Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 6 Mar 1952

Vol. 129 No. 10

Tourist Traffic Bill, 1951—Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Ní maith liom moill a chur ar an díospóireacht seo mar tá mé den bharúil gur dhúirt na Teachtaí a tháinig romham chóir a bheith achan rud fán Bhille.

Bille tairbheach, úsáideach é seo a chuideos go mór leis an dara tionscal is mó san tír seo agus mar gheall ar sin cuirim fáilte mhór roimhe. Tá lúcháir orainn fáilte a chur roimh cuairteóirí chun na tíre seo nó tá achan rud againn le iad a mhealladh —radharcanna, áilleacht agus gach míníneacht eile a chuidíos leo laethe saoire pleisiúrtha a chaitheamh in ár mease. Sílim féin nach bhfuil an tionscal seo ach ina thús ach leis an chuidiú a bhéarfas an Bille seo do lucht óstais agus aroile, ba cheart go dtiocfadh leathnú mór air agus go rachadh sé chun sochair go mór don tír.

Tá tionscal na gcuairteóirí ag leathnú go mór sa Ghaeltacht ar na blianta deireannacha seo agus tá súil agam go ndeanfaidh Fógra Fáilte iarracht speisialta leis an tionscal a leathnú sna háiteacha sin agus sa dóigh sin cuidiú le muintir na Gaeltachta a slí beatha a bhaint amach sa bhaile agus deireadh a chur leis an imirce.

Gheobhaidh cuairteóirí rudaí sa Ghaeltacht nach féidir a bhualadh amach—áilleacht sléibhe, farraige agus aibhneacha, saol Gaelach agus teanga ar dtíre á labhairt ag daoine fiala flaithiula.

D'fhéadfadh an tionscal seo an Ghaeltacht a shábháil, saol na ndaoine ansin a dhéanamh níos sócúlaí agus ceist na himirce a socrú—rud a dheineann an oiread sin dochar don Ghaeltacht agus do na ceantair cúnga.

Tá áiteacha eile in Eirinn ábalta na cuairteóirí a mhealladh ach saol úr do na cuairteóirí seal sa Ghaeltacht agus tá súil agam mar sin de go dtabharfaidh Fógra Fáilte gach cuidiú agus uchtach do lucht na Gaeltachta—chan mar gníomh carthannachta, ach mar gheall ar an tionscal é fhéin.

Mr. O'Higgins

This Bill is rather like the curate's egg—it is good in spots. I do not want to be critical in any way with regard to the broad purpose behind the Bill. The policy contained in the Bill is common to both sides of the House and the Bill itself, in its broad programme and the policy which it contains, was already drafted and ready when the present Minister found himself in office. Leaving aside the good parts of the Bill, it is undoubtedly true that the present Minister, in the manner in which he interfered with the Bill as framed by his predecessor, has done harm to the idea behind the Bill and the purpose it sought to achieve.

There are many small things about the Bill which I would be critical of. First, I cannot see the sense in changing the name of the Irish Tourist Board. The board has undoubtedly in the last three or four years done excellent work for the tourist industry. It has got away from the situation in which the industry was at the end of 1947 and the beginning of 1948 when it was cluttered up with enterprises such as luxury hotels and things of that kind which were quite out of keeping with the idea of the tourist industry. In the last three or four years the board has achieved considerable results so far as tourism is concerned and has enabled the Minister to disclose to the House in recent weeks the very high value of tourism in hard cash to the people of the country.

I do not know whether any case has been made for changing the name to An Bord Fáilte. It cannot be suggested that the change to an Irish name assists the saving of the language. I do not know the purpose behind the change because the Irish Tourist Board is intended to deal with tourists. I take it that we are not going to endeavour to teach tourists the Irish language. After all, we should realise that the Irish Tourist Board in recent years is known in England, on the Continent and in America and tourists who want to come back here, or want to encourage friends to come here, naturally will make inquiries or put their friends in touch with the board they know as the Irish Tourist Board. Changing the name does no good and may do harm, by causing confusion in England, on the Continent and in America with regard to the proper source from which to make inquiries in connection with visits here. That is only a small matter, but it is one of the criticisms I want to make with regard to the changes in the Bill.

The main criticism that we level at the Bill is the further lack of co-ordination which will undoubtedly be caused by Part V of the Bill, which is the political part of the Bill. In this country we have already dealing with tourism the Irish Tourist Board and the Irish Tourist Association. I will not endeavour to suggest what via media should be found to co-ordinate those two bodies. It does seem clear, however, that tourism may become the shuttlecock between these two organisations, and that certainly did appear to be the view of those from abroad interested in tourism in recent months.

The new board, Fógra Fáilte, as it is proposed to be called under this Bill, is a new incubus put on the tourist industry by the Tánaiste, and I regret to say that appears to me to be evidence of political cowardice on the part of the Minister. He has not been prepared to shape up to the decision which should have been taken of coordinating the tourist industry under one board, a board that would be responsible for the control of tourism, responsible for financing the different schemes envisaged in this Bill, responsible for publicity abroad and for the arrangements for visitors coming here, and responsible for all the facets of the industry itself. That should have been the proposal contained in this Bill. Instead of that, we get a Bill which, by adding a third body, makes confusion worse and spreads out the responsibilities amongst three bodies.

I see that one of the responsibilities of Fógra Fáilte will be to engage in advertising, to endeavour to make known abroad the tourist attractions of this country. That, of course, is a necessary thing that must be done to aid tourism here, but that work is also being done at the moment by one of these other bodies, by the Irish Tourist Association. It does seem strange that no effort was made by the Minister, when framing this Bill, to co-ordinate those publicity activities under one authority. The failure to do that mars and weakens this Bill, and it makes the tourist industry much weaker by reason of the addition of this new board.

Now, I would have thought that when a Bill of this nature was being introduced by the Minister, with our experience in recent years of tourism and our assessment of its value to the country, some effort would have been made to co-ordinate the activities of the different bodies, and to assess in a realistic way the values of this country to tourists. I do not want to refer again to different matters which have been dealt with by other Deputies such as the many attractions of this country, its scenic values and matters of that sort. These are all well known. But I would like to have seen the single authority that should have been in charge of tourism here in some way coordinating or at least having the power to act in relation to fisheries, shooting and other sports of that kind. I would like to have seen that authority armed with some responsibility for the protection and maintenance of the ordinary inland fisheries of the country. Despite the considerable work that has been done in recent years by the Department of Agriculture, there is no doubt that much remains to be done, from the tourist point of view, along all our rivers and lakes, North and West. If there was the same body responsible for fisheries and also responsible for tourism, I would like to have seen that single authority looking after that facet of tourism as part of its duties.

I think that such an authority could also do much in relation to the preservation of the scenic attractions of the country. I do not know whether the board, whether it be called the Tourist Board or An Bord Fáilte, will work in harmony and co-operation with the county councils. Certainly, that co-operation was not there in the past. If there had been, one would not see, as one can see now when driving from Dublin to Wicklow, the fine Glen of the Downs marred by a stone quarry, destroying one of the finest pieces of scenery we have within 25 miles of Dublin. Things like that should not happen, and they would not happen if there was proper co-operation between the tourist authority and local bodies. I just mention those matters in relation to the policy associated with or contained in the Bill.

My main objection to the Bill is its lack of co-ordination caused by this additional body and the confusion that it undoubtedly will create in the industry itself. I do not see any justification for it. I do not know whether it means anything, but last Sunday's issue of the Sunday Press, in referring to the Tourist Bill, had this very large heading: “New Tourist Bill will mean more jobs.” That may be so. Undoubtedly, it does appear that under this Bill the Minister will have power to make new appointments and, undoubtedly, the power to provide new jobs under the new board. I think it is a pity that that should be done, as I conceive it, at the expense of the industry itself.

This Bill, of course, amends the Tourist Act of 1939. It contains what I think to be very proper provisions in relation to the licensing of hotels, the grading of hotels, the provision of necessary facilities for holidays camps and for other units of the tourist industry. Broadly speaking, I have no objection to the facilities provided in the Bill but there are certain provisions in Part IV about which I want to say a word or two. Provision is made under Section 29 for the cancellation of the registration of hotels registered under the Acts of 1939 onwards and under this Bill. The provision in sub-section (1) of Section 29 is somewhat similar to that contained in the 1939 Act, but it goes a little bit further. Power is given to the board under this section to cancel registration at any time if a hotelier overcharges. Under Section 30 of the earlier Act such cancellation could only take place at the end of the season or the end of the year when the matter would be dealt with by the board. Under this Bill it can take place at any time. The penalty can be imposed for overcharging that may not have been deliberate, that may have been accidental and due to causes outside the control of the hotelier. That is a very extreme and wide power. I admit there is sense behind it because from the point of view of the industry itself no one could tolerate hoteliers carrying on here, advertising minimum charges and then proceeding to overcharge visitors. There is no doubt that would be bad policy.

I think, however, that the power under the Bill is greater than is absolutely necessary to deal with that kind of offence. First of all, it can only be an offence if the hotelier deliberately overcharges. There might be circumstances in which an overcharge might take place without the knowledge of the person running the hotel. Since the cancellation of registration means for the hotelier an end of his business the penalty is altogether too severe. Any hotel nowadays requires a capital investment out of the reach of most people. Cancellation of registration means that the hotelier is out of business. That penalty is altogether disproportionate to the offence, even if it were an intentional one. Since the consequences of the utilisation of the powers in that section are so extreme I would urge on the Minister that some provision should be made for a hearing by the board of the objection made against the hotelier and some opportunity should be given to him to state his case and make any answer he may have.

