Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 6 Jun 1946

Vol. 31 No. 23

Tourist Traffic (Amendment) Bill, 1946 (Certified Money Bill)—Committee and Final Stages.

Section 1 agreed to.

SECTION 2.

Question proposed: "That Section 2 stand part of the Bill."

Sir John Keane

In view of the several unsatisfactory features of the Minister's statement, I want to put myself in order in discussing this matter and, therefore, I move that the Seanad recommend the deletion of Section 2 of the Bill. That is, I think, the correct procedure on a Money Bill. This Bill has shown us that the Tourist Board is to be a gigantic real estate speculator. To earn money on its expenditure, it has got to acquire land, because, unless it owns the land which it is going to develop, it cannot take advantage of the improved values resulting from its development. I take it then that it is not an exaggeration of the financial position of the Tourist Board to say that it is a real estate speculator. It has certain compulsory powers and, to that extent, it enjoys an advantage. The Minister passed over very lightly as if it were a matter of secondary importance the establishment by the State of these hotels in connection with this real estate development. The Minister did not answer my question as to whether advice had been taken by the Tourist Board from experienced hotel managers as to the possibility of profit from ventures of this kind. If experienced hotel managers believe that hotels can, under such conditions, be run at a profit, why did not the Tourist Board ask such people to come in, give them financial assistance on a business like basis, and get them to manage such hotels, because obviously they would be far more qualified and experienced in such matters than a board of the kind the Minister mentioned? What single member of the board has any knowledge whatever of the technique or indeed of the social inhibitions and the little subtleties of social snobbery, that surround the development of a hotel clientele?

If the Minister was quite satisfied to accept the certificate of a board with such qualifications that a venture of that kind was likely to be profitable, did he feel any obligation to satisfy himself that there was a likelihood of such a venture being profitable? It is an extraordinary proposition that our money should be handed over to a body of people totally unqualified in hotel management who have never sought the advice of competent hotel managers and who are prepared to certify that a proposition of this kind is likely to be profitable. In the absence of such advice, we can only bring our own experience to bear on the problem. I am very unlike many other people and probably many other people are unlike me but I consider nothing more unpleasant than to go for a holiday to a place which has been developed by promenades and band stands attracting all the crowds associated with amenities of that kind, and be asked to go to a hotel and pay ten guineas a week or more. I do not say there are not people who will not do it but I do say that it is a most speculative enterprise promoted by people with no experience and it is an improper use of public money. In view of the further enlightenment we have heard from the Minister, I am totally opposed to the character of the development he has outlined.

There is one direction in which the State might assist—do not take it that I am totally opposed to any form of State activity, because I am not—and that is on the question of staggered holidays. If school holidays were staggered it would add very much to the economic possibilities of the whole holiday business. The fact that all schools close about the same time and that the whole peak load of holidays occurs at the one time is economically unsound and it is not justified by the weather. It is justified only by practice and tradition and anything the Government could do to arrange that holidays could extend all through June, July, August and September, would be of enormous advantage to the economics of the whole problem. I do not for one moment think that it would make holidays less agreeable. I do hope the Minister will give the matter his serious attention and do what he can through State agencies to secure staggered holidays. He might do something in that way with the schools and with the co-operation of the trade unions endeavour to secure the application of the system to industry. So far as holidays amongst the wage earning class are concerned, they seem to be confined to a very short period in certain industries.

Mr. Hayes

I do not intend to follow the Minister into a high rage about anything raised here yesterday. I realise quite well that the board is getting repayable advances from the Minister and when I said public money was being used, I spoke, perhaps, rather loosely. Technically the Minister is quite right but in fact I did not misrepresent the position and I certainly had no intention of misrepresenting it. The board puts up schemes which, in the judgment of the board, are profit-making schemes. The Minister, quite properly I am sure, with all the sources available to him, examines them. If they should turn out not to be profit-making schemes, the State loses. That is quite clear. In fact, what does happen is that State money is advanced for the purpose of a speculative undertaking. I am not using the word "speculative" in any wrong sense. Therefore I represented the position quite clearly and I could not have misled Senator Summerfield because I spoke after him and not before him. My capacity is not so extraordinary as that. Neither did I say, Sir, that all the members of the board were elected because they were supporters of Fianna Fáil.

I should like to avail of this occasion to correct one error made, I am sure quite unwittingly, by the Minister in his enthusiasm to vanquish certain political opponents. I advocated on the Committee Stage of the Tourist Development Bill, 1939, that a person with a knowledge of the Irish language and with practical capacity as well—and the combination is rather rare—should be put on the Tourist Board so that it could be sure that when certain of what are sometimes called backward areas were being developed, the question of the Irish language would receive proper consideration. If it is any consolation to the Minister I will say that I think the selection made for that particular kind of post was an admirable one. So much for that.

With regard to Lord Monteagle—I am speaking entirely from memory now—I think it is quite wrong to say that the Monteagles were leaders of Southern Unionism. I have a recollection that long before the Howth gunrunning in 1914 schools were managed in Limerick by the Monteagles—I think the name was Spring-Rice. At that particular period, long ago in the British days, there were men from Ring on the teaching staff and the pupils were taught, to some degree at least, through the medium of Irish. That was done in these far-distant days through the patriotic efforts of the Monteagles. I am speaking entirely from memory again, but I rather think there was a member of that family with Erskine Childers in the boat that brought the guns to Howth in 1914. I may be mistaken.

Senators

You are right.

Mr. Hayes

If I am right in that, I think I am also right in saying that the Minister was quite wrong when he was in this berserk rage. Because I was telling the truth he was very vexed with me. Sometimes when you are right you vex everybody in the House.

Mr. Baxter

Not everybody.

Mr. Hayes

Well, particular types of people. The Minister, in applying these epithets to me, was covering up his own bad case. He said that we should be as accurate as he was, but he was merely plastering Southern Unionism on these benches. He was wrong. In this particular instance he was extravagantly wrong. I just want to say that that is an example of the unscrupulous type of debate to which we are accustomed from the Minister. I said before that I have a great admiration for the Minister in many ways, but there is nothing he would not say.

Mr. Duffy

I would like to say a word on this section. I do not propose now to refer to the question of staff. I have some documents to read but I would prefer to deal with them on the Fifth Stage.

There are a couple of points which I would like to mention at this stage. One point is that I have discovered in three or four cases hotel services have deteriorated very materially in the last two or three years. There is one hotel not 20 miles from Dublin which in my opinion was a first-class hotel 15 years ago but I found it only fifth class a year ago. I had another experience of hotels in a midland town recently. I arrived on a Saturday afternoon in an important midland town and I put up at the hotel where I had been calling for at least 20 years. I was getting off a bus at eight o'clock to speak at a meeting which was timed to start at eight, and all I could do was to hand my bag to the porter and say that I would be in later.

I got to the hotel at about ten o'clock, and bear in mind the fact that I had no meal from about 9.30 that morning, but at ten o'clock on that Saturday night I could not get any meal in the hotel. I was told there was no room in the hotel either and I asked a couple of friends to get a room for me somewhere. When I came back later to the hotel where I had booked and where at ten o'clock I was told there was no accommodation, I discovered there were at least three vacant rooms there. I was disappointed and I intended to mention the matter to some member of the Tourist Board. It seems to me that the whole work of the Tourist Board is being destroyed if an impression like that is created on visitors who do not happen to come here from America, Canada or England. Surely it is very unsatisfactory that where somebody, like myself in that case, goes into a town that he cannot get a meal at ten o'clock at night in view of the fact that nowadays you cannot get a meal when travelling. That is going to have a very bad impression on people, especially if you tell them there is no accommodation when there is plenty.

Another matter which came to my notice recently is the extraordinary absence of cohesion between concerns which are more or less operated by the State. If they had been hostile organisations, one could understand it. In a case to which I will refer we have the Tourist Board on one side exercising certain control over hotels, and on the other side we have Córas Iompair Éireann making arrangements for their buses to call at hotels. On Saturday last I discovered that Hayes's Hotel in Thurles has terminated a contract with Córas Iompair Éireann because of the thoughtless manner in which the transport company was handling traffic calling at Hayes's hotel.

