Jimmy Deenihan
Question:29 Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the position regarding the acquisition of a new location for the Abbey Theatre; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15396/04]
View answerAbbey Theatre.
Questions (9)
Oral answers (5 contributions)
The Government, on 29 January 2003, authorised me to invite expressions of interest by way of public invitation from the private sector in participating, on the basis of a PPP, in the capital redevelopment of the Abbey Theatre in and/or around the vicinity of the site of the existing theatre. My Department, with the Department of Finance and the Office of Public Works, has been working to implement that decision.
In order to be compatible with the functions, profile and status of a national theatre and to address the acknowledged defects with the existing theatre a re-developed premises requires: to be a signature development, representative of a national theatre in the 21st century; to be in an appropriate civic setting and form part of the overall urban regeneration represented by the O'Connell Street integrated area plan and the north-east inner city plan; three significant enlarged auditoria, namely, the Abbey, the Peacock and a third multi-purpose space; a dedicated education and outreach facility; a publicly accessible archive; a restaurant-bar; improved public areas; disabled access for audiences and artists; and best practice theatre production facilities.
For the Abbey and the Peacock to function efficiently, effectively and without compromise, their basic functioning must not depend on movement of goods and people by mechanical lift. In essence, this means that the stages of both the Abbey and Peacock theatres must be positioned at ground level. In addition, both theatres must have easy access, also at the same level, to the scenery store and the prop store. It is agreed between the management of the Abbey and the OPW that there is a requirement for a ground floor footprint that is considerably larger than now exists. For the theatre to remain in its existing location, it will, therefore, be necessary to acquire properties adjacent to the existing premises.
Indications are that such acquisition will prove very costly and problematic in respect of timescale. My Department and the OPW are carefully examining all of the issues now arising and I intend to present my conclusions to Government in the near future. My personal preference, in common with that of many other cities around the world, would be for the theatre to be re-developed at its exiting location but I cannot ignore the realities of price and design. I assure Deputy Deenihan of my determination to have decisions taken on the redevelopment of the Abbey Theatre in this its centenary year.
Will the Minister rule out of the equation, once and for all, the current site of the theatre? His reply seems to suggest it has not yet been fully ruled out, which is creating confusion.
In view of the fact that the High Court judgment in the case involving the Carlton cinema site, which was held two months ago, is imminent, is the Minister of the opinion that it would be opportune for the OPW, Dublin City Council and officials from his Department to consider the site to which I refer to see if it would meet the necessary criteria, particularly that relating to the fact that development would have to take place at ground floor level? Have discussions or consultations taken place between the people and bodies to which I refer? If so and if the judge rules in favour of Dublin City Council, does the Minister believe the Carlton cinema site is now the preferred option?
The current site has not yet been ruled out. We need further information but there is no doubt that a serious problem exists regarding the acquisition of properties. The Carlton cinema site offers one alternative. We have not yet examined that site. However, if the Office of Public Works reports a definite view to me, I will take a view on the matter. At this point it is too early to say. Indications are there are significant difficulties with the current site. There is no point in denying or hiding from that. I would be disposed towards the Carlton site or any other in the city centre which would provide a location for the theatre. It should be in the city centre if possible, as is the position for national theatres in other countries.
If the current site is unsuitable, the Carlton seems to be the only alternative if the new theatre is to be located in the city centre. As the centenary of the Abbey Theatre is on 27 December would it not be prudent to make an announcement by then to celebrate that event? To ensure a speedy decision, will the Minister request his Department to engage with the OPW and Dublin City Council and examine the Carlton site to see if it meets the criteria for suitability? When the judgment is publicised the site can then be deemed suitable or unsuitable and we will not have to go through the same scenario we are going through with the Abbey Theatre site over the past two years.
I am aware it is the centenary year of the Abbey Theatre and naturally because of that I am anxious to provide an answer to the problem faced by the theatre. I will do everything I can to come to an early conclusion.
Sports Capital Programme.