Under the section as it stands the hotelier will have no opportunity of answering the complaint made against him, even though the overcharging may have been quite unintentional. Should the board consider it proper to cancel his registration he is vouchsafed no opportunity under the Bill of answering the charge brought against him. Such an opportunity should be given to him. Every publican has the right under the licensing laws to have his case heard. I think that is the only other trade that is controlled by statute in the same way as we are now beginning to control hotels in relation to tourism. Hoteliers should have the same right as every publican has of hearing the evidence against him with the right of appeal to the Circuit Court in case of an adverse decision. I would appeal to the Minister, in view of the serious consequences of cancellation, to consider favourably at a later stage amendments giving to the owner of an hotel the ordinary right to have the charges made against him heard in a court of law with the right of appeal therefrom.

Part VI of the Act contains the new icensing provisions. I think they are very necessary. Because of the licensing Act of 1902 and certain extreme views expressed from time to time both on the bench and off the bench we are inclined to regard any interference with the licensing trade as something that must be shunned. That is a conservative attitude that we should not adopt. At the same time, while the Minister very properly makes provision for the licensing of hotels with 20 bedrooms and upwards, it should be made clear that any member of the public, irrespective of whether or not he is a crank, shall have the right to object when an application is made for a new licence. The Minister may say that right is there. Under the provisions of Section 38 of this Bill I am not absolutely convinced that it is open to a person who bona fide feels a licence should not be granted to go into the Circuit Court and object when the application is made. The section does not specifically say that can be done. I think the point should be considered.

Again, in relation to licensing, Section 39 contains a very proper provision aimed at ensuring that newly licensed hotels under this measure will not become mere drinking places. It provides that the yearly renewal of the licence shall not be granted unless the hotel gets a certificate under the Finance Acts stating that not more than one-third of the turnover is attributable to the licensed trade. That is a good provision. It ensures that the hotelier will not become careless in relation to the standard of his hotel merely because he has a valuable licence and a good turnover from his bar.

I cannot understand why that provision does not also apply in relation to holiday camps. In Chapter III provision is made for the granting of licences to holiday camps. There is no provision whereby the proprietor of such a camp shall lose his licence unless he can show that his bar trade does not exceed a certain equitable proportion of the total turnover from his camp. Whatever ill-effects may come from turning a newly licensed hotel into a sort of road house where people will drink during all legitimate hours, and outside of them, the situation will be far worse if that is permitted to take place in a holiday camp. Unless there is some good reason for not including it, I would urge upon the Minister the desirability of inserting a similar section in Chapter III.

Applications for licences for holiday camps under this Bill should also permit objections from the public on grounds additional to those contained in the chapter as it stands. Under the Bill as it stands any member of the public may object to the licensing of a holiday camp on the grounds of the character of the applicant, the unfitness of the premises and the manner in which the holiday camp is conducted. We know that at present there are only three holiday camps in the country. Two of them are already licensed and one of them it was sought to license in the last Dáil but the majority decided against it. Obviously that Private Members' Bill is now incorporated in this Tourist Bill and the purpose is to license what is known as Butlin's Camp. That is all right and I am certainly not objecting to it but we should not forget that many more holiday camps may grow up in the country.

It may be that with the restrictions of a financial kind applicable to the Continent—no matter how short or how long they may last—more holiday camps may start in this country. I think that anyone who is against the commencement of a holiday camp in his own locality should be entitled to object not merely on the grounds of the character of the applicant or the kind of premises but also on the grounds associated with the locality in which the camp is sought to be established. I think that that is a very legitimate ground of objection to the commencement of a holiday camp and I should like to see that power of objection incorporated in the Bill.

That represents the few matters that I wanted to refer to with regard to the contents of the Bill. Generally speaking, as I have said, the Bill is a welcome one. The portions to which we object are the portions which were introduced by the present Minister himself, the additional board and so on. I think those have marred and spoiled the Bill. I think they will cause confusion and lack of co-ordination in the industry itself. I would strongly suggest to the Minister that he should consider, between now and the next stage of this Bill, deleting any provision in relation to a new publicity board and give that power and that responsibility to the Irish Tourist Board. If he does that he will have gone a long way towards putting the tourist industry on a firmer footing.

Along with the majority of the Deputies of this House, I welcome this Bill, particularly because of the financial clauses embodied in the Bill intended to advance tourism by way of making grants, in one instance, to approved organisations for the purpose of improving the amenities, which will be a further inducement to tourists who visit our country. There is also provision made whereby hoteliers can receive financial aid by way of loans to improve their premises, and to provide certain household amenities which are so necessary at the present day to encourage people to visit our country and return to it again. This also applies to our own people who spend their holidays in different parts of the country.

Exception has been taken by a number of Deputies on the opposite benches to the establishment of this board known as Fógra Fáilte. I am not well versed in tourism, but I know that the Irish Tourist Association has been in existence for quite a number of years now. It has played a very important part in making known the advantages, pleasures, etc., which tourists would derive from a visit to this country. The Tourist Board, which will now be known as An Bord Fáilte, had a similar objective, but its work, to my mind, was of a different nature. The type of work for which An Bord Fáilte will be responsible so far as the tourist industry is concerned, is the type of work which will need a body such as An Bord Fáilte to deal purely and solely with.

The work visualised for Fógra Fáilte will be work of a different type from the work which An Bord Fáilte is carrying out, inasmuch as it will be a continuation, on a bigger scale, of the work carried out by the Irish Tourist Association. That board will comprise members from An Bord Fáilte and individuals from the Tourist Association. I think that there is nothing seriously wrong with that and I do not see why there should be any objection from the Opposition except that they see in it, as they put it more or less blandly, an opportunity whereby the Minister will provide jobs for certain individuals. I do not propose to go into that as I am sure the Minister will be quite capable of dealing with any such comments as were made in that direction.

We have in every area a town which can be used as a sort of headquarters or focal point from the point of view of tourism. Provided the people from such a town as I have in mind are prepared to form an organisation and get the approval of the Minister, I think that the financial provisions in this Bill will be a great help towards utilising that town as a headquarters or a focal point for tourism in that particular area.

When I speak in that strain I have in mind a town in my own constituency, namely Arklow, which, in my opinion, is an ideal tourist centre. It is ideally situated, being a seaside resort, and, as well, it is quite close to the scenic beauty spots of County Wicklow, referred to sometimes as the Garden of Ireland. The only difficulty that operates against the tourist traffic there is the difficulty of transport in one form or another. Tourists who patronise the town of Arklow could also take advantage of the fact that they are convenient to the beauty spots of County Wicklow, and arrange to visit such spots during their stay, except for the absence of transport. The tourists who normally come to the town of Arklow are principally the working-class—white-collar workers and other classes of workers. These are people who have budgeted a certain amount for their holiday, and when they visit places such as Arklow they like to find there a cheap transport service to take them to different places surrounding the town. Arklow has been a tourist centre for years, but I have been told that the tourists themselves have always complained of the lack of transport facilities.

The fact that Arklow is situated by the sea is in itself a great amenity, but tourists would like also to be provided with facilities whereby they could see beauty spots of County Wicklow and whereby they could visit, in addition, the seaside resorts situated in adjoining counties which are only a few miles distant from the town. Attempts have been made to get Córas Iompair Éireann to operate a bus service there for the purpose of carrying out a series of tours to the beauty spots of County Wicklow two or three times a week. For some reason or other, probably because it would prove uneconomic, Córas Iompair Éireann were not prepared to give the necessary facilities. A local enterprise which was prepared to set up a service along those lines did not succeed in securing the necessary licences whereby they could operate. I hope that, as a result of this Bill, the tourists who visit the town of Arklow will be provided with facilities to enable them to enjoy the scenic beauties of County Wicklow as a whole. They should be provided with this amenity in addition to the amenities they have already in Arklow.

References have been made to our inland fishing industry. But for the fact that the River Avoca is polluted by the Avoca mines, Arklow would be, to my mind, out on its own as a tourist centre. The River Avoca would be an ideal river for fishing, but unfortunately, due to the fact that the waters of the river are poisoned by drainage from the Avoca mines, salmon and other types of fish cannot exist in them for any length of time. I believe that an attempt was made some years ago to try to solve the problem of the pollution of this river and I believe also, from what I am led to understand, that those who were interested were hopeful of a solution. However, since then nothing has transpired. No attempts have been made to try to counteract the pollution, but perhaps An Bord Fáilte will keep the Avoca River in mind and at least make a survey to see what possible chances there are of having this pollution rectified. Where the River Avoca enters the harbour at Arklow there is a big stretch of the river's bed where the water is very shallow. Sand and gravel have accumulated there. If the river were cleaned and deepened at that point, a further amenity might be evolved allowing pleasure boats to travel from the town of Arklow as far as Woodenbridge and even close to Avoca.

There are several propositions that, were they put into operation, would add greatly to the amenities for tourism in Arklow. There is a very enthusiastic tourist development board in existence. They have already, I understand, put up schemes, some of which I have referred to, and I hope that under this Bill An Bord Fáilte will not alone give full consideration to the schemes put forward but that something will eventually evolve from the board that will meet the difficulties that obtain for tourism at the present time in the town of Arklow. In that way, Arklow could be made a tourist centre of which not alone the people of Arklow but An Bord Fáilte, the Minister and all connected with tourism in this country can be proud.

I want to join with the other Deputies who have spoken in this House in welcoming this Bill. I believe that this Bill will bring certain benefits to the tourist industry in this country and, accordingly, it is in the national interest. This Bill has been debated in detail and I do not propose to go into minor matters at this stage but to refer to a few points that might be helpful.