I made inquiries because it seemed to me that there was a great deterioration when the bus stop was transferred across the street. I am not reflecting on the hotel where the bus was to stop as a result of this change but it bears no comparison in appearance or reputation with Hayes's hotel in Tipperary. I asked the people in Hayes's hotel why this happened and they said they had a contract with Córas Iompair Éireann that four buses would call there each day. They found in fact that six, seven and sometimes eight buses called in the day without any intimation having been given them that additional passengers were coming. They knew nothing about the additional buses but were expected to have a hot lunch ready whenever the buses arrived. On top of that, the Department of Supplies refused to give them additional tea or sugar to deal with the extra traffic. I hope the Minister will not reply by saying that I have gone off the rails to attack the Government in this matter. I am merely drawing the Minister's attention in what I hope is a reasonably restrained manner to what I consider a serious blemish on our method of handling this traffic which we might call native tourism. I do not know how the foreigners will fare but I have endeavoured to convey to the House how the natives are faring. I think this lack of cohesion is a serious matter. So far as Hayes's hotel is concerned there was a lack of cohesion between concerns that might be expected to work in unison in promoting the interests of travellers and guests in hotels.

In the other cases, I do not want to mention names but I can give the Minister the names of three hotels in which in my opinion services have deteriorated.

Mr. McGee

I must ask the indulgence of the House because due to an accident I was not able to speak on the Second Reading but I trust my remarks will be in order on the section to which Senator Sir John Keane referred. I noticed in the general debate we had yesterday that we were all apologies and all sympathy for a certain Minister who is dealing with acts of the past, acts for which I have absolutely no sympathy or consideration. I was silent because I was all sympathy for the Minister who was looking to the future and that is the present Minister. Somebody said that he might be deemed to be stepping off the rails in attacking the Government. I have a close experience of the Tourist Board and I would almost step off the rails on my side of the House to approve of a great deal that the Tourist Board have done. I do not see how we are to develop our remote coastal areas without the Tourist Board.

I think it was some Englishman who said in the last Great War, "We have made mistakes, we will make mistakes but we will root through successfully in the end." I hope that the Tourist Board will root through successfully in the end and with the help of well-meaning citizens that can be done. Within the last year I was responsible for auctioning a certain property. I was told to get all I could and I valued the property. Some people valued it at £14,000, others at £16,000 and one went as high as £20,000. When one gentleman came and offered £16,000 the lady concerned would not sell but eventually the Tourist Board offered £12,000, and she took it. I venture to think that in a couple of years' time they will have a first-class hotel there, whether they dispose of the property or not. They really have a gift in that property because it would cost them nothing. So enthusiastic are the local people for the success of this scheme that we have adopted a plan to provide water and sewerage facilities for the villages surrounding the property at a cost of £25,000. That £25,000 scheme has gone to another Department of State, and I am sorry that when they were blowing up the Custom House they did not succeed in abolishing the Local Government Department, for that scheme is with them for a year and it is in their pigeon-holes still. That is evidence of goodwill on the part of the people I represent. In developing these coastal areas, unless we have some board with authority and with money to act, the remote areas will be by-passed. That is a very big question. Last night I heard two Senators speaking here, two colleagues, one praying that we would not have another Blackpool in this country, and when he left the House, his colleague stated that our people could not get a decent holiday since the Isle of Man boats ceased to sail. That shows the difficulties the Tourist Board are up against. They cannot bring a Blackpool to Ireland and cannot get people away to the Isle of Man. I do not know which is the faster place, but when I was a young fellow they used to tell me I would have a far better time in the Isle of Man than even in Blackpool.

Regarding the development of our remote areas, my county has a population of 60,000 and we are a growing population still. We have had no new hotel development in the last 30 years that I know of, except the present development undertaken by the Tourist Board. My colleague, Senator Sir John Keane, said there was not a man with hotel experience on the board. To my certain knowledge, doing business with them, they have selected a gentleman, one of whose ancestors was a most distinguished representative, anti-Fianna Fáil, in this House, and, so far as I know, they are pursuing their job reasonably well and I would rather not hear of their competition in other areas when you have an undeveloped area such as Louth, with only two hotels along the coast, the Greenore Hotel and this one.

I am not satisfied that the Minister has asked for sufficient authority or sufficient money for the development of coastal areas. Accordingly, I would like to stress the development of remote coastal areas. With regard to transport, even yet the Department of Supplies is a bit too small-minded. We ask for a bus to take the members of the county council round the district.

Mr. Sweetman

There is no Department of Supplies now.

Mr. McGee

No one interrupted Senator Duffy or Senator Sweetman and they are both on their feet much more often than I am, so I do not think it would be too much for them to extend indulgence to me for about five minutes more. These remote coastal areas will not be developed by individuals. They have failed in the past. For example, in the case of fishing villages like Clogher Head and Annagasson, the men have probably gone to England for the war and it will take something brave and courageous to re-establish the big fishing industry where it ought to be. That can only be done if a board like this is generous in those areas. They will contribute their moieties in rates and expenses. The groundwork and foundation are there. Beside these very buildings they purchased from Lady Montaigne, there is the hill of Clogher Head, which is the only height along the coast from Newcastle in County Down to Howth—and it is at least as good and attractive as Howth. It has the huge town of Drogheda, with an 18,000 population, beside it.

Sir John Keane

But it has a great unspoiled charm.

Mr. McGee

What is that? The cement factory? No one is a better judge of where its foundation comes from than Senator Sir John Keane.

Sir John Keane

It is about ten miles away.

An Cathaoirleach

The Senator must address the chair.

Mr. McGee

I suppose it is five miles, anyway. I am not such a judge of distance as the Senator is. In regard to the development of the Irish colleges, I remember that 25 years ago the late Eoin MacNeill established one with some success at Omeath, where we have an Irish-speaking area. If I were silent about the beauties of that place, I think I would be misrepresenting my people. Obviously, you people who have every side to turn to for money—right, left, centre—must know that, when the border operates and half our people are cut off tragically at the end of a licensed premises, there is very little money, unless such money as black-marketeering might bring in. Whilst that may be very substantial during the war and whilst the Belfast people may come there to spend their war gains on a Sunday, there is room for any development the board can bring, especially to that peninsula known formerly as Cooley, which had so many trials to endure on account of the black scab.

It is not too much to ask for the generous eye of the Minister. The beauties of Connemara are all very well, but I think it will be found that this place 60 miles from Dublin would afford a great field for development. We have a sufficient number of hotels in it, just as we have everywhere else in Ireland; and some of them, except those that are carefully looked after, are certainly not attractive. Many of us have business in this hotel and go there the night before a fair in winter time, and find the Tourist Board have done nothing. You hear extensive ratepayers and taxpayers complaining of the state of some of them even in County Galway. I am sure that, in time, that will be put right, but I would not like that we should oppose the Tourist Board too violently, because there is so much room and so many opportunities for them to invest money in them in wholly undeveloped places, and some of them within 60 miles of Dublin. There is not much necessity to develop Beauty's Home and the wilds of Connemara. There are other citizens entitled to partake of whatever moneys are being invested in this business.

I can speak only on behalf of the northern end of the eastern coast and on behalf of my county council. Any place the board seeks to develop, be it in the property they are pursuing or be it further north, they will find the local authorities, urban, rural and county, at their disposal in every way. We feel we are a neglected area in this development and, now that the board has started, we think the Minister might be more generous in expending even four gallons of petrol to take the county council members through its district in a bus on the 26th June. That would be evidence of the goodwill to which we are entitled. If there were a little more friendly cohesion between the Departments, when a local authority sends up a scheme and has the sand and has Senator Sir John Keane and his directors ready to sell us the cement, we would be able to erect the waterworks in the vicinity which connects the town that is the basis of the cement factory and the area that the Tourist Board is starting to develop with this hotel in Newtown.

I do not think there is anything else that would come within this section. I do not think I am supposed to deal with the staggering of holidays. I have talked about the Irish language and I have dealt with Senator Foran's objection to Blackpool and Senator Campbell's admiration for the Isle of Man. The Minister said yesterday evening that the help of the local authorities would be needed. We are waiting and praying for some funds to be placed at our disposal for the development of what we believe will be a tourist place worth seeing.