Questions (10, 11)
Brian O'Shea
Question:30 Mr. O’Shea asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism if he is considering establishing an independent body to monitor grant aid to sporting organisations awarded funds under the sports capital programme; his views on whether the criteria for allocating these funds needs to be reviewed in order to achieve an equitable spread of money to sporting organisations across the country; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15368/04]
View answerOral answers (12 contributions)
I have no plans to establish an independent body to monitor grant aid to sporting organisations allocated funding under my Department's sports capital programme. The current arrangements for administering the scheme which have been applied by successive Governments over many years have been extremely successful in ensuring the programme is responsive to local needs. It is entirely appropriate that the Minister for sport should be in a position to use this important instrument of sporting policy to achieve objectives such as supporting projects of particular local or regional significance or encouraging the development of minority sports. Over the six-year period 1999-2004, inclusive, €313.5 million has been allocated to over 4,000 projects. This massive investment in the creation of a local sporting infrastructure is now yielding benefits both in terms of local community developments and increased participation in sport. The scheme is administered in accordance with pre-determined eligibility criteria, all of which must be satisfied before projects may access funding allocated to them.
I remind the Deputy that as Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, I am directly accountable to Dáil Éireann for the operation of the sports capital programme. This accountability is ongoing and finds expression, for example, through parliamentary questions, Adjournment debates, Estimates debates and engagement with Dáil committees. This is a feature which would be notably absent were the administration of the sports capital programme to be made the responsibility of an independent board. Apart from the obvious issue of how one determines "independence", experience elsewhere has shown that decisions by independent boards do not always receive universal acceptance. Where a grant scheme attracts a level of applications well in excess of available funding as is the case with the sports capital programme, unsuccessful applicants will always experience an understandable sense of disappointment, whatever the decision-making process.
Given the massive investment of public funding in sports facilities since 1999, which apart from the sports capital programme also includes other significant national facilities and the local authority swimming pool programme, the Government committed in An Agreed Programme for Government to develop a strategic plan for the future provision of sports facilities. This plan will include a national audit of sports facilities and will also review the eligibility criteria for the sports capital programme. The current criteria were adopted following a review of the programme carried out in 1998.
I am satisfied the development of the long-term strategic plan, building on the advances made in recent years in the area of facility provision, will ensure continued good value for money, effective use of resources, an equitable distribution of available funding for a wide range of sports and the availability of high-quality, sustainable facilities for all levels and types of sport across the country.
Does the Minister agree the sports capital programme has operated as something of a slush fund? When Deputy McDaid was the Minister with responsibility for sport did the current Minister intervene to ask him to look favourably at the funding application of the Killorglin rowing club, which is in the Minister's constituency? Is it the case that the club had scored 63 points when the approval rate was 70 points and that funding followed the current Minister's intervention?
Does the Minister agree the Government made a decision recently whereby the funding from the Dormant Accounts Disbursement Board will no longer be disbursed by the independent board but by the Government? Is it now the case that where we have more than one slush fund operating a new one will come into operation soon?
I do not accept it is a slush fund. The current criteria which apply to lottery funding are much stricter than the criteria which applied, if any, when the Deputy's party was in office. There were no calls for a change in procedures then.
It is a matter of public record that I made representations on behalf of the Killorglin rowing club, by writing two letters to the then Minister with responsibility for sport, Deputy McDaid. My understanding of the position is that after the score was originally awarded, the Minister was informed the amount he would have available for distribution would be €20 million greater than he had anticipated at the time the score was awarded. To be quite honest and to the best of my knowledge, I did not know what score the project had been awarded. It is going back a few years now.
I did what any Deputy would do in the normal course of events, whether on the Government or Opposition benches. I made representations on behalf of my constituents. That is what I am elected to do and it is my constitutional function. If I did not make such representations, I would not be here this afternoon to reply to the Deputy.
I take the Minister's word for it that he did not know what points had been allocated to the particular project. However, has he subsequently learned that the score of 63 points, which was below approval level, was used to bring this grant to the club in Killorglin? Does he agree this is an argument in favour of having an independent board to disburse these funds?
