I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Kelly, and his officials. The purpose of this meeting is to consider the Revised Estimate relating to Vote 31 and the supplementary performance information regarding the outputs and impacts of programme expenditure. A draft timetable has been circulated. Is it agreed? Briefing material providing information relating to the Revised Estimate was circulated to members. As agreed by the committee at its meeting on 22 May 2013, I propose that there will be no opening statements and that the committee will proceed to consider the Revised Estimate programme by programme. Each programme will be considered under the following headings: context and impact indicators; key outputs; financial and human resource inputs; and 2014 allocation and targets. Administration will be considered under these headings when each of the programme areas have been disposed of. In view of the limited time available in 2013 as a result of the budget being brought forward to October, there may be an element of engagement in respect of 2014 allocations when the 2013 Estimates are being considered. I propose that questions on the programmes be taken together and the Minister of State can then respond to them.
Vote 31 - Transport, Tourism and Sport (Revised)
Are we commencing with the civil aviation programme?
Yes.
On subhead A3, which relates to regional airports, amounts of €10 million in current expenditures and €4 million in capital expenditure are listed. Will the Minister of State provide some further detail in respect of this subhead.
The intention is to take all the questions relating to this programme together.
Okay.
We will also take the questions which Deputies Ellis and Tom Fleming may wish to pose and the Minister of State will reply to all of them.
Under subhead A4, a capital cost of €345,000 is indicated for 2012. To what did this cost relate? The subhead also indicates an increase of approximately 20% in the cost of insurance policies in 2013. Will the Minister of State elaborate on that matter? The number of traffic movements at State airports increased slightly during the past two years but this would seem to have been at the expense of some of the regional airports. Will the Minister of State comment on that? My final question relates to the fact that non-pay administration costs have risen by approximately 12.5% in 2013. What was the reason for this increase?
The total provisional outturn for 2012 was €27.923 million, while the overall estimate for 2013 is €30.105 million. Will the Minister of State outline the reason for this increase?
Will the Minister of State fill us in on why there is an increase this year? The non-pay administration figure referred to by the previous Deputy goes from €796,000 up to €876,000. Will the Minister of State elaborate on that increase? The figure for miscellaneous aviation services rises from €10,500,000 to €12,231,000. Will the Minister of State explain what miscellaneous aviation services are and what is included?
I wish to discuss regional airports. What is the opinion on the feasibility of our regional airports given their current business and traffic? What is the long-term projected future for these airports?
Will the public service obligation funding be renewed? Will it be possible to secure future renewals from the European Union? Is there any liaision between our regional airports and the main airports in Cork, Shannon and Dublin? Are there any agreements with Belfast International Airport arising from cross-Border relations?
Under the impact indicators heading for State airports, the total number of passenger traffic increases from 22.6 million to 22.7 million, whereas for regional airports there seems to be a slight decrease. I am interested in Knock Airport and I note an increase in numbers there up to almost 700,000. Will the Minister of State comment on the traffic numbers for the regional airports?
I will answer all of the questions but if I missed any we will take a note and get back to members individually. Deputy Dooley asked about the allocation of €10 million. Between €4 million and €10 million is spent on public service obligation air services and contracts for the Donegal to Dublin and Kerry to Dublin routes. The operational expenditure subvention is €3.27 million to cover losses in the airports in Donegal, Knock, Kerry and Waterford and to provide core airport facilities, air traffic control, security, safety and emergency services, etc. The €4 million capital figure will be spent on safety and security-related projects which are necessary to ensure compliance with domestic and international regulations at all four airports.
Does it apply to all four regional airports?
Yes. The increasing capital costs to which the Deputy referred are for some safety-related improvements that are required in certain places. The question of insurance policies was examined. It has been provisionally included because there was a larger outturn last year, but we expect it will not be 20% over; we believe it will fall back. The non-pay administration costs that arose were mostly related to the EU Presidency.
Deputy Elllis asked the same question on the non-pay figure. Miscellaneous aviation services relates to various subscriptions that we must make to various European and international organisations in the aviation area because of the relationships that have to be managed and the organisations that we must be a part of. That is part of the overall aviation provision.
Deputy Fleming raised a query about Kerry. The PSO will continue, as I have stated, and the position is the same as for the other airports. All the regional airports are, in one way or another, competing with one another for services and for this reason we monitor the level of co-operation. They are all competing for passenger services.
As the Vice Chairman is aware, there is a plan in place for Knock Airport and we expect a report in the coming months. I imagine the Vice Chairman is well up to speed on that. The traffic numbers to which the Vice Chairman referred are the total numbers for all the regional airports. They vary from time to time for various reasons. There was nothing too concerning in those figures from a departmental point of view.