Mr. Crosbie

On this section, I remarked in my speech yesterday that I regarded the sum of £1,250,000 as being an excellent investment of public funds. Despite anything that has been said subsequently on either side of the House, or even by the Minister, in his very vehement summing up, I still maintain that it is a good investment and in some ways I think the amount of money could possibly be greater. My reference to the personnel of the board brought to me, at any rate, an unexpected vehement reply, if not an attack from the Minister. I am personally acquainted with only one member of the board and he is, as far as I know, a gentleman of great competence and wide general experience. I have no wish to cast any aspersions or doubts on the competence or capabilities of those other members of the board with whom I am not acquainted. My criticism of the board, however, would be this, that for a number of years in this country we have had, as the Minister admits, 900 hotels, and he quite rightly points out that we have not got anything like a sufficiency of hotels. Out of those 900 hotels I do not know how many are, shall we say, successful, but I do know that we have a great number of extremely competent and successful and efficient hoteliers, and I do regret that when this board was set up not one of these extremely competent and efficient people who had made such a tremendous success of their trade—one might almost call it a profession because it really amounts to an unofficial profession—was put on this board. That was also the object of the questions I put to the Minister during his statement, and I would like the Minister, when he is replying, to take the opportunity of elaborating his statement to me that when this subsidiary company which is to start these hotels, is floated as a public company to the public, and the shares put on the market, the directors will be chosen by the shareholders.

I would like him to tell the House, if possible, whether the Government will have a nominee on that board, and whether the chairman will be nominated by the Government, or by whom will he be selected, and I would urge on the Minister, when the time comes —he says it will be some time, but apparently it will come—to float this company as a public company, to take the opportunity of making good the omission he committed in the Tourist Board itself and see that there are on that board people who have made a success themselves of the hotel business. That is my greatest criticism of the Tourist Board as it is now constituted. I have no doubt that the members of the board are very competent in their own way, but there is not one member of the board who has earned his living by running a hotel, and I think that is a great pity.

Mr. Sweetman

With some things the Minister said in his reply on the Second Reading, I am in agreement, and it might be better to refer to that at first. The purpose of this section is to enlarge the aggregate amount of the advances to be made by the Department of Finance to the Tourist Board for schemes certified by the board. Therefore, perhaps, technically, this money is not used for publicity but, perhaps, it would be as well to stress what was stated already, that there is no part of this money to be used for publicity, that no publicity abroad is being made at the present time by the Irish Tourist Association, that all the association is doing is to deal with the barest minimum of queries made to it and wherever it is asked by prospective visitors, it stresses in reply that people should not come to this country unless they have made appropriate booking arrangements in advance.

I agree with the Minister that when people come here we should be prepared to receive them, and they should not be encouraged to come until such time as we are ready. I am not clear, however, in respect of the grants that are to be made under this section, and I would like the Minister to explain it a little more, whether it is possible in this respect, or in any other manner, to ensure that some system of aiding tourist resorts by cheap holiday transport fares is possible. Certainly, we hope that so far as the present summer is concerned, the reduction in the tax on petrol will mean also a reduction in bus and train fares. That will assist the holiday season for our own people, but I do not know if there can be any schemes brought in like those in Switzerland and Italy where reductions varying from 20 to 80 per cent. in transport charges were made available for people, not necessarily foreigners, but for their own nationals, travelling together with their families. Some sort of family travel arrangement is very desirable in the interests of holiday makers, and I would stress very strongly that if the Minister cannot bring it in under this section, he would give urgent directions in that regard to the interests concerned.

Business suspended at 6 p.m. and resumed at 7 p.m.

Mr. Sweetman

At the tea adjournment, I had dealt with a couple of points which arose out of the Minister's speech when replying on the Second Reading debate. I want to deal with just a few more points. The Minister was perfectly correct in saying that a great deal of the discussion on the motion for the Second Reading was in relation to the Tourist Board, whether by means of a company or otherwise, operating and carrying on hotels, particularly luxury hotels, and, in addition, being empowered to carry on the variety of businesses that are provided for in the Memorandum of Association. The Minister, with that debating skill to which we are all so accustomed, avoided in regard to the businesses the net point which is a simple and concise one. The powers of the board are specifically set out in Section 16 of the Principal Act of 1939 as defined in Section 1 of this Bill. The Minister knows as well as I know that, if there had been any attempt to incorporate in the Principal Act powers to enable the Tourist Board itself to carry on any of the businesses that are now mentioned in the Memorandum of Association of the new company, there would have been an outcry in the Oireachtas. My point about those businesses is clear and simple. It is that the device of a company is a device that is dishonestly trying to get away from the limitations which are imposed in the Principal Act. The board should not by any device attempt to get away from the statutory limitations which are imposed on its operations in the Principal Act, and it is because I am of that opinion that I object to these powers being included in the memorandum of the company. Whether or not it is proper or wise to include them in the memorandum of any ordinary company is quite another matter.

I am in entire agreement with the Minister that it is usual for persons floating private companies to cast the net—I think that was the phrase used by Senator O Buachalla—as wide as possible. I agree so far as that applies to a private company, but this is not a private company. The proposal here is merely a method of evading the regulations and restrictions imposed by Section 16 of the Principal Act, and I, therefore, object to any part of the funds which we are providing under Section 2 of this Bill being utilised for such a purpose.

I saw the Cathaoirleach looking at me and I wished to relate my remarks specifically to Section 2 of the Bill which we are now discussing. It is because the memorandum of the company is an attempt to enlarge, extend and widen the provisions in the original Act that I made reference to hairdressers, bakers, licensed traders, manufacturers of pleasure steamers and others yesterday. If it were an original company, being opened for private operations, that would be normal, but this is merely an attempt to get away from the provisions contained in the Principal Act. It is on that ground I object.

I do not understand, despite the Minister's reply, how this company is to dispose of itself to the general public, having regard to the provisions included in its articles. It does not appear to me that those articles were drawn with the view which has now been suggested in mind. Senator O'Donovan said yesterday that, while we were talking of the board setting up luxury hotels, we had no evidence of that. It was, perhaps, unfortunate for him that the statement appeared in yesterday evening's papers to which reference has already been made and that there was a heading to-day in the newspaper which I may describe as the Bible of my friends opposite: "Club to cater for wealthy tourists." I suggest to the Minister that, while everybody going on holidays does, without question, want more luxury than he can get at home in his normal life, we do not want merely to cater for the super-luxury of the wealthy tourist. I suggest that it would have been better for the board to utilise the money which they are getting under this section to make some positive approach to the other methods of encouraging the trade—to utilise the money to do something in connection with holiday camps. Not so long ago, the members of this House paid a very pleasant visit to certain of the midland counties. As they were coming back that day, they saw Nissen huts, erected by the Turf Board at one place for certain purposes. If that board were able to obtain those huts for that purpose, why were not the Tourist Board, if they wanted to operate holiday camps, equally able to obtain them and have them set up? The Nissen hut would be an easily-convertible structure and would provide suitable holiday camp facilities.

I suggest that the reason of the omission is not, as the Minister said, that this is to be a minor phase of their work but because, as the chairman of the board said on 7th November, 1945, they are going in for luxury hotels, that that is what they regard as their main, positive, and immediate work. While it may be said that their intentions are to the contrary, we can only judge those intentions by what we have seen so far. What we have seen does not bear out the Minister's statement of the board's intentions.

The Minister made reference, in a somewhat heated little "scene", to the members of the Tourist Board. I think that the charge made by Senator Hayes was not against the members of the board but against certain employees—not all employees—of the board. The Minister made particular reference to Lord Monteagle. It has been pointed out to me that, in fairness to him, it should be stated that his wife was one of the teachers at the college to which Senator Hayes referred, and that he himself was one of the original people associated with Sir Horace Plunkett in the initiation of the co-operative movement here. It is only fair that that should be put on the records of the House.

In a few moments, we are to discuss a Bill dealing with local government. One of the Acts which constitute the local government code was very much decried at first but was subsequently accepted as a sound proposition—the selection of local government employees by independent methods. The Minister for Local Government will, no doubt, state, when dealing with his Bill, that he believes that to be a sound method. I should like the Minister for Industry and Commerce to make clear why a similar method of operation is not suitable in the case of a board such as the Irish Tourist Board. It appears to me that what is fish for one should be fish for the other and that, when employees of one body are selected in that way, it should be desirable that employees of another body be selected in the same way.

It would be better for the Minister to make clear the exact method by which the staff of the Irish Tourist Board are appointed. The Minister, as reported in Column 6, Volume 99, No. 1 of the Dáil Debates, stated that he did not lay down any conditions in regard to the method of appointment of officers of the board. The Minister has stated that political considerations did not enter into any such appointments. I want to make it clear that, if that is the case, the method of appointment is one that the public would like explained because if it is merely a coincidence that the Tourist Board is to a large degree-staffed by persons who are of one political complexion and who are, more than that, related to what I might call for the moment for want of a better word, a certain hierarchy in Fianna Fáil, it is only fair to them that the method should be made clear. We should like to know whether, for example in the appointment of an assistant secretary to the board, public advertisements were issued inviting applications for the position and if certain conditions were fulfilled; and, further, whether in regard to the appointment of a solicitor for the board, who, I notice, made the application yesterday, the same type of opportunity to apply for the position was afforded to other solicitors who might be equally qualified to deal with the matters on which it is necessary for the board to obtain legal advice. I want to try to deal with this matter in a calm way and I should like the Minister to supply the necessary information when he is replying.