I do not know the exact position with regard to the scores and to the best of my recollection I did not know then. I made representations in the same way every other Deputy makes them. Every day of the week I receive representations from Deputies on various projects.
None of the projects which is awarded provisional grant allocations under the sports capital programme can access any of the allocated funding unless it has demonstrated full compliance with the terms and conditions as communicated to it by the Department. These conditions include, compliance with public tendering processes, legal and tax clearance requirements and the submission of invoices in respect of completed work on the project. In other words, unless a project fulfils all of the criteria, it cannot qualify.
It is important that we have political accountability in the Dáil and that is what I am doing here. It is also important that Deputies are politically accountable to their constituents.
Paudge Connolly
Question:31 Mr. Connolly asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the level of grant aid allocated to applicants under the sports capital programme in County Monaghan and County Cavan on a yearly basis since 2000; the way this funding compares with the overall annual sports capital programme allocation in each year since 2000; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15395/04]
View answerThe national lottery funded sports capital programme allocates funding to sporting, voluntary and community organisations at local, regional and national level. The programme is advertised on an annual basis. In regard to the 2004 sports capital programme, I announced funding allocations, totalling €50.8 million, to 717 projects on 7 May last.
I set out in the following tabular form the specific data requested by the Deputy for the funding allocated for each year to counties Cavan and Monaghan from 2000 to 2004 and how this relates to the overall level of funding in those years.
The overall total of the allocations made in that period under the programme was €284.6 million. Of that amount, 64 projects located in County Cavan received grants totalling over €3.2 million or 1.14% of the total allocation. If the funding were allocated on a strict per capita basis only, the county would be entitled to 1.17% of the total allocation. Some 72 projects located in County Monaghan have been allocated over €3.8 million in the period in question or 1.35% of the overall total. Again, if the funding were allocated on a strict per capita basis only, Monaghan should receive 1.34% of the total allocation. On the basis of these figures, the level of funding received by the counties is very much in line with what might be expected.
Those projects which receive funding under the 2004 programme, which are located in areas covered by either of the Government's CLÁR or RAPID schemes for prioritising disadvantaged areas are in line for additional funding from the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, which administers those schemes. A statement will issue in due course from my colleague, the Minister at that Department, Deputy Ó Cuív, regarding top-up funding allocations under these programmes.
Of the projects which have received provisional grant allocations to date in 2004 in County Cavan, eight are located in either CLÁR or RAPID areas, while in County Monaghan, two projects are located in CLÁR areas.
I am satisfied that projects in counties Cavan and Monaghan have been treated fairly in the administration of the programme and I expect that the Deputy will agree with me that the funding provided has made a major difference to the range and quality of the sports facilities in counties Cavan and Monaghan since 1998.
|
Year |
Allocations to County Cavan |
Allocations to County Monaghan |
Overall Allocation |
|
€ |
€ |
€ |
|
|
2000 |
452,027 |
502,181 |
45,496,874 |
|
2001 |
591,698 |
615,823 |
56,179,561 |
|
2002 |
691,200 |
1,233,000 |
78,779,400 |
|
2003 |
580,000 |
485,000 |
53,352,500 |
|
2004 |
925,000 |
996,000 |
50,800,000 |
My question refers to the spread of grant aid allocations. People in counties Cavan and Monaghan are not receiving their fair share of grant aid. This is a frequent bone of contention. At times, the way some grants are allocated smacks of political patronage. I will refer to some allocations for 2003, but not to the most recent ones because they have been well bandied about. Three concerns in the south Kerry area received more grant aid than allocated to eight counties, namely, counties Cavan, Monaghan, Laois, Sligo, Carlow, Limerick, Longford and Westmeath. All I am seeking is that the people in my area get their fair share of grant aid allocations. Two clubs to which the Minister for Finance belongs were given more grant aid allocations than those given counties Cavan and Monaghan in 2003. There is an element of unfairness in such allocations.