First of all, I would like to refer to something that has already been mentioned and that is the conditions that prevail in Dún Laoghaire and to join with the other Deputies who have spoken in criticism of the way that things are being done there. Further I would like to draw attention to the conditions that prevail so far as Córas Iompair Éireann services are concerned not only in Dublin but throughout the whole country. I feel that, as other Deputies have said, there is room for vast improvement to say the least of it. In any other country in the world to-day I feel certain that the out-dated methods of handling passenger traffic do not exist in the same manner as they exist in this country. When you take into account that the majority of the people that come to Ireland are dependent on our public transport system, it is of vital importance that we should strive for greater efficiency and speed up our services generally. Coming along from time to time from the West of Ireland to Dublin one finds that one is held up at level crossings for ten or 15 minutes waiting for a train to pass. Even when the train passes through you notice that some very easy-going official of Córas Iompair Éireann walks casually out a few minutes afterwards and opens the gate. I have often seen ambulances held up for a considerable period; apart from that the ordinary individual may be on urgent and important business and with a little better organisation these delays could be eliminated.

Any person who discusses these matters with tourists who come into this country will hear from them a lot of criticism regarding our transport system. Therefore, I respectfully suggest to the Minister that he should do something about that and so improve conditions for the tourist.

It is generally recognised throughout the length and breadth of this country that the tourist industry has great possibilities. It is also recognised that the principal reason why this industry has grown to such wonderful proportions in recent years is that outside our shores conditions are not as good as they are here in the matter of food. Tourists are attracted here by reason of the fact that our food is much better and much superior to the food in foreign countries.

There is no denying the fact that the food being served in our hotels is superior to the food served in any other part of the world. With regard to the cooking side of it, I would like to say this, that it is often my experience, and I am sure the experience of many others, that food which is in itself quite good is spoiled either in the cooking or in the handling. I would like to impress on the Minister, therefore, the advisability of making available facilities for the training of hotel staffs in domestic economy schools. That point cannot be overstressed. In many instances good food is spoiled because inexperienced people are handling it. When you consider, as I say, that we have really the best food in the world, it is a pity that that should be the case.

I welcome this Bill for another very important reason. It gives great employment within the country and, in most cases, well-paid employment. When it is considered that by increasing the tourist traffic generally, considerably higher numbers can be employed than are being employed at present, it will be realised that this industry is a very important factor in our economy.

If we want to attract tourists we must bear in mind the old rule that we should treat others as we would like to be treated ourselves. If we remember that and put it into practice, there is no doubt that in the time that lies ahead we will definitely attract many more tourists than we have succeeded in attracting in the past. It is regrettable that many proprietors of hotels see fit to treat their guests in the manner in which they do. I am not speaking disparagingly of all hotel proprietors, but there is room for a lot of criticism of the way in which some of them treat their guests.

In the matter of overcharging, in the matter of cramming four or five beds into a small room and in some cases having people lying around the floor while charging full hotel fees, I think there is a good deal of ground for complaint and that such conduct is really a shame. Many people of the get-rich-quick type have gone into the hotel business in this country in recent years, and it is most unfortunate that they got in. The class of hotel that some years ago was sold for £4,000 or £5,000 changed hands again for £10,000 or £15,000 a few years later when some foreigner arrived who had money to put up for it. That type of gentleman coming into this country is not worried about the tourist industry, of course; he is worried about getting back his £10,000 or £15,000 and, if possible, another £10,000 or £15,000 along with it in the shortest possible space of time. These people are not very scrupulous about their charges but there should be some means of checkup on such overcharging and wrong dealing.

I have been coming to the City of Dublin for a number of years now and quite frequently I have had the experience of speaking both to some of our own people and people who have come across channel to this country and they were very loud in their complaints and in their criticisms of some of our hotels in the matter of charges. Mind you, the majority of people who come here from England, America and other countries do not really belong to the wealthy class. They are people who perhaps emigrated from this country ten, 15 or 20 years ago and, through hard work, they succeeded in saving, over a long period of years, sufficient money to enable them to take a holiday in their native land for a short term. It must, and should, be taken into consideration that during dark and evil days many of these Irish boys and girls, who form the bulk of our tourist traffic, contributed generously to the upkeep of their parents here and of other members of their family who were not free to emigrate. They have made a very generous contribution towards the well-being of this country and it is really regrettable that after all that, when they come back here after ten, 15 or 20 years or in some cases perhaps 40 years, they should be treated in such a way. As I have pointed out these people supply the bulk of our tourist traffic.

It is a pity, to my mind, that we would not concentrate more on encouraging tourists to visit places like the West of Ireland, and particularly my native County of Mayo, where there is an abundance of wonderful scenery —mountains, lakes, rivers, sea, and beautiful churches and shrines such as Croagh Patrick and Knock, and other places to which thousands of people from the United States of America, and in fact from all over the world, come to visit. These places are all well worth seeing, and well worth visiting, particularly from the spiritual point of view. If the Minister could encourage tourists to get out of the City of Dublin and to go into the country districts, I believe that in the first place the tourist would be far better satisfied for the reason that he would find cheaper hotel accommodation. He would find less congestion of traffic and more hospitality in western areas than here in the City of Dublin. The average person who has spent years and years in cities like London, New York and Chicago would experience a refreshing change in these rural districts but, while you have centralised in the City of Dublin the offices of Fógra Fáilte, it is fairly reasonable to assume that the people in these offices will encourage tourists to stay in the vicinity of Dublin, to make Dublin bigger than it is, and thereby to impoverish the rural areas still more.

I have often pointed out in this House that there is a considerable amount of emigration from the West of Ireland which is still going on. This tourist industry if properly developed would lead to a substantial reduction in my opinion in the number of emigrants who are forced to leave this country. I should like to impress upon the Minister that we in the West of Ireland feel that we have something special to offer tourists and I hope that so far as lies in the power of the Minister, under the new organisation that he is setting up under this Bill, he will encourage tourists to go to the West to enjoy the wonderful scenery and the many beautiful views we have to show tourists there. In return, if this organisation tries to encourage people to come to us, the Minister can rest assured that the same old Irish hospitality which has been always a characteristic of the West, still prevails there and that the tourist will find that, unlike the treatment meted out to him here in the city, he will not be overcharged and that every facility in the way of sport and enjoyment will be available to him. I know I can give that assurance for the part of the country I represent. In conclusion, I should like to say, having travelled the length and breadth of this country and having stayed in hundreds of hotels, that nowhere throughout the length and breadth of the country are there such fine hotels as in the town of Ballina in North Mayo.

That may seem to be a loud boast. However, if you ask any commercial traveller or tourist—but particularly the commercial traveller—about the matter you will find that what I say is, indeed, true. Take the commercial traveller who goes to a town 40 or 50 miles from Ballina. When he has finished his rounds, and even though it may be at a late hour at night, he will make a point of visiting one of the hotels at Ballina. I think that that speaks for itself. I can assure this House, therefore, that we in the West are most anxious to avail of the tourist traffic and we look forward with hope to greater facilities and greater help in that connection through this Bill than we have got in the past.

First of all I should like to support the appeal of the other Deputies to the Minister to have one board responsible for the functions of tourism in this country. I think that by establishing three separate organisations, the Minister is increasing considerably the administrative expenses. It should be quite possible to have only one board and, if that board thought it necessary, sub-committees could be set up to deal with separate functions. I am convinced that one board should be responsible to the Minister and to this House and that it would be a more economic proposition altogether than the setting up of three separate organisations.

I see that the new board to be established is to have considerable representation on it from the Irish Tourist Association, and that some hundreds of thousands of pounds are being given to that board by the general taxpayer. In view of that, I think the Irish Tourist Association should not now ask the taxpayer or the ratepayer to contribute to them again in another form, namely, through the rates of the county. If hundreds of thousands of pounds are being provided by the ratepayers and the taxpayers through the central funds of the State, I think that that should be a sufficient subsidy from the ordinary people of the State, and that the Tourist Association should not expect the local authorities to impose further rates on the ratepayers of the county to finance tourism.

One matter which, I think, seriously affects the efficiency of our services and the attractiveness of our country as a tourist centre is the lack of internal air services. Tourists who come here from Britain, America and the Continent are used to internal air services, but we in this country have a very narrow outlook on that particular matter. According to last Sunday's Sunday Press, one of its representatives interviewed experts on tourism and, in reply to the question “What more is needed?” the experts answered: “A courageous programme of private enterprise and an intelligent use of the new provisions envisaged in the Bill.”

I am interested in "the courageous use of private enterprise" because in Cork an airfield was set up by private enterprise and for a number of years past that airfield has been trying to get permission to run scheduled services. Because, however, of the attitude of the Department of Industry and Commerce, and the dog-in-the-manager attitude of Aer Lingus, nothing can be done to develop this airfield which was established four or five years ago because scheduled services will not be permitted to operate from it. Aer Lingus will not operate the services themselves and they will not permit anybody else to operate them. There are three private firms who are prepared to operate scheduled air services from Cork but these firms will not be allowed to do so. Cork is very near Cobh and Cobh is the gateway to Ireland so far as the Atlantic liners are concerned. Many people who come to this country would stay here for a night or two if they had adequate air travel facilities such as they are used to in their own countries. We are told that the difficulty relates to meteorological services. The general taxpayer of this country is paying, according to the Estimate for this year, £540,000 for meteorological services. The people of Cork are paying at least £50,000 of that £540,000, but yet they get absolutely no return for it. We have a radio station in Tivoli which was used by shipping when the radio stations in the vicinity—Valentia and others—were out of action during storms. The station at Tivoli was quite suitable then but it is not regarded as suitable to provide the services for the landing field at Farmer's Cross in Cork. There is, also, a big development in internal air services in other countries. A demonstration was recently given at South-end-on-Sea where a system known as "Talk you down" was operated by one man. I understand that the cost is £5,000 and that it is quite effective. That money will not be spent on Cork even though £540,000 is provided for meteorological services for Dublin and Shannon.