Nothing that has been said by anybody has in any way shaken my view that there is in this industry of providing for tourists and holiday-makers a great future, if the industry is developed in the right way. Even after hearing the Minister, nothing has made it clear to me that his board is going to make an effort to get the co-operation of the hotel industry. I am in entire agreement with the provision of hotels in an area such as that mentioned by Senator McGee in Louth where there is no hotel in competition.

It is a very different story to compete with an existing institution. The provision and operation by the board directly or indirectly through the company of a hotel such as Ballinahinch, which is just next to the Zetland and another hotel of which the Minister is well aware, and the provision by the board of an additional hotel in Killarney are bound, if there is not the same overflow as exists at present, to affect existing institutions. I want further to know—and I would ask the Minister to be absolutely specific on this point—whether the board is at once going to make provision—and when I say "at once" I mean during the next month—by virtue of which existing hotel keepers who want to modernise, improve, and extend their premises can get long-term credit at reasonable rates.

Mr. Summerfield

In view of the very explicit statements made by the Minister in opening the debate yesterday and in the debate we had to-day, I must confess that I am puzzled at the tone and the trend of the speeches made on this section. Senator Sir John Keane started off by describing the board—I think I quote him correctly—as real estate speculators. At least one of this evening's Dublin newspapers has given him the prominence of the front page. Whether they have reported him correctly or not I cannot say, but what he is reported as having said would lead the ordinary public to assume that this House is now discussing whether we shall, in fact, finance a number of reckless spendthrifts. The Senator's description of this scheme for tourist expenditure is that it is a highly speculative one. Of course it is to a degree, but I suggest, because it is of importance to the country, that if there is an element of gamble in this, in the light of the Minister's statement as to how the money is to be expended, the country will gladly face that gamble. If all State expenditure is as well thought-out and as well planned as this, I do not think that we shall have anything to regret within the next year or two.

Sir John Keane

Where can we see these well-thought out plans?

Mr. Summerfield

I thought the Minister himself had explained them. Evidently some people are harder to convince than others. It is obvious to the ordinary people—and I do not claim to be anything more than an ordinary person—that much of what the Minister has already stated covers expenditure for schemes that could not be initiated or brought to fruition except by State expenditure. I am glad to know that Portmarnock is to be developed and I hope that before long Dollymount will be developed. I wonder how many people resident in Dublin have thought, as I have thought over a long period of years, that we cruelly neglected nature's gifts. Instead of these places being so convenient to Dublin, they might have been hundreds of miles away for all the good they were to the majority of the people of Dublin, particularly Portmarnock. If Portmarnock had been near an English industrial city it would have been developed long since.

Development need not necessarily mean the bringing of Blackpool to our coastline. Development can mean merely making available to the community the beauties of these places in a restrained and well thought-out fashion. Therefore I am puzzled to know why there has been so much emphasis on luxury. I am glad the Minister dealt with that question. I think we are a long way from the time when we can describe any of our hotels as luxury hotels. The best of them are only what one would describe as decently good hotels. If there is to be a higher standard set, all right; let us start at the top if you like. In the course of my speech on the previous stage of the Bill I myself stressed that in my opinion sane development will include amenities for the family, as the family is the basis of our population. I think we should lay greater emphasis on that. We have had so many speeches and so much time of the House has been occupied by this debate, that I have no intention of making a detailed speech such as seems to be the fashion in this House, but I should like to set my view as a counterblast if you like to the view which has been expressed by Senator Sir John Keane which has already got very great publicity, that if this Bill involves speculation, it is not reckless speculation but something that is wise in the best interest of the people.

Mr. Foran

I do not want to enter into this discussion very much. I am a thorough advocate of State enterprise and I must say that in our efforts in that direction we have been reasonably successful. In all those efforts of State enterprise, however, we found Senator Sir John Keane as hostile and as bitter as he is at this moment. For the electrification of the Shannon there was no more bitter opponent than Senator Sir John Keane and so he has been through every State effort that has been made. Unfortunately, however, I find myself somewhat in agreement with him on this occasion because I think we are likely to blot our copybook because of our success through State efforts. It is for that reason that I enter into this discussion.

I cannot visualise the State risking the fairly big sum of money involved in this Bill. If these schemes are a success the intention is to hand them over to private enterprise. In my opinion this development is not going to be such a success, or such a money-spinner that it will induce private enterprise to come in and take it over. Therefore, we will be left holding the baby, as it were. Those are my feelings at any rate. Having put our money into it and not achieving the success that we hoped for this will be left as the property of the State, whereas on the other hand, if by any chance it should turn out to be a money-spinner, we are going to hand it over to private enterprise which is to get the benefit of our effort, the benefit of our interest and of our money.

I have read a good deal about this luxury business. One place mentioned was Ballinahinch but the Ranji Singhi could not afford to keep that place going. He spent a good deal of money on it and with all the money he spent and the development that took place it certainly was the last word in luxury. The salmon used to come up the river and ask to be caught, so that there you had inducement for the fisherman while the area was well stocked with game as well. Nevertheless we do not notice a great number of people coming over to partake of the amenities to be obtained at Ballinahinch.

Senator Sweetman referred to Portmarnock. I do not know if what he said is to be applied to the country.

Mr. Sweetman

I did not refer to it; it was Senator Summerfield who mentioned it.

Mr. Foran

Oh yes, it was Senator Summerfield. I knew it was a name beginning with an "S" anyway. I want to know in what way are the people of this country going to benefit from the expenditure on the development of Portmarnock any more than they are benefiting from Portmarnock to-day. I hope the Minister will tell us that. According to the published statement yesterday evening there will be 19 bedrooms accommodating a maximum of 33 people. These will be catered for in a hotel covering 200 acres. The hotel will own 200 acres of Portmarnock and will shut out the people from the beautiful strand, so that people will have no more access to the strand at Portmarnock after all this expenditure than they have to-day.

Senator O Buachalla mentioned Ashford. Time was when people could go into Ashford and enjoy its beauty and scenery but now they have to pay 1/- and at Portmarnock they may have to pay 1/- or more.

Mr. Summerfield

Oh no.

Mr. Foran

No? I think Senator Summerfield said that he hoped Dollymount would be developed, but I have heard people belonging to the Royal Dublin Golf Club saying that they hope there will not be development out there. Generally speaking there is grave apprehension regarding the possible activity of this board. There are amenities which offer considerable inducement to our own nationals and locals but if this board carries out what I learn is their intention, the nationals and locals will be put into competition with the black marketeers from other countries coming in here and paying 12 guineas a week for amenities which our own people can enjoy now at fairly reasonable prices. The people realise that and they are very concerned about it. I hope that the Minister, for the sake of our worthy achievement up to the present in State enterprise, will see to that matter and give a good deal of attention to making this effort as definite a success as many of the others were.

I would like the Minister to explain why the staff engaged by the Tourist Board are not recruited through the Employment Commission. The staff for many other enterprises are so recruited. If there is any particular reason for this I would like to know it. If the staff engaged by the Tourist Board were recruited through the Employment Commission it would kill, at the source, this allegation that the people being employed and recruited by the board are all members of a certain organisation, and that priority and preference are given to them. Here is an opportunity of doing away with that allegation. It is an allegation to which I do not subscribe but it is doing a considerable amount of harm, and if the Employment Commission were resorted to it would to a large extent kill the allegation that preference and priority are given to people with a certain political tinge.

Mr. O'Dea

I had hoped that at some time or another we would be finished with the suggestions that are being thrown across the House from the other side and which arise every time the question of giving money for the formation of a board comes up in this House. Senator Sweetman confined the matter to a certain basis. He said that they were not referring to the members of the board though he said they were referring to some employees but not to all the employees. No names were mentioned and no details were given but evidently there is the suggestion that somebody was appointed as an employee of that board who was Fianna Fáil and how dare members of the Fianna Fáil Government appoint a man who is Fianna Fáil.