Thank you. We will move on now to the land transport programme.
Why has the budget for road improvement and maintenance been reduced by some 32% under subhead B3? I note there is an increase under subhead B6, smarter travel and carbon reduction. Will the Minister of State elaborate on that increase?
The Minister of State was a local authority member.
I was not.
He was not? He was only a Member of the Seanad. Like myself, he took the short cut.
Via the European Parliament.
He is now a Minister of State. Does the Minister of State believe it is possible for Ireland's public road network to be maintained when the overall budget is reduced by 24%? Obviously, the reduction will have a significant impact on our transport network. Will the Minister of State explain what analysis he has carried out, what strategic thinking has gone into the decision and how he can justify such a significant cut? There is also a claim that approximately 2,800 km of regional and local roads were maintained and 2,575 km of regional and local roads were improved in 2012. Can these modest targets for 2013 be achieved given all the cuts the Minister of State has set out? I will leave it at that.
There is a significant reduction in the expenses figure for the Road Safety Authority. I realise there has been a considerable drop in road deaths but why are we reducing that figure if we want to maintain the progress we have made? It is a substantial amount.
The public service provision payment has been reduced considerably by approximately €50 million or €60 million. If we keep reducing the provision the effects in the long term in terms of keeping public transport going will be significant. I become concerned when we make these reductions while other European countries contribute far more than we do to public transport.
Will the Minister of State indicate the position on the public transport investment programme? The Estimate represents an increase. Will the Minister of State give an idea of what extras will be included?
My first question relates to our regional road network. At the moment we are significantly neglecting the upkeep and general improvement and maintenance of this network of roads. They are very important to rural Ireland in particular. There are several instances in my county. I imagine the Minister of State is familiar with the R577 that stretches from Castleisland in the centre of my county to the Cork border and on to Mallow. The road is in a sub-standard condition and it epitomises and reflects the situation more generally. There should be a significant concentration on those roads because they are very important for the whole transport system. They are important for the rural bus transport system. It is vital to ensure the upkeep and continual improvement of our local and county road network.
There is a form of discrimination. In a way, I offer my compliments for making available moneys for some of our tertiary roads, but is the distribution consistent and fair?
There is the general neglect of rural areas and, on the other side of the coin, in urban areas people are not obliged to contribute towards any service. Under the new scheme people in remote areas with tertiary roads must pay upfront to get their road improvements carried out. This is widening the gulf between urban areas and remote rural areas. We need to strike a balance here. We cannot tax people out of living in their localities. In one way I compliment the Minister of State on making this money available as it gives people an opportunity. However, in these very straitened times it is another burden on people trying to live in the environment where they were born and reared.
I will deal with the issue of roads in general. We never have enough money for roads. The general Exchequer situation means that we do not have the allocations we want. We accept that and are trying to do the best we can with what we have. Given the budget constraints and the impact of reduced maintenance spending, the Minister, Deputy Varadkar, and I decided to channel all available resources to maintenance and rehabilitation work to protect the investment that has been made. This means that funding for major construction or realignment of schemes for regional and local roads has been discontinued. In recent weeks, we have found an extra €50 million for regional and local roads, which was badly needed, and I welcome it. We also put forward a pilot community involvement scheme. I note Deputy Tom Fleming's comments go both ways on this in supporting it and suggesting people cannot take the burden. However, it does not need to be a financial contribution and can be in other forms also. We will see how that goes. We are trying to get more with less with the budget we have.
Deputy Dooley has said it is hard to justify the level of funding but we simply do not have the money. In the national recovery plan published by the previous Government the total funding allocated to roads over the period was less than we are giving. From that point of view we are putting in more than the previous Government thought was feasible, but it still is not enough. We need to work as much as possible with local authorities and we are trying our best.
We need to support the local authorities that are doing their best. While they get substantial funding from central government, they also have their own means of funding. Some local authorities contribute considerable funding towards their local roads and others do not. I believe we should give more support to those that are making a greater contribution. It is depressing that some local authorities have actually dropped their allocation substantially while depending on the Exchequer for more funding. Given the extent of the road network which is considerably beyond the European norm, we are doing our best with the funds we have. We are trying a few schemes and we are closing out a number of projects. At national level we are trying a number of public private partnerships, PPPs, as everyone is aware.
It is possible to go back to the national recovery plan, the programme for Government and the Government parties' manifestoes at the previous general election. However, recognising that the State now has savings of in excess of €1 billion as a result of the deal on the promissory notes, we are all in a different position. If we were drafting documents at the moment, the Minister of State and I would probably have two different documents. I am disappointed that the Minister of State has not been able to estimate that the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport will benefit in some way resulting in our citizens benefiting from the savings.