I appeal to the Minister to use his influence with Aer Lingus to get them to shoulder their responsibilities. They are being subsidised to a very large degree by the State and if they are not prepared to do the job themselves they should say so. They should get rid of this dog-in-the-manger attitude which they have adopted for the past three or four years and let one of the companies who are prepared, without subsidy from the State, to run scheduled air services from Cork and provide the facilities which tourists to this country, and others, require.

A great deal has been said about the licensing provisions of this Bill. Judging by some of the speeches which were made in this House, and that made by Deputy O'Higgins, it would seem that Butlin's Holiday Camp is as dry as the Sahara Desert. My information is that there are at least three licensed premises in Butlin's Holiday Camp—the Pig and Whistle, the American Bar and the Wishing Well. I do not think that anybody in that camp at the moment need be thirsty. For the life of me, I cannot understand why the people in the towns and in the hotels and in the holiday camps should have facilities for drinking when it is considered immoral for anybody living in the country to have a drink on a Sunday. It is quite all right to open the public-houses in Cork and Dublin and to serve drinks in hotels until 9 o'clock on a Sunday but it is immoral and a crime for a person living in the country to have a drink at all on a Sunday unless he travels three miles from his place of residence—and then it appears to be quite all right.

I am not inclined to vote for any provision that will provide greater drinking facilities in the towns or hotels or holiday camps while the ordinary countryman who is working and slaving sometimes from 6 o'clock in the morning until 7 o'clock at night cannot have a drink on a Sunday unless he travels three miles from his place of residence to some other licensed premises. I am not prepared to give any further facilities to people who already can drink in hotels until 9 o'clock on Sunday nights and in the ordinary public-houses in the city until 7 o'clock on Sunday nights.

Another point I should like to bring to the Minister's attention is the tendency of the Tourist Board and tourist organisations to develop the more generally known centres rather than the lesser known centres which have a number of attractions to offer. Killarney is boosted all over the place and is well advertised already. There are, however, a number of small places which the Tourist Board should try to publicise. Then, in certain areas you have a number of hoteliers who are prepared to co-operate and do something for themselves. They are prepared to spend a certain amount of money on publicity and to go out of their way to cater for the people who come to them. Where you have a group such as that, the Tourist Board should help them in some way.

I have in mind particularly the hotels on each side of Cork Harbour. They have a small organisation of their own, they publish little brochures and try to do a little bit of publicity as far as their finances will permit them. When they get customers they try to make as good an impression on them as they can. Where you have groups like that, the Tourist Board should help them to publicise their areas, particularly when they are prepared to show their earnestness by contributing part of the cost.

I also think that certain towns with a potential tourist value which are at the moment depressed areas should be specially treated in regard to publicity and the provision of facilities by the Tourist Board. I refer to places such as Kinsale which could be very well developed as a tourist centre because it has an historical background, several antiquities, and various features that would lend themselves to development. Kinsale was an old garrison town and a town that was noted for its fishing industry. It has ceased to be a garrison town and the fishing industry has more or less gone by the board. The only hope for Kinsale so far as I can see would be to develop tourism there. There is a wide field for development along that line having regard to the history of the town, the antiquities in it and the general amenities which it has to offer tourists, particularly American or British.

Finally, I think the Tourist Board should suggest to hotels that, instead of aping the continental chefs, they should realise that we have here the finest food in the world, the best meat, the freshest vegetables and the best of milk, in spite of what Deputy Dillon says about it. Rather than following the lines of continental chefs and putting up concoctions of this, that and the other thing, we should develop and advertise our Irish dishes and stand over them. To get that done we must begin with the highest grade hotel and then it will be copied by the other hotels all down the line.

I am glad to see that every section in the House now appreciates the value of the tourist industry to this country. Some time ago people had different views about it, but I am glad that we are all unanimous in this House in realising that tourism is a useful national industry and one that we can develop; that we have something to offer which no other country has to offer, and that the amount of money we can derive from this industry can make it one of the greatest industries we have.

I do not intend to dilate on the broad aspects of this Bill except to say that if we do not appreciate the importance of tourism as a source of revenue and act on that we will be shirking our responsibilities. The result of this Bill remains to be seen, but the development of tourism depends a great deal more on the individual efforts of citizens than it does on any action on the part of the House. The main discussion so far seems to have been carried on with an eye on the foreign tourist and his money. If we are to approach the question of tourism merely from the financial point of view, I should like to bring to the Minister's notice the uneven distribution of this revenue throughout the country. If we are asking people from all over the country to develop this industry, we should at least make some effort to distribute the benefits of it throughout the country. At present the tourist seems to stay mainly in the larger centres or in the more famed resorts. I think that Fógra Fáilte should take on itself the proper advertising of suitable tourist places in the country.

In County Clare we have attractions which are unequalled anywhere in the country and yet the amount of advertising given to the county is negligible. If a person at present wants to find out something about the county he can get information about it, but that is not advertising. A person should not have to ask about a place; he should be told about it so that he will be attracted to it.

There are two points I wish to put before the Minister in regard to this Bill. The first is the development of the tourist industry for the benefit of our own people. The number of people who spend their annual holidays at the different resorts throughout the country is much too low.

Now, there is probably more than one reason why the people are not holiday-minded. But, certainly, one of the causes of it is that it is too expensive for them. I think that definite efforts should be made by the Tourist Board to make cheaper holidays available to as many people and as many families in the country as possible, because even though the benefits to the tourist industry from foreign tourists may be ephemeral the social benefits of being able to take a holiday in the case of our own people would remain with us. The second point is probably related to the first. The smaller tourist resorts form a very important part of the pattern of our tourist industry, but they have to survive on a very short season. Each year, the season is becoming shorter, and at the same time the expenses incurred each year by the people in those resorts are becoming greater. I suggest that the Minister should attempt to have a study made of how the season could be lengthened and of how facilities and amenities could be made available to attract people there before the regular season begins. It is possible that if that were done, cheaper holidays would be available, and that more people at home could avail of a holiday.

There are certain functions and duties allotted to the board which should certainly benefit tourism throughout the country. In the matter of giving grants to develop various resorts, I think that the board could well look to places like Kilkee which suffered severe damage during the recent storms and give help so that it would be ready for the season.

The Minister, in his introductory speech, mentioned the difficulty of finding the Cliffs of Moher. There are many places throughout the country which are difficult to find. I expect that the provision of those road signs, which have been mentioned, will make a great difference because at present the tourist is put to far too much discomfort and discouragement.

I would finally ask the Minister to do his best towards having all the roads in the tourist countries developed and maintained in such a state as to make travelling on them comfortable. Most tourists, nowadays, like to travel in their own cars and I think it should be our duty to have roads suitable for, them. Good roads should be made available for them, and these should not be limited to the main roads. Every road throughout a tourist county should be maintained as a tourist road.

After the very lengthy debate that has taken place on this Bill, I intend to emulate the example of the last two speakers by trying to limit my remarks to as brief a space as possible. On this Bill I wish to draw the Minister's attention to two particular matters, one of which was raised yesterday in the debate, and the other which has not been referred to yet, as far as I am aware.

The Minister must be aware, from his contacts with the tourist industry, that one of the greatest deterrents to hoteliers throughout the country to expanding their businesses and towards creating better facilities in their hotels is that of an increased valuation of their buildings, pursuant on the improvements which they will have carried out. Not only an increased valuation, but uncertainty as to the amount of the valuation when the valuation comes to be struck by the Valuation Office, is in itself a great deterrent to hotel people in the matter of expanding their businesses and creating improvements which all recognise to be necessary if tourists are to be attracted to this country.

It is a common mistake to consider that Dublin is Ireland in relation not only to the tourist industry but to every other industry. It is a mistake to equate the conditions attendant in Dublin, conditions of large-scale hotels sometimes in the form of public companies, with conditions throughout the country where, I think, it is probably true to say that the majority of hotels are owned and run as family concerns. The fact that, as a result of improving his premises, of putting in amenities which we all now recognise tourists require—of improving tourist facilities —a man is going to have his valuation increased, and increased to an extent which he cannot tell beforehand, does play a very significant part in stopping the development in the case of existing hotels which all of us, and I think the hoteliers themselves, would like to see brought about.

Now, I would like to see a provision in this Bill, something on the lines of a section in relation to the licensed trade, to the effect that it would be possible for any hotel keeper who proposes to execute improvements in his hotel to forward the plans to the Valuation Office before hand so that he will have an opportunity of knowing what the amount of the increase in the poor law valuation will be attendant on those improvements. I would, however, prefer to see a clause in this Bill giving a remission of rates for a period of years—a clause such as is to be found in a number of Housing Acts—to hoteliers who carry out improvements say over the next five or six years. The loss of income attendant on such a provision would not, I believe, be very great. I think that anybody who has any knowledge of the tourist industry will fully appreciate that such a provision would play no small part in having the existing hotels, and particularly the smaller type of hotels throughout the country, improved, and on a scale which is now so greatly desired.

Now, the other matter on this Bill to which I should like to draw particular attention is the necessity of setting up some sort of a consultative council representative of the tourist trade. I feel that it is a matter of regret that there is no such thing as a consultative council representative of travel agencies, transport companies and of the hoteliers themselves which would be in a position to advise the Tourist Board on the general running of the tourist industry. It is by no means peculiar to the tourist industry, when a board is set up and given such wide powers as this board is now being given, that, in the course of time, there is a natural divorce between the members of the board and the members of the industry which that board is meant to direct. That is something natural and inherent in the setting up of these types of boards, and I think that a lot of the difficulty, a lot of the friction that exists and that may exist in the future between the members of the hotel industry, on the one part, and the officials of the board on the other, could be got over if a consultative council was set up which would meet regularly and which would be properly representative of the interests which I have named, so that these interests would know that effect was being given to their representations.