Now, that matter has so often been repeated in the Dáil and Seanad that I really think Ministers and boards are afraid to appoint anybody who is Fianna Fáil to a position on a board. A man came to me recently and asked me to recommend him for a position. He said he was a Fianna Fáil supporter for many years and that he was secretary of a Fianna Fáil cumann. I said: "If you mention that fact you will never be appointed, no matter how good you are." That is what I feel about it and that is what is felt down the country by the people who know. It is not felt by the people who do not know. People who do not know the difference read the debates in the Dáil and the Seanad and sometimes they come to us and ask us to use our influence to get them positions. We do our best to assure them that if we tried to use any influence we would probably disqualify them from going for the appointment and that probably they would have no chance of the job at all if we put in a word on their behalf. There has been an attempt made to purify public life, in spite of the views of some people, yet these views are still instilled into them by speeches such as we have heard here to-day. I wish it would end, for the sake of the purity of public life. It does no good, it is not genuine, and the people who make those statements do not believe them.

Mr. Sweetman

I do.

Mr. O'Dea

Well, the Senator is an exception, if he does, as the facts and the figures do not bear out the suggestions that have been made. I think statements should not be made unless they are borne out.

Mr. Sweetman

I quoted two cases. The Senator did not hear them, apparently.

Mr. O'Dea

I did not hear them, but apparently two employees have been employed who are members of Fianna Fáil. However, the fact now is that, in any appointment that is being offered, a man has a very bad chance if he is Fianna Fáil. I am sorry that does exist and I was glad to hear the Minister take a strong attitude when he said that, in any appointment under him, politics does not come into the question. I hope, at the same time, that the dice is not loaded against any man who belongs to his Party.

Senator Sweetman also referred to the memorandum of association of a company. I am surprised that he did so, as he admits that he knows perfectly well that, when a company is being formed, the memorandum of association sets out the objects of the company and, in doing so, every industry or trade that could possibly be carried on by the company originally intended to be formed is set out. He has seen it and so have I, as I have drafted them. We give power to people to establish hotels, to run laundries, to become soap makers and so on, even to be tailors and haircutters and anything else they like. That is done in order that their rights will not be confined in any way. It is not done for the sake of giving them power to do that, as the one hundredth part of the powers given are never adopted and it was never intended they would be adopted, but for fear anything would ever occur in some far distant date that would make it necessary for the company to enter into a particular business. That is put in, even if it is only to happen 200 years hence, in order to save the company the necessity of making application to the court to alter the memorandum of association. There is nothing in that point, which is just a debating point and I am sorry it is made. I do not know why this debate has lasted so long and I hope I have not added much to its length. I thought it would have been over a long time ago.

Mr. Lemass

Like Senator Summerfield, I was struck by Senator Sir John Keane's use of the words "speculator in real estate" in describing the Irish Tourist Board. No doubt, the board will be dealing in real estate, nor would I altogether object to the use of the word "speculation" in that regard, unless the Senator desires to give it an unsavoury meaning.

Sir John Keane

No, no.

Mr. Lemass

They will be speculating in real estate, but also no doubt they will endeavour to eliminate as far as possible the element of speculation in their transactions. In so far as the real estate dealer may acquire property with a view to its subsequent development and resale at an enhanced value, there is a similarity to the method of operation of the Tourist Board in regard to their resort development schemes.

There has been much discussion concerning the constitution of the Tourist Board and I do not think it gets rid of the issues which were raised in the Second Reading debate for Senator Sweetman to say that he did not refer to the board. Associates of his on the same bench did refer to the board. Senator Crosbie made a positive statement that the members of the board were appointed solely for their political opinions. Senator Hayes's references may not have been as direct, but Senator Hayes is not always noteworthy for direct references, yet he got the idea across just as effectively. I named the members of the board during the Second Reading debate, though I disliked having to do so. Most of the members of such boards have business associations of other kinds and do not like to be drawn into political controversy. I regret particularly if I made a reference to Lord Monteagle which might have caused him annoyance. If I understood his political past, that will at least be an indication that his politics were not taken into account when he was made a member of the board.

Senator Sir John Keane asked if the board have had expert advice in respect to their hotel operations. They have expert advice. They have employed not merely technical people with considerable experience but from time to time they have employed consultants to advise them on particular aspects of their work.

Senator Crosbie asked why no hotel proprietor is on the Tourist Board. The answer to that question is quite definite: I think a hotel proprietor should not be on the Tourist Board. I know that the Commission on Vocational Organisation made a similar criticism of the board, but I think it was based on a misunderstanding of the functions of the board. It has responsibility for supervising hotels generally and may have the obligation of imposing penalties upon hotels which do not carry on their business in accordance with the board's standards. I should think that the majority of hotel proprietors would object to some competitor of theirs being on the board and exercising these powers in relation to them. We could have had five hotel proprietors— or some other number—on the board, and that might have been a very useful thing for those five individuals; but I am sure that all the other hotel proprietors would feel they would prefer a board which did not include persons actively engaged in the hotel business.

The company which is set up by the board to manage temporarily these hotel properties is in a different position. That board, I understand does contain amongst its members a person who has had very long experience and has very high reputation in the hotel management business. It may interest Senator Mrs. Concannon to know that one member is also a lady.

Mr. Sweetman

And there is a gentleman as well.

Mr. Lemass

That is true, but I make reference to the lady, arising out of the suggestion that the board, in acquiring properties and arranging for the establishment of a hotel business at Ballinahinch, was acting contrary to the interests of local hotel proprietors. So far as I know, all the local hotel proprietors strongly favoured that development by the board.

Mr. Sweetman

I beg the Minister's pardon. Would he mind repeating that?

Mr. Lemass

I said the hotel proprietors in Connemara did not disapprove, and, in fact, favoured the board's proposals in relation to Ballinahinch.

Mr. Sweetman

The Minister was not at the meeting I had the misfortune to attend in that case.

Mr. Lemass

That may be so. Perhaps, I should say that a number of the more prominent hotel proprietors welcomed the project.

Mr. Sweetman

I think the Minister knows the meeting to which I refer.

Mr. Lemass

When Senator Sweetman asks by what particular process the board's interests in that company will be transferred from the board to ordinary private shareholders, I cannot answer his question precisely. The intention is that this company, which will have a temporary existence, will complete works of construction and equipment and establish the hotels as going concerns which will, at that stage, be sold to the public. It may be that individual properties will be disposed of separately. It may be that a whole series of hotels will be offered as a single business as operated through this company. The intention is that the public, if they wish to avail themselves of it, will be given the opportunity of taking an interest in it and acquiring it.

It is hoped that the board will, in fact, cease to have any financial interest in the undertaking at that stage. Perhaps, it is necessary to state that this company is not the only one the board has promoted. The board has also promoted a company to develop its Tramore properties. It is a local company, but it was promoted by the board. It consists of local business people and their function is to manage and direct the general development of the property which the board has reclaimed and developed, and in the case of every property that the board has got, development work will probably be completed by local initiative. It may have to take steps to encourage, assist or promote a local business company as an alternative to doing the job itself.

He mentioned the question of holiday camps. I would be delighted if private business people came to the board and offered to establish these camps with their own capital, and to run them under their own management. That may happen, but if it does not happen, I will not object to the board promoting the establishment of a company for that purpose, even though it may have to proceed, as in the case of the hotel company, through a holding company for a period until they have established the commercial possibilities of the business. Whether it is done one way or the other the board will have the obligation to see that the development of workers' holiday camps will proceed.

May I say at once, that I entirely disagree with Senator Sweetman that Nissen huts would make suitable equipment for holiday camps. I think that Nissen huts would be most unsuitable, and if the board made a proposition to me to establish holiday camps on the basis of a collection of Nissen huts, I would object most strongly. The picture in my mind of holiday camps for workers and their families consists of more than huts in which they can sleep. When I am talking of workers' holiday camps, I am thinking of properly constructed camps with swimming pools and restaurants, and proper sewerage arrangements and water supplies, and everything that tends to comfort and health, and those things must be planned and developed on a proper basis.

These holiday camps were established over wide areas in Great Britain before the war. They were established by a private company, but I think their establishment was encouraged by the Government with a view to having mobilisation centres for troops when a war developed. The fact is that these camps were commercially most successful. Our population distribution and industrial conditions are different from those of Britain but, nevertheless, we have to secure the establishment of those camps here, and I believe that in favourable circumstances they can be as commercially successful here as they were in Britain.

I know that Senator Foran may feel it is wrong that this State board, having established these businesses, should dispose of them to private interests. The board has not as its primary object the establishment of hotels and camps. It has to encourage their establishment and supervise their management. It intervenes in these businesses only to encourage and stimulate private enterprise—only to get things going when private enterprise is holding back. Its primary purpose is to encourage private enterprise.