As the Deputy is well aware, discussions on that are ongoing and it would not be appropriate for me to prejudge that. Decisions on that and across a range of other related issues-----
It would make it easier for the Minister of State if it was raised here so that he can say that the parliamentarians are supporting the case he might make to the Minister for Finance. I am trying to strengthen the Minister of State's hand.
On my behalf and on behalf of the Minister and the other Minister of State in my Department, I thank the Deputy for being so-----
The Minister of State and I would like to see the bridge in Killaloe completed.
Absolutely, I would love to see it completed. There will be discussions on the matter of the promissory notes. We will discover the implications of that in the near future. As the Deputy knows we will have an early budget this year.
Deputy Ellis asked a very good question about the Road Safety Authority, RSA. If this is not viewed in the broader sense, one could imagine there might be a problem. The real issue is that the RSA is raising more revenue than it ever did, which is why we do not need to allocate it so much. It is a fantastic organisation and is doing a very good job. In addition to its good advocacy work, it is also making more money. The total spend from a safety point of view has not decreased. However, the percentage of funding it is generating itself as opposed to from the Department is changing.
As with roads, we would like to be spending more money on a range of public transport projects. We have prioritised the Luas and a number of other projects to improve the public transport offering to consumers. Considerable investment is going towards closing out the Leap card and the real-time passenger information, RTPI, signs. There is a lot of stuff on technology and improving passenger journeys. Deputy Ellis is well aware we do not have the funding because Sinn Féin's budget document did not allocate extra funding to this area. We are making do with what we have. While I would love to see more, we are trying to spend it wisely to get more passengers on the rail and bus services we are protecting.
Will the additional €50 million for regional and local roads go towards fixing potholes or is it just the maintenance of those roads?
It is mainly to protect the investment through restoration and maintenance. That is the best value for money we can deliver with this funding. There has been a serious investment in roads. We had two hard winters and with every hard winter the impact is increasing all the time. We have asked local authorities to prioritise the roads they feel have suffered the biggest impact because of the severe weather, and that is what we expect them to do.
From where was the €50 million identified, because it is a substantial amount?
From a departmental point of view, we would have taken more but, unfortunately, it was not available. We were quite happy that we got the allocation of €50 million. It was discussed at Cabinet and was prioritised as an area that we knew needed extra funding. The figure of €50 million came out of the total financial situation that was there at the time at which the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, was dealing with it. We were happy with the €50 million, which was a considerable amount of money to find.
I am reasonably familiar with what is going on in maritime transport safety so I will not bore the Minister of State with the questions I might normally ask about the increases. Has the Department considered empowering the Coast Guard to attempt to claim from the insurance companies associated with people who have been rescued? I do not refer to the individuals rescued on the River Shannon or off the west coast as happened last week when it provided a fantastic service.
Unbelievable.
Two Sikorsky aircraft were tasked to go 300 miles off the south coast recently. It was a very complicated expedition, involving landing on an oil rig to refuel, to rescue a passenger, who is not a citizen of the State, from a cruise ship.
When it comes to saving lives, the financial aspect is left to the background. The Minister of State is familiar with the fact that at present if the fire service from a local authority is called out to attend at a road accident, the insurance company of the person driving the car is billed. Many people travelling on cruise ships and trawlers already have the benefit of insurance in another country. I am not stating the question should be asked before the rescue takes place, but it certainly should be asked afterwards. I do not suggest this would make a major dent, but the cost of two aircraft travelling 300 miles south west of Ireland was certainly significant given the cost per hour of flying.
The amount for maritime transport and safety has increased considerably, by at least €30,000, and it is badly needed. A number of accidents have occurred off the coast and three fishermen drowned recently. The Minister has indicated he will make an announcement in July with regard to personal beacons which can be traced in the water. Has the cost of these beacons been factored in? It is probably a bit early yet.
The amount for administration has also increased substantially with regard to the Coast Guard. Is this with regard to the extra services being put in place along the coast, particularly off the islands on the west coast? Will the Minister of State give us information on these amounts?
During the week an incident occurred on Lough Derg. Maritime tourism and activities are becoming more popular and the country has opportunities to exploit them and maximise their benefits for the economy. This will place increased demand on rescue resources. Do we have a long-term plan which involves all of the stakeholders? Do we have a programme to develop this? It is great to see an increase in activities and the potential which exists and we should take advantage of it.
Are hoax calls to the Coast Guard helicopter a significant factor with regard to costs? Is it possible to identify those who make them?