I will refer to two clubs which submitted grant applications which are in difficulties.
The Deputy should put a question to the Minister.
Some 17 people have worked voluntarily on a scheme under the Ballybay Development Association and have provided interest-free loans. They have attracted participation from schools and universities from Northern Ireland. Its counterpart body in the North, the Wildlife, Fowl and Wetland Trust in Belfast will receive funding of £2 million sterling to help its development, yet the Ballybay Development Association, which cost €868,000 to establish, submitted an application for grant aid for €180,000 which is not forthcoming.
There is also a lakeshore heritage development in Concra Wood, the core activity of which is golf. That development has been refused funding on the grounds that golf is not one of those activities that attracts funding despite that in some local economies, especially a local economy such as Castleblayney, such recreational sport would attract the provision of additional bed and breakfast accommodation and tourists. Does the Minister agree that it would be beneficial to the economy for these types of clubs to gain from the sports capital grant?
In terms of Government aid, the Deputy should not focus on my Department in isolation. He should consider the entire spectrum of Government and he would note that there have been substantial transfers of resources to his constituency since 1997. That is a fact. For example, I travelled to Monaghan earlier this year to examine the swimming pool in Monaghan town and there is no question but that the people of Monaghan require a new swimming pool. I did everything I possibly could to advance the cause of the swimming pool, as everyone in County Monaghan knows. I sincerely hope that a new pool will be built there soon. That funding would be included under the swimming pool programme and not under the sports capital programme. Therefore, one cannot be selective in this regard.
It is also the case, and little can be done about this, that in many circumstances the people living in the county from where I come submit many applications for funding under the sports capital programme and often the proportion of applicants can be higher than the number in other counties. The percentage of funding awarded to counties Cavan and Monaghan was reflective of the population and other grants for other projects have been and will be sanctioned for those counties. The Deputy need have no concern about that.
Will the Minister consider allocating each constituency a sum of €1.2 million for such funding per annum? That would be a much fairer system of allocation, given that counties in the centre of the country cannot benefit from such tourist attractions from which coastal towns would benefit.
The difficulty that would arise in that regard is that criteria are laid down against which every project is benchmarked. Under the tourist development scheme in my Department, which is overseen by a committee, Killarney in my constituency is not included while the Deputy's constituency is included. Therefore, one cannot be selective and one must view this matter in an overall context.
National Conference Centre.
Questions (12)
Jimmy Deenihan
Question:32 Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the status of the proposed national convention centre; the expected timetable for delivery of this project; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15397/04]
View answerOral answers (5 contributions)
As the Deputy is aware, the Office of Public Works received four submissions for the provision of a national conference centre following its advertisement for expressions of interest on 11 November 2003. The closing date for the receipt of submissions was 21 January 2004.
Those submissions have undergone detailed evaluation by an assessment panel representative of my Department, the Office of Public Works and its advisers, the Department of Finance, Fáilte Ireland and the National Development Finance Agency. I understand that submission of the assessment panel's report to the chairman of the national conference centre steering group is imminent. A separate assessment panel has evaluated the site proposals that candidates were also asked to put forward. I am informed that as soon as that report has been finalised, both reports will be considered by the steering group with a view to deciding on the candidates to go forward to the next stage of the process.
In the meantime, I am informed that the Office of Public Works and its advisers continue to work on the preparation of the detailed documentation required before that next stage can be initiated. In addition, consultants have been engaged by the OPW to undertake a public sector benchmarking exercise, as required by the Department of Finance's interim guidelines for the provision of infrastructure and capital investments through public private partnerships. I am told that this is likely to take some weeks to complete.
The timeframe prepared following the Government's decision to secure the provision of a national conference centre, and which envisaged that a final decision from Government could be secured in the autumn, was an indicative timeframe based on the information and assumptions available at the time. The procurement process that was subsequently undertaken is, as one would expect for a project of this scale, necessarily complex. In addition to the procedural requirements of the PPP process, the development of the detailed design and contract documentation is demanding, with details requiring careful scrutiny and consideration.