Senator Duffy complained that the standard of comfort and cleanliness in some hotels he experienced was not high. That, I think, is probably true. The board will necessarily proceed to raise the standard of hotel accommodation step by step. I mentioned here, already, the opinion held by the board, but it would not be reasonable to establish very high standards in 1945, and to insist on their realisation by hotel proprietors. It will undoubtedly raise its requirements as time goes on, and as it becomes easier for hotel proprietors to acquire new equipment, to install new furniture and generally to get rid of the objectionable conditions which are sometimes found in hotels.

Of course, in every hotel, cleanliness can be achieved straightway and one of the matters to which the board is giving particular attention is the standard of cleanliness which is achieved, and I think that if cleanliness is, in fact, achieved, deficiencies in equipment will be less important.

I cannot possibly deal with Senator Duffy's points about Córas Iompair Éireann and Hayes' Hotel in Thurles. The last I heard about Hayes' Hotel in Thurles was when a member of the Seanad, not here this evening, was anxious to attend a race meeting in Thurles when the use of motor cars for attendance at race meetings was prohibited and a Presidential election happened to be in progress for which cars were allowed. The member concerned plastered his car with slogans "Up O'Kelly" and attended the race meeting.

Mr. Baxter

Was he on this side of the House?

Mr. Lemass

He was on that side of the House.

Mr. Baxter

Very bad.

Mr. Lemass

There was one point referred to by Senator Duffy—he said the Department had refused to increase the allocation of tea and sugar to a hotel because it was getting increased business. The fact is that no hotel has been getting an increased allocation of tea and sugar because it is doing an increased business. It is probably true that every hotel and restaurant in the country has been doing increased business as a result of the rationing of those commodities. It would not be possible to increase supplies of rationed goods because of increased business.

Mr. Duffy

Will the Minister understand that because of the incident this hotel has ceased to do a particular business and sends the guests somewhere else? That is the trouble.

Mr. Lemass

That was a useful change for the people that operated somewhere else. However, I am not in a position to talk about the circumstances, and, consequently, I cannot deal with that point. Senator Sir John Keane referred to the problem of staggering holidays. I do not wish to deal with that at any length except to say that I did interest myself in the matter at the request of the Tourist Board before the war. I found very considerable difficulty in getting any measure of agreement amongst industrial managements and others concerned on a practicable plan.

The school authorities have their difficulties and cannot very well alter the period during which the schools are open during the year, particularly as examinations have to be arranged. The conflicting views of industrial directors and of trade union officials who were consulted, as well as others, as to the most suitable time for holidays and as to the practicability of spreading holidays over a longer period, made it very difficult to work out a scheme which would be accepted. No doubt, we could enforce the staggering of holidays by legislation, but I think that would be a form of Government interference which no Government would be anxious to undertake because of the unpopularity which would be bound to follow from it.

It is true to say that everybody would like to get their holidays in the first week or the first fortnight of August, but the fact is that everybody cannot get them at that period without having such congestion at holiday resorts that holiday comforts would be impossible. If we could devise a system for staggering holidays we could make enjoyable holidays more easily obtainable and we would be lengthening the holiday season which would help the providers of holiday facilities, thereby assisting considerably the problem of the efficient and economical management of these businesses here.

Mr. Sweetman

Did the Minister consider the question of being able to encourage the staggering of holidays by better transport concessions in the non-rush periods?

Mr. Lemass

I was about to deal with the Senator's point about transport facilities. On the question of devising an arrangement for staggering holidays—it is a phrase I do not like but it conveys the right idea—I should mention that so far as I have been able to ascertain, efforts to that end made in Great Britain were no more successful there than they were here. Senator Sweetman referred to the possibility of cheap transport to holiday resorts. It is, of course, true that in normal times the railway companies did provide cheap holiday transport. Not merely were week-end excursions a normal feature of railway operation, but we had holiday trains during the week and special holiday season tickets.

These were, I think, a regular practice. We cannot have these facilities now because the curtailment of transport makes it impossible to run excursion trains or to give special excursion facilities or to attract travellers to the public transport services by any reduction of fares. This year, fortunately, we will have much more ample transport facilities by rail and road than we had in any year for the last four or five years, but it will still be, I think, a year or perhaps two years before we will reach the stage at which excursion trains or other exceptional transport facilities can be provided at cheap rates. I should think, however, that it would not be necessary for the Tourist Board to do anything about that. The transport operators will be willing to do it in their own interest. I want to say, in answer to the specific point that was raised, that the Tourist Board has not any power under legislation to use the money advanced to it for the purpose of subsidising rail rates or for the giving of grants towards a reduction of fares for that purpose.

Mr. Sweetman

We may hope, I suppose, for some reduction in fares this season in view of the reduction in the price of petrol?

Mr. Lemass

There will be a reduction in general fares and a considerable expansion of facilities. Senator Sweetman is perturbed about the scope of the functions taken in the memorandum of association of Fáilte, Teoranta. Senator O'Dea, I think, gave a correct explanation of why that is the normal commercial practice. I want to point out that, in so far as that company is operating properties which will ultimately be disposed of by means of sale, it is desirable that there should not be handicaps or restrictions imposed which might depreciate their value, in the course of time. I could not attempt to say how soon or how late it may be that that company will be operating without any public financial support. It will then be entitled to engage in any business which any other citizen can freely engage in. I think it would be undesirable that we should place it in the position that it would at that stage, if it wanted to extend its activities, have to seek an amendment of its memorandum of association. The memorandum, I understand, makes reference to distilling, brewing and other activities. I would point out that no one can engage in the business of brewing and distilling without going through certain legal formalities and getting certain licences. That situation will apply, of course, in the case of this company as in the case of anybody else.

With regard to the staff of the Tourist Board, the procedure, I understand, followed by the board in appointing staff is to advertise vacancies in the Press, to invite applications for these vacancies and to have a committee of the board interview the applicants, placing them in order of merit. Senator Sweetman asked about the assistant secretary and the solicitor. I can give no information as to these appointments. I do not know the names of the persons who were appointed or anything about them.

Mr. O'Dea

I do not think that the board has any solicitor. So far as I know, they engage different solicitors through the country whenever they require them.

Mr. Lemass

The obligation on the board is to get the best staff it can. It will, of course, be aware of the necessity of avoiding any suspicion that, in choosing its staff, it was influenced by improper motives. I do not think it is desirable that we should place upon these organisations the obligation of recruiting staffs through the Local Appointments Commission. Under some of the Acts establishing boards of this kind the boards are empowered to use the Local Appointments Commission when they require staff, but, as a general rule, it is not practicable to undertake and carry on a commercial enterprise with the condition that staff can only be recruited through the Local Appointments Commission. I do not know if Senators appreciate precisely how long it takes for the Local Appointments Commission to function.

Mr. O'Dea

Two years sometimes.

Mr. Lemass

It is always months and sometimes years. Clearly, no board engaged in commercial work could be required to face that prolonged delay before securing the staff which its activities need. I realise that it is inevitable that any organisation functioning under this Government will be open to the accusation of giving preference to supporters of this Government. When this Government disappears, and when another Government takes its place, the same allegations will be made, possibly by myself, in relation to that Government.

The fact is that no body of people in charge of enterprises of this kind will allow themselves to be saddled with dud staff merely for political reasons, if they know that their individual credit, as well as the success of the whole enterprise, will very largely depend not so much on the board as on the efficiency of the staff acting under the board. I have never found, in the case of any of those boards, reason to believe that any consideration was applied in the appointment of staff other than that of getting the best people. My personal practice has been to refuse to allow my name to be used even for reference purposes by people applying for positions under these boards. Needless to remark, I get a very large number of letters asking me to assist them or their sons or daughters in getting appointments from one or other of those organisations because these people believe, from speeches made in the Dáil and Seanad, that it is all a matter of influence. Invariably, they are informed that I have no function whatever regarding the appointment of staff in these organisations and that their applications should be addressed to the secretary or manager, as the case may be. That causes political difficulty for me, because those people, I am sure, do not always believe that the answer is true and think that I am just putting them off. In due course, it will come to be understood that it is personal merit which will be the deciding factor. I have never given any board with which I am concerned any instruction or suggestion that they are not free to appoint members of Fianna Fáil, as they are free to appoint people of any other political persuasion, if they are the best people. I have no doubt that the supporters of Fianna Fáil are the best people.

Mr. Baxter

You let the cat out of the bag when you said that.