There are a number of small matters to which I would like to refer though they might perhaps be dealt with more satisfactorily on the Committee Stage. With regard to Part III there is a matter to which I would like to draw the Minister's attention. I feel it is causing a certain amount of concern. One of the best features in the Bill is the guarantee of loans and the servicing of loans by means of grants. If that provision is worked intelligently and well the result can only be beneficial to the industry and to the country as a whole. Inherent in this financial set-up there is some difficulty because the provisions of the Bill may be used by speculators and we may find ourselves providing money out of the Exchequer to facilitate the making of money in a ready fashion by some of the more unscrupulous members of our own society or of society across the sea.

There is a clause in Section 16 which provides that the loans which are to be guaranteed will be subject to such terms and conditions as the Minister may sanction. If that particular provision is availed of to prohibit the assignment or sale of the particular hotel to which the loan is being granted for a period of, say, five years, it will help to obviate the very real danger of speculation which might take place if the provisions of this Bill were used by unscrupulous persons.

The grading of hotels is of vital importance to every hotelier in the country. It is, therefore, very important that the provisions governing the grading of hotels should be operated in a proper fashion. If qualified and competent officers are used by the board to grade hotels little friction will result. An example of what can be achieved by competent and intelligent officials carrying out work of this sort is to be found in the manner in which the rather onerous health regulations passed some time ago have been put into operation. Extremely efficient and courteous officers were appointed to carry out these regulations and little friction has resulted in the various industries to which these regulations apply.

It is of the greatest importance for the board to ensure that competent, intelligent and courteous officers are employed in the grading of hotels. Hotels are graded in A, B and C categories. I think the Minister should recommend to the board the setting up of a separate category to cover luxury hotels. We have luxury hotels here in Dublin and there are one or two in the country. They should be in a separate class from the grade A hotels so that the tourist will know exactly the type of hotel to which he is going. If there is a luxury class grading, the grading of the remainder should be a comparatively easy matter.

It has been brought to my attention that the grading of hotels has been carried out in some cases on a purely mechanical basis. An hotel may be a grade A hotel for all practical purposes but because it fails to have a lift, or some other mechanical device which the officer considers proper for such an hotel, it will not be graded in that particular class. Grading should not be done on a purely mechanical rule-of-thumb basis. All the amenities and facilities of the establishment should be taken into account.

I welcome sub-section (f) of Section 52 which empowers the board to protect and maintain and aid in the protection and maintenance of historic buildings and sites. That provision is long overdue and the time for effective action in maintaining and preserving our many historic sites is long overdue. Probably because of lack of interest more than anything else the National Monuments Act has not proved sufficient to preserve effectively and mark out the historic monuments and sites throughout the country. Many of the sites and monuments in which we should take most pride are at present relegated to the background and out of the route of ordinary tourist traffic. I hope this particular section of the Bill will be operated in such manner as to remedy that state of affairs.

I would like to join my voice with the almost unaminous voice of the House against the setting up of two boards under this Bill and the establishment, in practice, of no less than three boards to run the tourist industry. No sound or effective argument has been advanced for the setting up of the proposed publicity board. In the teeth of the recommendations of the expert committee and commissions which have reported on this industry the Dáil is now proposing to set up a third board, a board which will do very little good and which may do a lot of harm. No really cogent argument has been advanced for expending more money out of the Exchequer on this board and many arguments can be adduced to show that the board may in fact hinder the development of the industry rather than assist it.

I hope amendments will be tabled on the Committee Stage knocking out the provisions governing the establishment of this new board. If they are tabled I appeal to the Minister to accept them. Apart from the Deputies on the Government Benches, the unanimous opinion of the House appears to me to be a condemnation of the setting up of this third board. The Minister will have an opportunity of showing his willingness to co-operate in bringing about the proper machinery for the running of this industry if he accepts the amendment I have suggested.

I would like to say, in conclusion, that if the financial provisions of this Bill are effectively worked out and if the grading of hotels is effectively carried out, we can hope to see a thriving hotel industry in this country, an industry which will bring benefit not only to itself but to the country as a whole. In order to further those ends, I have suggested the setting up of some sort of a consultative council to act as a means of communication between the interested bodies in the tourist trade and the new body that is being established by this Bill. Further to this end, I have also suggested that provision be put into this Bill doing away with any increased valuation which may result from the increased facilities and improvements which take place as a result of increased expenditure by hoteliers on their premises. If those provisions are put into this Bill and if this Bill is worked out, as I hope it will be worked out, by the new board, we will be inaugurating, by the passing of this Bill, an easier phase in our tourist industry, a phase which will bring benefit not only to the particular interests involved in the tourist industry but to the country as a whole.

I have been listening to Deputy Costello and the description he gave of the present board. I should like to reply by asking him how was it that it was not until Mr. Christenberry visited this country and made certain suggestions in regard to the training of staff, etc., that the present board made an effort to do these things? Is it not time that the Minister should now come and review the whole position and, if necessary, as it will be, appoint additional members who will do the work as it should have been done from the very outset?

The one point I have been asked to mention is that in relation to the clause in Section 16 which enables the board to allocate grants in respect of the payment of interest on loans. I have been informed that this clause as it now reads is very ambiguous and more or less tantamount to giving a grant in another way and that people can so arrange it that they can qualify for these grants. There should be some examination of that clause because as it reads at the moment not alone are people entitled to get a loan but a grant to supplement it. In other words, it will enable people who can prove that the loan was not effective or was not what they thought it would be to come along and also qualify for a grant. That was the point that I have been asked to mention. The average man throughout the country would be against the Government or the board giving grants to people who are well established and who are engaged in the industry over a long number of years.

I would agree entirely with Deputy Costello when he said that people in a small way should be entitled to a concession by way of a remission of rates or a revision of valuation and so on. I entirely agree with that but I do not agree at all with any body or Government giving grants to people who would be speculators and would "cash in" in other words and dispose of their premises in a year or two after being paid by the State to extend their premises.

The most important feature in this Bill at the moment is the provision of schemes for the training of persons for work in relation to the tourist industry. Mr. Christenberry, on his recent visit to Ireland, stressed the importance of training hotel staffs. It is very important to pay attention to all these matters and I would suggest to the Minister that a training college should be established in this country, particularly in my own County of Kerry, the home of tourism and a tourist county.

In Killarney there are no jobs for young people during eight months of the year with the result that they have to emigrate as unskilled labourers and take up the poorest of jobs abroad. Ireland loses a valuable asset in this way. We should have a college in this country in which boys and girls could be trained during the slack period joining the hotels during the busy season as they do in Switzerland. That is a very important point and one which I strongly stress. I would be glad if the Minister would give it his consideration. The suggestion is that an Irish manager, who was trained in Switzerland, could take charge of such a college or centre and boys and girls doing the full course would have the opportunity of being trained as managers, head waiters, chefs and book-keepers.

Notice taken that 20 Deputies were not present; House counted and 20 Deputies being present,

I was referring to this question of training staffs and I made the case that this is not similar to the scheme that was tried out recently in Kilkee where, I understand, the local tourist association and the vocational authorities agreed to experiment on the training of staff for hotel work. My idea is quite different altogether. My idea is to have a training centre run by the State and that there will be more or less an all the year round programme that will have its personnel available in all parts of the country as they are required. In County Kerry we have need for such a centre where there are hotels in the vicinity. The necessity of having such an organisation in that area as well as in other areas throughout the country is apparent to everybody. Hotels apply for trained staff and cannot find them when they want them. If such a college or centre were established by the State trained staff would be available at all times.

I appeal to the Minister to arrange that the new board could give grants-in-aid to angling associations for fishery development. Deputy Mrs. Crowley, Mr. Bartley, the Parliamentary Secretary, and myself were in Kenmare and Kilgarvan on Sunday last. In Kenmare where we have the finest rivers in Ireland, there is only one free river. All the others are held by trusts and vested interests, mostly outside this country. There is an angling association there second to none but there is no river available to tourists. Kenmare is a town of great interest and in the centre of the tourist district. Yet there are no amenities there for tourists in so far as fishing is concerned.

I suggest that the first concern of a business-like tourist board is to put up the money to buy at least one river in the district, namely, the River Blackwater where there is an excellent fishery. The angling association sent a deputation to Mr. Bartley and they informed him that there was no free river in the district except one, which was of no account. That is a point to which a tourist board could very profitably devote its attention. What is the use in giving grants to hoteliers to expand their business and having tourists coming if there are no amenities? If they were interested in fishing they would have to go to Waterville or Killarney, 20, 30 or 40 miles away, or to some other part of the coast. Those are matters to which the board could direct its attention, and in that way there will be real development.

There is the further point that in many parts of South Kerry there are tourists roads, roads leading to the Gap of Dunloe and other important places of interest. The Tourist Board, in my opinion, should have some incentive or encouragement or direction from the Minister to compel them to make moneys available by way of road grants for these districts.

Another important matter which was brought to my notice—it was mentioned last night by Deputy Dr. Browne —is in connection with these all-in bookings from New York to France, Germany and this country. I received information some time ago from a member of the Córas Iompair Éireann organisation that some of the work which was being done by Córas Iompair Éireann was credited to Cooks and other people; in other words Córas Iompair Éireann did most of the work but a great deal of the benefit of those bookings was reaped by other concerns. That is a situation that should be examined. I was informed about 12 or 18 months ago that Córas Iompair Éireann were about to send some people to New York to try to build up a centre where they could have direct credit and bookings for this country.

They have a joint office there.

It is about time they did have but nevertheless, as far as I am informed, the matter requires further investigation. People outside this country are getting away with the major portion of the profits from these bookings to the detriment of our people.

