Gaming and Lotteries Act or introduce new legislation. That is a matter for Government but it is not been considered by it.
That is why I am astonished. We are operating under a gaming Act introduced in 1956, which successive Governments——
The Deputy is making a speech now, this is Question Time.
——and parties in this House have not had the courage to amend and update. All the seaside resorts including the small traditional seaside resorts referred to earlier and in the budget speech yesterday——
Does the Deputy have a question?
Yes. Seaside resorts and tourist operations are expected to operate under the 1956 Act but because we are now considering the establishment of a casino we are prepared to amend that Act to facilitate its establishment. Successive Governments since 1956 have not had the courage to update the gaming laws and decide whether we are to ban or allow gaming.
That should be adequate Deputy.
If we are to allow gaming surely it should operate under modern legislation rather than under the 1956 Act. At the moment illegal gaming is being taxed to the hilt.
The Deputy has made his point. This is Question Time.
The establishment of a casino cannot be considered while established derelict enterprises are ignored.
Let us hear the Minister.
The record will show that I said that if a decision is taken to provide a casino, the Act would have to be amended.
It will not be amended otherwise?
I am not saying that, Deputy Molloy. That is a matter for the Minister responsible.
It is a disgrace.
Let us hear the Minister.
All new legislation is a matter for the Government and a decision has not been taken in that regard yet. If a casino is to be provided the existing legislation would have to be amended or new legislation introduced. It is not for me to say that if such an Act were amended all its precedents would be codified and updated.
I accept that.
Regarding the committee the Minister has set up to examine this problem and consider possible projects, he mentioned a figure of £23 million in the context of the operational programme, EU funding and so on for a stand alone centre. Will he agree that if private enterprises are prepared to put that type of money to provide a conference centre in a complex with additional facilities, it would be more appropriate for them to do so rather than the State as it would result in a saving to the State of £23 million?
It is in that context that some of the proposals have been submitted to my Department and the Department of the Taoiseach and I am considering them from that point of view.
Will the Minister's Department investigate why airline companies double the fares they charge passengers who wish to travel to this country at Easter, St. Patrick's weekend and Christmas? I compliment the Minister on the pilot scheme he announced yesterday. In spite of what Deputy Molloy might think, the seaside town of Westport needs that pilot scheme. Westport needs that lift because in the past it did not benefit from the urban renewal scheme or other schemes.
I am not opposed to Westport. I want a similar provision for Salthill.
The Deputy has been very agitated during the past few days. Westport was very good to the Deputy when he was campaigning for the European elections.
It was indeed. I told the Deputy that yesterday.
I would be delighted if Salthill were considered after Westport.
I appreciate the support of Deputies Ring and Molloy for the scheme.