Mr. Lemass

Naturally, they are the most intelligent people. So far as the Tourist Board is concerned, I am quite satisfied that Senator Sweetman's Party has lost many supporters by his allegation that the staff of the Tourist Board are all supporters of Fianna Fáil. A large number of them, I am sure, were not.

Mr. Sweetman

I never said that all the staff were supporters of Fianna Fáil.

Mr. Lemass

Then, Senator Sweetman's objection boils down to this— that some of the staff are supporters of Fianna Fáil.

Mr. Sweetman

All the plums are reserved for supporters of that Party.

Mr. O'Dea

The Senator did not say that before and I should like to have particulars of the "plums."

Mr. Sweetman

The secretary, assistant-secretary and solicitor.

An Cathaoirleach

Senators should address the Chair.

Mr. Lemass

For myself, I can quite honestly say that, if I were asked, at the moment, the names of the secretary, assistant-secretary and solicitor, I could not give them. I think that the secretary is a man named Barry.

Mr. Quirke

You are wrong.

Mr. Baxter

This is not Question Time.

Mr. Lemass

Senator Summerfield asked if the board had a scheme for the development of Dollymount. The board had such a scheme, but when they went to discuss their project with the Dublin Corporation—it was quite clear that the co-operation of Dublin Corporation would be required—the Dublin Corporation authorities intimated that they would rather do the whole job themselves. I gather that the board are now no longer interested in Dollymount, but that Dublin Corporation have quite substantial plans for improvement of the amenities there and development of the area.

Mr. Foran

That will be good news for the golf club.

Mr. Lemass

There are two golf clubs at Dollymount. Whether or not the plans of Dublin Corporation will involve any interference with the golf courses, I cannot say. Senator Sir John Keane asked where the well-considered plans to which reference had been made were. I could produce here details of the work which the board proposes to do—the areas they propose to acquire and the different proposals for development of those areas—but that would, I think, be undesirable, because the board is quite free to change its plans at any time if it can get better plans and, in the second place, what the Seanad really requires is a general indication of the manner in which the board will proceed. That I tried to give. Senator Foran asked about Portmarnock. There, the board acquired an estate with a house on it. The area of the estate is to be developed. Roads will be built through it which will give access to the public from the main road to the strand, parks will be laid out, shelters and bandstands will be erected and the area will be levelled and improved so that there will be normal holiday-resort facilities there. A house being on the estate, they are going to use it as a hotel but the whole of the estate area will be developed in accordance with the board's general scheme and will be available to members of the public who wish to use it. The development plan for that area—the construction of those roads, promenades and so forth—requires the co-operation of the Dublin County Council. I understand that the commissioner acting for the county council has agreed to undertake certain expenditure in the provision of a water supply and other public services which are necessary. All the work will begin at the same time—the country council work and the work of the Tourist Development Board. What has happened at Portmarnock is not, as Senators seem to assume, that the board has acquired an estate which shuts off the sea from the main road and is using that estate purely as an amenity to the hotel. The board acquired the estate with a view to developing it as an estate and, incidentally, got a house which they propose to use as a hotel. One of the main purposes of the acquisition of the estate was to give access to the very excellent beach there.

Sir John Keane

So far as I may have been responsible for prolonging this debate, I make no apology. We are placing at the disposal of the board a large sum of money. We shall probably never again have an opportunity of looking at this proposition from a business standpoint. There will be no annual vote, so far as I understand, on which the work of the board can be discussed. We can only obtain enlightenment and bring criticism to bear on the operations of the board if somebody chooses to raise the matter when the accounts of the board are laid on the table of the House. That is a roundabout and not satisfactory way for Houses of Parliament to keep in touch with institutions which have the spending of large sums of money. I thought that it would not be long before my old colleague, Senator Foran, would remind me of my record in respect of the Electricity Supply Corporation. I make him a present of the admission that I was wrong on that occasion. But the fact that I was wrong on one occasion is probably a very good reason why I should not be wrong on all occasions. I am perfectly prepared to submit my record in the matter of criticism of State enterprises to a tribunal constituted, if you like, of both wings of the Labour Party, before which I should be glad to appear.

I should like the Minister to enlighten us on two or three points. He referred to a very successful organisation in Great Britain which has developed holiday camps. Those of us who keep in touch with the financial papers are aware that that organisation made a very successful flotation lately. No sense of isolated nationality should prevent the Tourist Board from going to that body and saying, "You have experience of holiday camps; would you consider coming over to our country, forming an Irish company and sending over men with the technical experience necessary for the establishment of such camps?" That was done in the case of cement and sugar beet.

The board might say: "We have funds at our disposal to help you financially. You have ample funds but there are certain limitations imposed by the Control of Manufactures Act which would make it necessary that a certain percentage of your directors must be of Irish nationality and that a certain percentage of the capital must be owned by Irish nationals." Is there any objection to a policy of that kind being adopted because I believe that it would help the establishment of holiday camps if we approach the matter in that way? We would have the very best experience at our disposal. If these people agreed to examine the proposition and then said: "Commercially we do not think there is anything in it," that would be all to the good. You would have got expert opinion on the possibility of an enterprise of that kind.

The same remarks apply to trust houses. There is a body which has experience of the smaller class of hotel. There again I feel that if a body like that were approached they would consider the question of forming an Irish company with the usual percentage of national capital and national directors. That would be far the best way of developing propositions of the character which the Tourist Board has to consider. May I again say that I am not concerned—I have not been in touch with any Party—with this squabble over the political affiliations of the board or its officers, though I do know that it serves the Minister as a very useful red herring to enable him to avoid discussing the more businesslike aspects of the problem. I do say definitely that the board is not constituted in a manner which would enable it to handle commercial propositions with the best chance of success. What commercial experience have any members of the board got? I agree that they are men of the world and that they are fully qualified to deal with such matters as propaganda, advertising and publicity. They know the political facets of Irish political life and they know local conditions, but they have no experience of dealing with commercial propositions, and it is entirely on commercial ventures that this money is to be spent.

I hope the Minister does not take exception to my describing them as speculative measures. Surely men of commercial experience are necessary for that purpose. Have any of the members of the board such experience? In a smaller way perhaps they have technical experience of hotel management. The men I have in mind would have experience of hotel management, as much general knowledge as directors would have, though they would not necessarily have risen from the ranks of the hotel and catering business. That is why I say that this board is not constituted to handle and develop commercial propositions. I know that there are men of genius who have had no commercial experience but who have made quite a success of ventures of this kind. I know there are such men in this city but I think these are the exceptions rather than the rule and I do say that is the danger facing us when we come to the expenditure of large sums of money by a body with really no experience and no qualifications to develop business propositions.

There is one further point which I should like to put to the Minister if he thinks fit to reply to it. Has he got a statutory obligation as Minister to examine these schemes independently of the board or is he prepared to accept the reports of the board, and the belief and the opinion of the board, that they are going to be a commercial success? Of course, nobody in ventures of this kind can say conclusively whether they are going to be successful. Take the Portmarnock Hotel, for instance. The Minister has told us that he believes that it will be possible in a short time to sell the Portmarnock Hotel to private enterprise but the Minister has never said "only if it is a paying proposition." I think Senator Foran pointed out that it was a very unsuitable building and that it was never built for a hotel. That means that it can be sold to private enterprise only if it is commercially successful, otherwise it has got to be kept by the board and run at a loss.

Mr. Lemass

As to the two points raised by the Senator, I have an obligation to examine schemes submitted to me by the board, but I want to make it quite clear that I have declined to accept responsibility for an examination of the technical aspects. If the board produces a scheme which involves some engineering works and if they say that an engineer was employed by them and that he has certified that the scheme is feasible, then the board's engineers must be trusted to look after the technical part of their proposals. It is the board's responsibility to see that these duties are carried out. I have the responsibility to examine schemes from a general aspect before approving of them. There have been some schemes submitted by the board which have not been approved or have not yet been approved or which have been sent back for re-examination regarding certain aspects. An obligation is on the Minister to examine these schemes before approving of advances to the board, in other words the making of advances to the board is not an automatic business after the board has made application.

The Senator is wrong in his assumption that the Control of Manufactures Act applies to the operation of hotels or holiday camps. It does not. There is in fact no statutory limitation on the ownership of hotels or holiday camps. If a foreign company wanted to establish and operate hotels here now, it could do so. It does not have to apply for a licence or seek any approval from a Government Department. The same remarks apply to holiday camps. If the company, to which the Senator referred, wanted to establish hotels and holiday camps here they could come in and do so. If the board have to face the responsibility of getting holiday camps established through their own initiative or through a company promoted by them for the purpose, then no doubt they will seek the best advice they can get anywhere in the world to ensure that they will be on the right lines.