In conclusion, I would be glad if the Minister would remember these points I have put forward. On behalf of the people of South Kerry I would say that we appreciate what he intends to do for the tourist industry. We have small hoteliers along the coastline who require assistance. Certainly this system of advancing loans for improvement is an ideal one and I join with Deputy Mrs. Crowley's request last night in regard to seaside strands and the amenities that could be provided in that respect. The Tourist Board, as it exists at the moment, never seem to leave the beaten track or contact the people in the remote districts. They always contact the people in the more important centres and never concern themselves with areas like Rossbeigh or Carragh Lake. Even though they may not be as well established or as well advertised as other centres, nevertheless they merit attention.

I would like to bring a few facts to the Minister's notice, and I hope that the new board will deal with them when they start carrying out their functions. Being a Dublin Deputy, I am primarily interested in the tourist trade as it affects Dublin, and I propose to talk chiefly along those lines. We have tourist ports both in Dublin and Dún Laoghaire. In both cases the conditions under which the tourists travel before they arrive at the ports of embarkation leave a great deal to be desired. During the tourist season the trains traveling to Holyhead, to Liverpool and, I understand, also to Fishguard are very crowded indeed. That, of course, lies outside our control, but it does not lie outside the control or the powers of the board to bring these matters up with the proper authorities and to do all they can to see that they are rectified. When the boats are crossing from Britain to Ireland the passengers have to travel under very crowded conditions. On account of the scarcity of boats the system of sailing tickets has had to be inaugurated. I feel sure that the carrying companies are doing all they can with the existing means at their disposal, but the existing means, namely the boats, are not at all adequate for the Irish tourist trade, or anything like it.

It is nonsense for us to talk about the tourist trade in this country and about all we can do to help it unless we bear in mind that the means of transport available to tourists before they come to our shores is of very great importance to the trade. I fee that we should have more boats. Conditions at the port of Dún Laoghaire are simply disgraceful. The pier there was designed for a much smaller trade; it was never meant to take a customs shed. During the height of the tourist season, hundreds and thousands of people crowd on to a small pier and the rush and bustle and the general conditions are very, very bad. Of course, the people concerned do all they can, but the pier itself is quite inadequate to meet the demands that are put on it to-day. When the tourists are leaving the country via Dún Laoghaire, it is a terrible sight to see a queue of people stretching for several hundred yards. These are the people whom we bring over here and whom we expect to advertise this country amongst their friends. I would urge on the Minister that it is of the greatest importance, in fact, of vital importance, to see that proper facilities are provided at Dún Laoghaire. It is the port which brings the most tourists into this country, and, indeed, it is not very desirable that our own citizens leaving and entering this country should find it so uncomfortable.

Another matter to which I would like to refer briefly is that of hotels. There has been a lot of talk about the classification of hotels. I would urge on the new board not to lower in any way their standard of classification. That standard has been set up to protect the tourist and also to protect the good hotels. I feel very strongly that a really good hotel keeper would be only too anxious to carry out the recommendations of any board. In fact, the first-class hotel keeper will tell you that he does not need any board to tell him what to do, and that goes for any other industry apart from the tourist industry. A good deal of sympathy is being given and lip service paid to hotel keepers who allege they have been put on too low a classification. All in this Dáil should be very jealous of the good reputation of our good hotels, and we ought all be watchful in making sure that the standard is not in any way lowered, because it would do our tourist trade a great deal of harm.

There is another side to tourism as well as hotels. I am referring to the amenities for amusements which should be available for those who come to this country. We have certain attractions here. I shall touch briefly on the cultural attractions which we have and, indeed, on those which we do not have. In Dublin we have very good theatres and a very good literary and dramatic tradition which is of great interest to, and which helps to attract, very many tourists to the city. I would remind other Deputies who have spoken that the very large number of tourists who come to this city do not stay here; they go on to see other parts of Ireland afterwards. Theatres in Dublin prove to be a great draw but, unfortunately, we have no large concert hall in the city and our musical life is very severely handicapped on that account.

I would urge on the new board and indeed on the Minister to give sympathetic consideration to the building of a concert hall in the city. If we had a large concert hall here one Radio Éireann orchestra could give public concerts in a manner in which they cannot do so now; they have to go to theatres and cinemas at a time when the regular shows are not on. Had we got a concert hall, a musical life could be built up which we do not possess at the present time. In this respect I would bring to the notice of the board the success which attended the Edinburgh Musical Festival. It brought an amount of money to the city. Hundreds of thousands of tourists visited the place and they afterwards went on tours around Scotland. In fact, it proved to be a tremendous draw. If we had a concert hall in this city worthy of our capital, it is very likely that we could have a musical festival on the lines of those held in Edinburgh and in other cities.

The last matter to which I wish to refer is the question of the care of monuments. Ireland abounds in ruins, many of them very interesting, both historical and ecclesiastical ruins, but it is extremely difficult for the casual visitor to get any information concerning them. I would urge this new board to keep before it the necessity of printing and publishing pamphlets and local histories about these places. I think the board should also ensure that they are readily available to tourists.

I am glad that under this Bill powers are to be taken for the preservation of these monuments. Within the last 12 months I was driving along a road not very far from Limerick. I shall not mention what county it was in as I do not want a howl of protest from the enraged locals who will state that they have devoted all their lives towards the preservation of these ruins. It was, however, a very large castle. We clambered over the gateway, got into the castle and, at a certain amount of risk to life and limb, we went upstairs. In one place, where there was some very interesting 17th-century plaster work on the ceiling, I observed that the ceilings were falling down and it was evident that the plaster work had been falling only in the last few years. I would say that 30 years ago, or even at a considerably more recent period, this castle was in a very fine state of preservation. Actually there were large notices indicating that it was under the care of the Board of Works but one could not find out anything further in the district about the castle. The only information I could get about the castle was what I gleaned from the Automobile Association Road Guide. It should be possible to get locally details of these historic monuments. In local towns there should be guide books, pamphlets and short histories giving all necessary information on these subjects. I think very few of them exist to-day. I would urge on the new board the importance of encouraging publication of these local histories.

In conclusion, I would say that in spite of the various drawbacks which I have noted, I welcome this Bill. I am glad to see that a further effort is being made to take powers to train young people in this country. Of course, we have various centres at the present moment which are doing very good work in that direction. We should see that our people can get as much information and as much training in hotel work as is possible. I would urge on Deputies and the general public to do their utmost to improve and maintain the standard of our hotels. If we Irish people demand a high standard from our hotels, we shall get that high standard and we shall find that the tourist trade will develop here to a much greater extent than we now think is possible. If all of us co-operate in demanding improvements, we shall get them.

Quite a lot of ground has already been covered in the debate on this measure. There are just a few matters, mainly affecting the area which I represent and the tourist centres there, which I should like to bring to the attention of the Minister. The main complaint of hoteliers in the West of Ireland and the people who go there on holidays concerns the dreadful journey that one has to endure in trying to get there. That is one of the principal matters with which this new body should deal. I cannot for the life of me understand why it takes such a dreadfully long time for either a train or a bus to get to the West. I see no reason why Córas Iompair Éireann should not be prepared to run, say, one train express to Athlone and another train, after a short interval, express from Athlone to Westport or Ballina. Similarly, I cannot see why a special through bus cannot be run from Dublin to Athlone, making, perhaps, just one stop in a centre in the Midlands. I think that could be done very easily. It requires only the goodwill of Córas Iompair Éireann and some other organisation to deal with the matter satisfactorily.

So far as complaints about Córas Iompair Éireann restaurants are concerned, I agree with some of them. I think that in addition to a monopoly of transport in this country, Córas Iompair Éireann has also a monopoly of surly waiters and of weak tea. This new board might do something about that matter, if they tackled it in a really effective way. The really effective remedy in my opinion is, not to leave travellers to the tender mercies of Córas Iompair Éireann restaurants, but to provide them with express trains and express buses which would bring them speedily to their destination. Unless something is done along these lines I am afraid very much that hoteliers in the West will be waiting a long time to make any profit out of the expected tourist influx to this country.

There has been some disagreement about the name of the new board, Fógra Fáilte. I do not think it matters quite a lot; probably a better name for it would be "Fáilte gan Fógra" because under this Bill we expect to cater for people whom we never expected to come to this country normally and who are being driven in here by outside circumstances. Once they do come here, the job of this board should be to create a desire amongst them to return in future years. In my district the name applied to a certain class of sea-side visitors is "Formeries"; perhaps this board might be called "Formeries Teoranta." However, I think we can safely leave that matter to the body itself. One thing we should ensure is that the board will not be a haven of rest for defunct county managers with political ambitions. This board should be composed of people who know something about the business, who are prepared to deal with the difficulties of transport and to take the steps necessary to get hoteliers to deal with the expected tourist influx and to boost Irish holiday resorts abroad.

I am not so concerned with the question of advertising inside the country because I think everybody in this country can make up his own mind where he will go. I think the new board, however, from the point of view of publicity, might have a tie-up with some of the travel agencies like Cooks or Wagon-Lits, who cater for people on the Continent. Like everybody else, I suppose these people are more interested in what they can make out of it than they are in selling any particular resort. If this new board can put Ireland well on the map from a tourist point of view they will have achieved something very worth while and justify their existence.

I do not know whether any discrimination will be exercised under this Bill as between Irish citizens and non-nationals. In recent years there has been an influx of non-nationals to this country and some of these people have gone into the hotel and catering business. I do not know whether these people qualify under this Bill though it seems to me that they do. Perhaps it is a matter of policy—I do not know—but at all events it is a matter which should be considered by the Minister.