I will deal with the Chairman's question first. It is something I have asked about myself. It is an issue and we will provide the Chairman with the exact figures of how much it costs. We all despise it. Not alone is there a cost impact, but there is also an alignment and co-ordination impact if a real issue arises somewhere else. Much of the time it is difficult to track down these people but if we can, they should be dealt with very severely in my opinion because they put other people's lives at risk.
Deputy Dooley and I come from opposite ends of the Shannon, where the serious rescue on Lough Derg took place last week. I live beside the difficult area in which it happened and saw from my house many people being rescued. The co-ordination of the various units was fantastic. It shows the value of the work these people do. I understand exactly the point made and it is something which raises its head. We must balance the pendulum and not disincentivise people from being rescued because they think there will be a financial cost. We must ensure safety is the number one issue. In 95% of cases a safety issue has arisen, but in 5% of cases somebody needed to be collected. If the latter figure increases, then from a cost point of view we must judge whether we need to put in place a charge. We monitor this from year to year. At present the answer is "No" because we do not want to disincentivise people from being rescued, but it is a valid question.
To answer Deputy Ellis, the high increase relates to the new search and rescue contract. The changes in the figure for administration also relate to this. Overall, from a departmental point of view, administration costs are decreasing.
I take on board Deputy Fleming's comments on maritime tourism.
Do committee members have questions on sports and recreation services?
If advertising by alcohol companies is banned, will it put added pressure on the Department to meet the shortfall? Various sports bodies receive substantial funding for programmes they have put in place. Has this been considered with regard to the Estimates?
This is a very topical issue and I thank Deputy Ellis for raising it. The Department is working with various sporting organisations. If a ban were put in place, it would be a challenge to replace the amount. This decision will be made at Cabinet in the near future. The health and social benefits must also be taken into account.
Will the Minister of State rob the Department of Health?
We must consider the health and social benefits with regard to linking alcohol and sport. From the purely balance sheet point of view we are here to discuss today, the obvious answer is that if the funding were withdrawn, of course it would be difficult to replace it. From an overall Government point of view, this must be balanced with the health and social aspects which are also extremely important.
Will the Minister of State comment on the fact that the amount for administration and pay seems to have increased from €1.621 million to €1.74 million?
The reason for this increase is because the staff in Coaching Ireland have been incorporated into the budget.
I thank the Minister of State. Do committee members have comments or questions on tourism?
I would like to comment on the marketing of our tourism product, in particular to the British and German markets. During the past four years, the number of British tourists visiting Ireland has reduced by one million. Also, we appear to be getting only 1% of the German market vis-à-vis the almost 26 million of the German population who holiday abroad every year. Previously, Ireland was actively sold abroad by way of exhibition of our excellent tourism product at holiday fairs and so on. At one time it was the policy of Bord Fáilte to target English cities, particularly those closest to the airports. The same applied in regard to the Continent. There is too much emphasis these days on the Internet and no personal engagement with German and British consumers. We are probably neglecting this market. Through proper engagement we could significantly increase our market share.
I must first declare that I was formerly a manager of Bord Fáilte-Fáilte Ireland. I worked in that agency for almost eight and a half years. I take on board what the Deputy had to say. The US market is looking good, as is the mainland European market. We expect to meet The Gathering target of over 300,000 visitors and €170 million in revenue. As a Government, we have been very proactive in this area. The changes in VAT have delivered thousands of jobs across the country.
On the Deputy's specific comment in relation to Germany, which is an important market for Ireland, German tourists are product orientated, be that fishing, walking, cycling and so on. We concentrate a great deal on those activities. From a competition point of view, Germany is in the centre of Europe, which means its tourists can travel by car or rail to many destinations. Tourism Ireland, supported by Fáilte Ireland, is currently engaged in a great deal of work in the German market. I disagree with the Deputy that there is an over-concentration on the online marketing of tourism. Statistics indicate that from a tourism planning point of view people are doing more online. I believe we need to put more rather than less resources into this space. From a decision-making point of view, it is the ultimate tool. The websites discoverireland.ie and discoverireland.com , which I registered in a previous life, are the real marketing tools for this country. We need to promote them as much as we can.
I have one question for the Minister of State on subhead F - administration, which records an increase of 79% in the travel and subsistence budget for 2013. The relevant figure in this regard for 2012 was €1.069 million. This has been increased to €1.911 million for 2013. Perhaps the Minister of State would comment on this.
The increase relates in the main to our hosting of the Presidency of the European Council. I expect the allocation for this area to return to previous percentages.
I thank the Minister of State and his officials for assisting the sub-committee in its consideration of the Revised Estimates.