As a result, I am now advised that it is unlikely that the procurement process will be sufficiently advanced to facilitate a Government decision in the autumn. While I hope to be in that position before the end of the year, I am, given the complexity of the process, reluctant to be categorical. My priority is to have this project brought to a conclusion at the earliest possible date. However, it is important that the relevant procedures and guidelines pertaining to the process are closely observed and that nothing is done that might jeopardise its successful conclusion.
I hope this project will not be long-fingered. The tone of the Minister's reply seems to indicate that the urgency associated with this project has abated. I am sure he is aware that Ireland is losing about €50 million every year because we do not have an international conference centre. Ireland is not even ranked among the leading conference destinations in Europe and Dublin is ranked only about twenty-fifth in that regard. When it comes to conferences, we are just not at the races. The debate on providing a national conference centre has been ongoing for approximately 15 years. Does the Minister agree that there is a need for urgency about the provision of such a centre? The Government's two main priorities in this area should be the national conference centre and the Abbey Theatre project, which I asked about in Question No. 29. The Minister, who is probably halfway through his term of office, should prioritise these projects. Will he assure the House and the tourism industry that there will be no further delays? Will a decision on the successful partner be taken before the end of the year?
The procurement of the national conference centre is a particularly complex and lengthy undertaking. While I hope to take the matter to the Cabinet for a decision later in the year, I cannot rule out the possibility that deliberations and negotiations will continue into next year. I assure Deputy Deenihan that I am fully committed to delivering the project at the earliest possible opportunity, subject to the acceptance of proposals.
It is true that conference business is being lost to Ireland. Fáilte Ireland estimates that approximately 120,000 people come to this country, mainly to Dublin, to participate in conferences each year. The construction of a dedicated conference centre would lead to an increase in the figure to at least 150,000. Many cities that have dedicated conference centres have been visited on many occasions by certain organisations that would like a change. We could expect a high level of business in the centre's first ten years of operations. It is immensely important that we provide a dedicated conference centre. I regard it as a priority.
I would like to make progress with the Abbey Theatre project this year so that those involved with the theatre can be told where they stand. We should also consider the development of a new national concert hall. I have said on a number of occasions that the current generation of Irish people is one of the most imaginative and creative generations there has been. None of that creativity or imagination has yet been given expression in our public architecture.
Is the Minister concerned by BUPA's recent decision, inspired by the smoking ban, not to bring an international conference to Dublin? Does the Minister believe that the ban will affect conferences in the future? Has Tourism Ireland offered any counter-arguments to allay the fears of people coming here who have similar concerns?
When the decision on the smoking ban was being made, I asked Tourism Ireland's officials throughout the world to report on the likely effect of the ban on tourism numbers. The response I received was the effect would be negligible. It was argued that the smoking ban would help to increase the number of visitors coming to the country from the United States. I understand that Norway followed Ireland by introducing a smoking ban today. A precedent has been set that will be followed in other countries, including countries that will be in competition with Ireland for conferences.
Tourism Promotion.
Questions (13)
Brian O'Shea
Question:33 Mr. O’Shea asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism his views on the fact that following the successful enlargement of the European Union, increased competition from eastern European states as tourist destinations will impact significantly on the Irish tourism market; his further views that having been thus far unable to develop fully a foothold in the continental European market, competition from eastern European countries will further prevent Ireland being marketed throughout Europe; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15394/04]
View answerOral answers (5 contributions)
I welcome the enlargement of the European Union, which was celebrated so warmly by people throughout this island on 1 May last. I consider it as a great opportunity and not as a threat. I disagree with the Deputy's assertion that we have been unable "to develop fully a foothold in the continental European market" so far. We had 6.3 million visitors to our shores last year, of which 1.5 million or almost one in four came from continental Europe. We continue to see strong growth from Latin countries in particular. Visits from continental Europe were at record levels in 2003. Central Statistics Office figures for the first two months of 2004 indicate a growth of 11.5% in visitor numbers from continental Europe over the same period in 2003.