I disagree with the provisions in this Bill which relate to tourist camps, not on the grounds which have been given here by different speakers in this debate but because I feel that the only type of tourist camp envisaged under this Bill is some huge concern like Butlins'. I think you have a provision for a holiday camp with a valuation of something like £250. No group of Irishmen in the business would be in a position to finance a holiday camp of such a size. I think the Minister should make provision, before the Bill passes through the House, to help people who might be in a position to establish suitable holiday camps, of, say, £50 valuation and which would cater for approximately 100 to 150 guests. A building with a valuation of £250—even with the present outlook of the Commissioners of Valuation in this country —is some building and, in my opinion, nobody in the business in this country would be in a position, financially, to erect such a holiday camp to cater either for the home trade or for visitors. I suggest that as far as holiday camps are concerned the limits laid down here should be lowered.

I entirely agree with the Deputies who spoke of the importance of the brown trout and salmon fisheries of this country. I do not know whether legislation would be necessary or not —possibly it would not, or possibly it could be arranged—but I think that this new board should start off by devoting some particular attention to these fisheries. It should be possible for a fisherman who visits this country to get a licence here in Dublin to fish in any part of this State. The system of going from one board of conservators to another in order to get a licence to fish in different districts is most inefficient apart from the fact that it is often very difficult to find out where one should go for a licence to fish in a particular district. That system can be described as the height of inefficiency.

It frequently happens in different parts of the country that a visitor has great difficulty in discovering to whom he should apply for a licence to fish because even the local people have not that information. There is good fishing and an abundance of it in this country and try to imagine the feelings of a tourist who comes here with the intention of fishing and who cannot find out where he should apply for a licence to fish. Any fisherman coming here is prepared to pay a reasonable fee for a licence that will allow him to fish and I think that even if the fee be fairly substantial it is far cheaper to fish in this country than it is to fish in Scotland, as anybody who has any experience in that connection must know. We have an abundance of good fishing in this country and that is a tourist attraction which, possibly, many other countries have not got and it is one that attracts the type of tourist who spends the most money here. Any tourist, therefore, who comes here to fish should be given a comprehensive licence which will permit him to fish in those districts which he contemplates visiting and thus save him the time and the trouble involved in applying to different officials and different boards of conservators for separate licences.

Another important matter, although it may not be a function of the Tourist Board, is the restocking of our fisheries. It is a great pity that it is not the specific duty of some body to restock our fisheries, as is the case in America and elsewhere. If the Tourist Board would undertake this work I believe that it would yield them very good dividends. The trouble about it is that this matter seems to be everybody's business and nobody's business though the fact remains that our inland fisheries, from the point of view of tourists and local anglers, have been sadly neglected. This country could quite definitely cash-in on those fisheries and compete more than favourably with other countries for tourists who are interested in fishing.

My remarks on fishing apply, to a lesser extent, to rough shooting. Our experience is that the man who holds a licence for rough shooting has eliminated most of the grouse shooting in this country. I have mentioned the necessity for a body whose specific job it would be to look after the restocking of our inland fisheries and such a body could also usefully attend to some of these huge tracts of shooting lands, a large number of which are, I understand, controlled by the Irish Land Commission. There are large tracts of mountain in which tenants have common rights. If these mountains were stocked and rough shooting permitted there, you would make a gamekeeper out of the tenant very quickly if he were getting something out of it and he would be the first to assist the board if they undertook this work.

I have some considerable doubts about some of the sections in the Bill in connection with the cancellation of registration of hotels. I consider that we are taking a different step in legislation under this Bill. I shall deal with the licensing sections in a moment. As I understand the law at present, if, for any reason, an hotel is registered under the Tourist Board and that registration is cancelled, the board are not legally empowered to re-register that hotel without sending down an inspector to inspect the hotel and without the payment by the hotel of a new registration fee and other expenses—even though that hotel had previously been registered with the Tourist Board and had been inspected prior to that initial registration. The Minister should avail of this opportunity to clear up the anomalous position which arises if, for some reason or other outside those set out in Section 29 of this Bill, or through some slip, the registration of a premises is cancelled. For premises which were previously registered and inspected prior to that registration, and operated for some time prior to cancellation of the registration, I think some method should be devised for the re-registration of these premises without putting the owners to all the additional expense of bringing an inspector down to visit the premises again and the payment of registration fees, apart altogether from the long delay which all that work can involve. I am not satisfied, under Section 29 of this Bill, to leave it to what might happen with the backroom boys. Certain provisions are laid down in Section 29 in connection with the cancellation of registration but we all know what can happen. Certainly, I shall suggest to the Minister on the Committee Stage that there should be some further provision by way of extra protection for hoteliers to enable them to appeal to the courts if they should so desire. I should not leave it entirely in the hands of this body to be set up under this Bill to wipe out the existence of an hotel because, in effect, that is what it will mean. If some officials set up under this board do not like a particular hotel owner and pay him a couple of visits and decide for one reason or another to cancel his licence, so far as I can see under this Bill that hotel owner has no redress.

I should like the Minister to take this opportunity of clearing up a couple of matters in connection with hotel licences in general. I cannot think of anything more annoying to tourists than for a bunch of the local Gardaí to descend upon the local hotel in an endeavour to check up on the hotelier and on whether there is or is not a technical breach of the licensing laws. There may not seem to be much in that from the outside view, but anybody who has had experience of living in a county where there is a highly efficient chief superintendent and three or four Guards who have done the sergeant's examination will realise what I mean.

Nobody in this country appears to know what constitutes an hotel bar. There seem to have been conflicting decisions about the matter. Hoteliers are dragged into court on allegations by the Guards that it is illegal to have any opening at all where there is a dispense bar; that if there is any opening at all from the dispense bar it becomes a public bar. This Bill gives the Minister an opportunity, when he is interfering with the licensing laws at all, of defining what is meant, what the authorities mean by an hotel bar and in that way removing one reason why you have very technical members of the Garda Síochána bringing prosecutions against hoteliers and disturbing their guests in connection with matters of this kind.

Then there is another matter. If the front door of an hotel, let it be a 200 bedroom one, is open and a member of the public goes in, say, for a meal and at the same time the door of the dispense bar is open, or if the hotel has an ordinary public-house licence and the door of the bar is open while the front door is open, or even if the barman is coming out of the bar door with a drink for one of the guests who is entitled to get it, there is a breach of the licensing laws. It sounds paradoxical and strange, but we have had prosecutions of that nature even in tourist areas. When that kind of thing is happening and highly efficient Gardaí are taking advantage of every letter of the law and giving a considerable amount of unjustifiable attention on technical matters of this kind to hoteliers, I think opportunity should now be taken to clear up these bones of contention under Part IV of the Bill.

I am not quite clear as to what is the position of new country hotels under this Bill. The minimum requirement for city hotels is 20 bedrooms etc. This Bill will be interpreted by the courts when it is passed. If a hotelier in the country applies for a licence under the law, the suggestion will be that, by implication, the old standards are all gone and it must be an hotel of the nature envisaged here. It seems that under Sections 38 and 39 there will be two different applications in respect of a licence. Section 38 is a good one in so far as it gives power to apply to the court for a declaration that the premises proposed to be erected or improved would be suitable for a licence. But you have to go back again after that with another application under Section 39.

I do not know what the necessity is for this second application. If there is a necessity for it, I do not know why it should have to come before the Circuit Court. I do not see why hoteliers should be put to the expense, which is not inconsiderable, of costs in the Circuit Court. Particularly, I do not see why that should be so when, in fact, the judge will be only acting as a rubber stamp under the Bill, because it depends on whether the Tourist Board registers the hotel or not. The premises, of course, must be registered with the board. If for any reason, the board do not register the premises, evidently the owner cannot get a licence. Still more strange, when an owner applies for the annual renewal of his licence in September he cannot get a renewal if, for any reason, the hotel is not registered with the Tourist Board or if, in the meantime, its name has been taken off the register. The Minister should provide some further safeguard in that connection.

Then I am not prepared to agree that the Tourist Board should have the final say in this matter. Possibly it might not even be the Tourist Board, but some official of the board who would wipe out the hotel on which the owner may have spent a very considerable sum of money making the hotel suitable. If, owing to some conflict with the board, his registration is cancelled, he automatically loses his licence. If he has to go before the court in the first instance to get a licence, he should be entitled to go to the court in the last instance before the board can deprive him of his licence.

This Bill is very long overdue and, when it is passed, I hope that whatever board is dealing with it will take full advantage of the powers given them as soon as possible, because a lot of time has been lost in dealing with this most valuable industry. A lot will depend on getting an energetic board, and I hope that this problem will be tackled in a way in which it has not been tackled before. I have listened to and read the speeches of various Deputies pointing out the things we have to offer here. We have a number of things to offer in this country, but there is certainly one thing we have not to offer and that is weather. We can do nothing about that in this House. But the board could do something to provide for the tourist during wet weather.

The law as it stands in this country militates against that. In places on Clew Bay and on Achill Island, where quite a number of tourists go during wet weather, when boats cannot go out there is nothing for the tourist to do. When an enterprising gentleman there tried to run some little side shows he found himself hauled into court. I do not want to suggest that we should turn any part of the country into another Blackpool. I suggest, however, that if we are to go in for tourism in a reasonable way we must make provision for the wet days that, unfortunately, we get in this country. Unless there are picture houses or some other form of amusement in these local tourist resorts, there is absolutely nothing for the people to do except roam about their hotels.

I was very sorry when the Board of Works in their wisdom saw fit to remove the monument to good Queen Victoria from outside this House, that Deputies did not get interested in removing the Gaming Act of 1854 from the Statute Book. We gamble millions of money in this country on the sweepstakes and on horses. We can put £100 on a horse which never ran before. But, if you go into a country carnival and put 1d. on the roulette, all the rigours of the law are applied to you. If a carnival is run to raise funds for a charitable object and the game of pongo is played at it, there are hundreds of charges promptly issued by the local Guards.