Sir John Keane

Would the Minister have any objection to inviting people with experience to come in and put up a proposition for the establishment of a holiday camp here?

Mr. Lemass

What the board has done in that regard I could not say. They understand they have this obligation of procuring the establishment of properly run holiday camps, and I presume they are examining the various methods of tackling their problem. So far as I am concerned they have not been precluded in any way from seeking advice outside the country.

Sir John Keane

There seems to be some hesitation in going outside the country for such advice.

Question put and agreed to.

Section 3 and the Title agreed to.

Agreed to take the Fourth Stage now.

Question—"That the Bill be received for Final Consideration"—put and agreed to.

Agreed to take the Fifth Stage now.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be returned to the Dáil".

Mr. Duffy

On the motion that the Bill be returned to the Dáil I would like to refer to something that was raised at an earlier stage in the debate. The House will remember that I drew attention to the conditions under which a section of the hotel staff were employed, and I made it perfectly clear I was speaking only of the commercial and executive staff. The Minister I think misunderstood the point I was making or at least did not apprehend its narrow character. He addressed himself—but perhaps like Senator Sir John Keane it was a red herring—to the problem of organising hotel staffs as a whole so that trade union organisation might regulate the conditions.

So far as I understand, the waiters, waitresses and kitchen staff in all the hotels in Dublin and in the vicinity of Dublin are organised in trade unions and as far as I know there are no complaints regarding their conditions of employment. I think they actually are employed under negotiated agreements which cover a long period of time. I am concerned, however, with employees who are almost exclusively clerical, employed as clerks in the hotel office and as receptionists and typists. The number of such persons in a hotel is usually quite small and I have pointed out that their wages run from 15/- to 25/- a week. In the last few hours, however, I have learned that wages in some of the provincial hotels are in fact as low as 5/- and 7/6 a week, so that the case I was making is not confined merely to Dublin or the vicinity of Dublin but is generally applicable to the whole hotel industry throughout the country.

The Minister tells us, first and foremost, that it is not the function of the board to examine the conditions under which staffs are employed. To that I have replied that there is a duty somewhere, and if the Minister resents the suggestion that it is the duty of the Government I must join issue with him. If he asks me whether I am willing that the Government should intervene rather than leave it to the trade unions, I answer "yes." There is no equivocation about that. It has been the practice of this Government, of their predecessors and of the British Government since 1909 to intervene on behalf of unorganised workers to secure that there are certain minimum conditions of employment. The Minister himself operates 15 trade boards which are established for the protection of persons, mainly people who are unorganised and unable to protect themselves. Actually the conception of the trade board was that that organisation was set up by the State only when there was no effective machinery available to regulate wages and conditions of employment. It is not merely wages. I do not desire to bore the House with quotations from complaints that have reached me.

I restricted myself to those references that concern wages and hours of young girls but I want now to draw your attention to the conditions under which the staff lives in a leading County Dublin hotel which charges its guests 12 guineas a week. This complaint was given me by a person who has access to the hotel and who knows it intimately. He said:

"I think it is right that you should know how the clerical staff are treated in some of our posh hotels. I know the ins and outs of — hotel. I am in a position to give you details about it, which probably the public do not suspect. For instance, the hours are long, the food is poor and meagre. The pay is 15/- a week for young girls but paid monthly for trained experienced office clerks. Three of these girls sleep in one small bedroom at the end of an underground passage. Part of this passage is used as a potato store. At the other end is the furnace-room with a temperature like a turkish bath. Here certain members of the staff dine. It is known officially as the staff hall. It is monstrous that people should be expected to use a room like this while the furnace is kept on. The Tourist Board inspectors visit this hotel to see that the accommodation, the beds, the linen, etc., provided for the guests are up to the mark, but God help the staff— nobody bothers about them."

That is a description of the conditions under which young people are employed in an hotel than can afford to get 12 guineas a week from its guests.

I refuse to accept the view that the Government have no obligation in this matter. I refuse to accept the view that the Tourist Board inspectors should confine themselves to an examination merely of that portion of the hotel occupied by the guests, without considering the conditions under which the staff is employed, because in the long run the success and popularity of our hotels will depend on the manner in which the guests are received by the staff. It is monstrous to think that people working under these conditions could be cheerful, pleasant or agreeable in dealing with guests realising what the guest is getting and what they are getting themselves.

If the Minister wants to draw this red herring across my path as to whether I am in favour of the State intervening, of the Tourist Board intervening, to protect the interests of these commercial employees—typists, receptionists and clerks—of the hotels, I say I am in favour of their doing it. I say, too, that if the trade unions have a function in that matter they have neglected to perform their duties. I do not know if the trade unions would agree that they are under any obligation to the clerical staffs. They may not, and it may be true that the clerical staffs do not join trade unions, but let us bear in mind the fact that the clerical staff are not in the same position as the kitchen staff, the waiters or waitresses.

The clerical staff usually consists of two or three girls as against 20, 30 or 40 people employed throughout the whole hotel establishment. By the very nature of their employment these girls in the office are more or less in conflict with the rest of the staff and I think it is probable they feel that they may not belong to the same tribunal as the other members of the staff. There is not much point in their joining any other union because their strength does not allow of their own organisation—two or three of them in isolation—and by the fact that they were combined with the hotel staff as a whole they have no chance whatever while being combined that way to secure better conditions for themselves. Therefore I suggest it should be part of the Minister's duty in implementing the provisions of this Bill, to ensure that the conditions of employment of the clerical and executive staff, people who are unable to defend themselves, will become part of the function of the Tourist Board. I hope the licence required by a hotel will be refused where the board is not satisfied that proper conditions are observed in respect of the hotel staffs.

Mr. Sweetman

The Minister—quite unintentionally, I accept completely— mentioned a name in regard to the secretaryship of the Tourist Board. It is only right that I should put it on record that Mr. Barry is not the secretary of the Tourist Board, that he is not the person to whom I have referred, that he is, in fact, the secretary of the Irish Tourist Association, and that as such he has our complete confidence—certainly, so far as I am concerned and so far as anybody with whom I am acquainted is concerned. For very deliberate reasons, I referred to people by titles rather than by names, and since the name was mentioned—as I say, I accept that the Minister did not mention it intentionally—it is only right that there should be a disclaimer on the records of the House.

Sir John Keane

On the question raised by Senator Duffy, while I would not go so far as he goes in regard to any responsibility of the Tourist Board for the wages or even for the hours of the staff, I do feel that there is a certain responsibility with regard to accommodation. I do not think it is right to label a hotel and admit it in a high-class category without some adequate regard to the conditions under which the staff live. The whole character of the hotel should enable an adequate staff to be provided for, and a good, high-class hotel should not be so labelled unless adequate accommodation is provided for all its staff. I agree with Senator Duffy to the extent that there should be some responsibility on the board's inspectors to satisfy themselves that the staff accommodation is adequate to the class of hotel.

Mr. Lemass

My objections to Senator Duffy's observations concerning the conditions of employment or remuneration of clerical staff in a hotel are due entirely to the fact that they were brought in here irrelevantly. Senator Duffy knows as well as I do, and as well as every other Senator knows, that the Tourist Board has no powers which could be used to remedy the grievances of which he complains. Nevertheless, he endeavoured to leave the House under the impression that these grievances were due to some dereliction of duty by the Tourist Board or by the Government. Provided he understands clearly, as other Senators understand, that whatever conditions exist in regard to the employment of or the accommodation given to clerical staffs, it is not the fault of the Tourist Board and that the Tourist Board have no powers in law which give them a right to interfere, then we can deal with that matter. If he tells me that the trade union concerned is unable to organise the people affected, and that the trade is one which, because of its nature, cannot be organised, then the law does provide machinery by which action can be taken, by which the State can be given powers to regulate rates of remuneration at least, that is, by the use of the Trade Boards Acts.

If there is any difficulty about applying the Trade Boards Acts, by reason of the fact that the persons concerned are only a class of persons employed in the trade and not all the persons employed in the trade, then proposals for legislation which, amongst other things, would alter that law, will be introduced soon and be before the Seanad within a month or so, and the Senator can make any reference he likes then.

Mr. Sweetman

Has the board not power to refuse registration to a hotel which does not provide proper facilities for its staff?

Mr. Lemass

No, it has not.

Question put and agreed to.

Ordered accordingly: That the Bill be returned to the Dáil.