I accept that the delivery of value for money is a common concern across all markets. If there is a specific inhibiting factor in developing our mainland European business, however, it does not relate to marketing or the fashionability of Ireland. It is more likely to relate to access, in my view, as there is still quite a way to go in developing additional routes from mainland Europe to Ireland.
The international tourism market is fiercely competitive and will become more so. I do not doubt that the new EU member states will add to the intensity of that competition, but they have been competitors for some years. Ireland has had to work in tough and competitive tourism markets for decades. It has had to compete with the strongest players and to pitch for business against long-established destinations with natural climatic advantages or cosmopolitan architectural heritage that may have outshone those of Ireland. This country has taken on this competition and succeeded in selling its unique proposition. Tourism Ireland, which is a professional and well-organised marketing organisation, is a great North-South success story. It is delivering for both parts of the island. The marketing of Irish tourism is recognised internationally as a highly sophisticated and successful operation.
If we maintain the key pillars of the Irish tourism proposition, deliver value for money and continue our high-quality marketing, we will not have much to fear from our new EU partners. We may have much to gain over time, however, given that the accession countries represent a population increase to the EU of nearly 20%. The outbound travel spending of the ten new member states came to €8.2 billion last year, suggesting that a market is available for Irish tourism. Ireland has experienced steady growth in visitor numbers from eastern Europe over the past four years, albeit from a low base, most notably from Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary.
Ireland has not developed the foothold it needs in continental Europe if it is to get its full share of the tourism business from that region. The Minister's figures have indicated that fewer than 25% of tourists who visit this country come from continental Europe. It is obvious that if the new member states have great capacity in their tourism product, they will develop it with the assistance of the EU. They will improve access and other tourist facilities. Is it not the case that Ireland's tourism industry faces a monumental problem? There is a perception that one will not get value for money here by comparison with low-cost countries, more of which will market their products. Even if such countries do not operate in opposition to Ireland per se, we will compete for the same sort of market.
Ireland's share of the continental European market has not been as high as one might have wished. That 1.5 million people from that region came to this country last year shows that we are making significant gains. It is quite encouraging that we are making gains in markets as diverse as Germany, Italy, France and Spain. The tourism authorities are engaging in an aggressive marketing campaign in Germany, a country which is often seen as the litmus test of the continental market. We will face a greater degree of competition from the new accession states than we have before. Costs are lower in many such countries than they are here, as Deputy O'Shea said, and the holiday experience is cheaper as a result. It is important to point out, however, that Ireland has never been a low-cost mass destination and never will be. The opposite is the case. Ireland has successfully been a holiday destination for discerning visitors for many decades.
New opportunities will emerge for Ireland to gain a greater tourism market share as the accession states progress within the European Union and as their economies improve. We will closely monitor all markets to ensure that we increase the opportunity to gain market share. It is encouraging that 2003 was a peak year for tourism, outstripping the previous record year of 2000. I am confident that 2004 will be the best year Irish tourism has had.
The Minister has agreed the entry of ten new countries into the European Union will put some pressure on the market but have his Department or its agencies taken any specific marketing measures to cope with the new level of tourism product now available within the EU?
Yes. The amount of funding that has been made available for marketing Ireland abroad is at its highest ever level. We are spending record sums of money in all our main markets, as well as in other markets that do not offer as many visitors as we would like. The marketing is ongoing and between the public and private sectors it is quite considerable. I am satisfied, as is Tourism Ireland, that the available resources are sufficient to take on all comers. Naturally, we would all like to have more resources but that question is for another day. As of now, however, Tourism Ireland is in a position to take on all comers and is doing so extremely successfully.
The World Tourism Organisation estimated the number of tourists fell by 1.2% last year and Europe's performance was, at best, flat. Ireland, however, has growth rates in the order of 5% so it is clear the number of visitors coming here is increasing in a marketplace that is more competitive than ever before. Tourism Ireland deserves great credit for that good news.