This Gaming Act is a complete anachronism on our Statute Book and its repeal should be considered. The fact that it is there means that there is a check by the Guards in the case of those small shows when they visit isolated tourist places and attempt to provide some amusement with innocent games. Some of our people might consider that it would be bad business if we were to cater for the gambling type of tourist. We know that there is quite an amount of gambling done by a lot of our people. If they do want to do that, I do not see any reason why they should not be allowed to do it. Possibly the board might consider that it would be money well spent if someone were to come along and cater for gambling in a big way and were to set up a casino such as they have in places like Monaco. One of the things against that would be the weather. But if people were prepared to come here and spend their money, I do not see see why it should not be taken from them.

Apart from the question of local carnivals, I think that the board should be enabled to make use of these innocent games at seaside places like Enniscrone and Bundoran. They would provide amusement for people on a wet day. If anything of the kind is attempted at present, the parties concerned are brought before the court. I think the Minister would be well advised to insert a provision in the Bill to stop that kind of thing. These games do not do any harm. They provide amusement for the people during wet weather at seaside resorts. I have learned from the hoteliers in my part of the country that the board will get every co-operation from them. They are expecting a big rush of visitors this year. The main thing they complain about is that the assistance which this Bill is intended to give them was not provided earlier. I imagine their feeling is "better late than never." If the board faces its task with vision and energy, I believe that the Minister's forecast will be achieved, namely, that the tourist income of this country can well be doubled.

I wish to join with previous speakers in welcoming the Bill. I do not like the proposal in it for the setting up of a third board. We have had two boards in control of tourism for some years. One result of that was that there were prolonged delays in reaching decisions. The fact that we are now to have a third board will make that position worse rather than better because we may expect that the reaching of decisions will be further prolonged. However, that is the proposal in the Bill, and I suppose no change can be made now.

There is one point which I want to bring to the Minister's notice, and that is the present state of the law as it applies to the licensing of hotels. I agree with Deputy Moran that it is causing a certain amount of dissatisfaction amongst hotel owners. It is a matter which, I understand, could be easily remedied not by the Department of Industry and Commerce or by the Tourist Board but by the Department of Justice, if proper representations were made to it. At present hotel proprietors are finding it no easy matter to keep within the regulations so far as the licensing laws are concerned. My information is that up to 1902 anybody, whether residing in a city, town or rural area could get a publican's licence on satisfying the court that he was a suitable person to undertake the responsibility of conducting licensed premises. After the passing of the 1902 Act, the granting of such licences was limited to hotels which possessed the required qualifications as regards bedroom accommodation. But, even in that case, there was, and is, a limitation on the sale of drink. A hotel proprietor cannot offer drink for sale or expose it for sale across the counter. As I have said, previous to 1902 such a person could get a public-house licence and was free to sell drink across the counter. That was changed under the 1902 Act, and has caused a certain amount of inconvenience to tourists staying in hotels.

The present regulations add to the cost of working a bar in an hotel when the proprietor is not allowed to sell across the counter. The assistant is employed in the bar which is cut off from the rest of the house. The drink has to be served direct from the bar to that portion of the house in which the lounge is, but there can be no sale across the counter. That increases labour costs as far as the hotel proprietor is concerned. Now that the hotels are being graded, I think this is an opportune time to make an appeal to the Department of Justice to modify the provisions in the 1902 Act. I am told that it would only need deletion of about ten words in the Act, with the addition of other words bringing the licensing laws in regard to hotels into conformity with the general licensing laws. At present, the Guards have great trouble in enforcing the law as it stands. I am not blaming the Guards. They have to perform their duties, and if a premises is licensed to sell drink across the counter then it is their duty to see that drink is sold only across the counter. A grade B hotel may have a public-house licence. It may want to sell drink across the bar. The Guards may possibly go into that hotel and, because it is an hotel, tell the owner that he must not sell drink across the counter. In the same way the owner of the grade A hotel may not be allowed to sell drink across the counter because it will be against the law. I think the present anomaly should be remedied in order to introduce more harmony into the regulations governing the licensing of hotels.

Deputies have referred to the scenery in the Counties of Kerry, Cork, Wicklow and Dublin and talked about tourism in relation to their counties. In Mayo the scenery is first-class. People who have visited the area have called it the "Killarney of the West." I doubt if anybody could find more beautiful scenery than Achill in the summer time. Achill is served by good roads. It has several villages and there are excellent hotels in all of them. The tourists who visit Achill get excellent service at prices which compare favourably with any other tourist centre.

On one occasion I visited the hotel in Mulranny. It is an excellent hotel. It is well managed and well run. I understand there is practically no business there. I have been told it is the property of the Córas Iompair Éireann and the reason for its lack of business is due to the fact that it is not advertised and tourists do not know of its existence. There are excellent hotels in Ballina and Pontoon. In Pontoon there is the added attraction of Lough Conn, Lough Cullen and the River Moy. These are excellent for salmon and trout fishing. I might mention, too, that excellent shooting can be had in these areas. There is, in fact, everything to encourage the tourist.

Unfortunately, County Mayo seems to have been neglected from the point of view of tourist traffic. Every year our county council makes a contribution to the Tourist Board—a contribution which forms part of a levy on the ratepayers. I have been approached by people on occasions and told that, though they pay rates in order to make a contribution to tourism, they do not get a penny in return. If benefits have reached the area they have reached it through sources of which I am not aware.

We have a very active chamber of commerce in Ballina and Achill has a very live improvements committee. These bodies would be quite willing to co-operate with the Tourist Board and supply that body with any information that may be required or suggestions which might help to improve facilities so far as tourists are concerned. Quite a number of holiday-makers come to Achill, to Nephin, to Pontoon and Ballina. They are mostly Dublin people in search of a quiet holiday. They want good bracing air and proper treatment. They may fish or shoot. We would like to get a share of the people coming from foreign countries. We think Mayo ought to be advertised in order to induce these people to visit it. I hope that under this Bill all the necessary publicity will be given to my county.

A great deal has been said inside the House and outside it in relation to tourism. When we had neither boards nor associations to deal with it, we had thousands of visitors coming here from abroad anxious to see our beauty spots and quite prepared to travel to them on bicycles and jaunting cars long before the advent of motor cars and buses.

The Irish Tourist Association was the first body set up to publicise this country at home and abroad so far as its attractions were present for potential visitors. I have a particular interest in this matter, because I think the board was first formed in Killarney. It certainly took the necessary steps to ensure a warm welcome for tourists on their arrival. It placed at their disposal all the necessary information as regards hotel accommodation, interesting tours and so forth. It will be admitted that, down through the years of its existence, the board and its officials carried out their duties in a courteous and efficient manner. If it had got the necessary financial support and backing of the various Governments, there would be no need at all for the setting up of either An Bord Fáilte or Fógra Fáilte, with all their paraphernalia and the vast expense incurred for which, at any rate, so far as the Tourist Board up to the present is concerned, there was no real result.

In this Bill there is no mention whatsoever regarding the functions of the Irish Tourist Association. No matter what may be said to the contrary by the Minister and his colleagues in the Government, there is a feeling abroad that it is the wish of the Government to give the cold shoulder to this association and crush it out of existence eventually. As regards the setting up of the Publicity Board, there is a rather widespread feeling that it was set up for some ulterior motives. However, we shall be quite charitable so far as that is concerned. We trust that it has been set up with the sincerest of motives and that it is meant to be for the welfare and advancement of tourism in this country.

The Minister set up the board some months ago without, to my mind, having any statutory powers. Even moneys, to my mind, have been placed at the disposal of the board in a more or less illegal way. The constitution of the board, as outlined in the Bill, does not seem to be democratic in that the Minister has to choose and appoint the personnel. The Minister would be wise, if he had a clause in the Bill or passed an amendment dealing with the matter, to ensure that on that board there would be three directors of the Irish Tourist Association, directors nominated by the Tourist Association. The Minister has so far selected three such members but there would be no obligation on his successor to do that unless it were clearly inserted in the Bill.

In passing, I have a complaint to make in that respect. When the Tourist Association selected by vote three directors for inclusion in the Publicity Board, at least one of the three who was selected on the highest vote was not appointed. Being a native of Killarney and coming from the centre of tourism, I think it was unfair for the Minister to pass this person over when he got the highest number of votes from the members of the association to which he belonged.

I should like to draw the attention of the Minister to a beautiful building in Killarney lying idle at present, Muckross House. Since there is so much talk about decentralisation of industry and various boards, might I suggest the possibility of using this House as a headquarters for the Tourist Board or the Publicity Board? In that way a step would be taken to remove the centre of tourism from the City of Dublin. At least some branch of the tourist industry should be established in other areas, especially in Killarney which is the home of tourism.

As regards the names of those boards there is something very peculiar about them, in fact something childish. With regard to An Bord Fáilte, I think it would be an improvement if it were called Bord na bhFáilte. In fact, the Tourist Board itself should be given the name Bord na Cuardaíochta, that is, simply, the Tourist Board. After all, when passing through the country, you would often see outside a public-house a notice board with the name "Welcome Inn." I am sure that there is always a welcome for visitors to that type of inn. There is certainly a welcome for visitors who come to this country from any part of the world. and in that respect there is no need to have a Welcome Board set up.

There is nothing else to which I wish to refer. I hope that the steps which have been taken will prove very successful in adding to the tourist industry. While many things may be said against the Bill, and especially against the necessity of setting up this Publicity Board, still the Minister can feel assured that he will have the support of the people on this side of the House, and he will also have the support of everybody interested in forwarding—no matter in what direction —the interests of this country.

I welcome this Tourist Bill in the sense that I welcome any Bill which is calculated to improve our tourist industry. This is a field in which there is still an enormous scope for improvement. I believe this is a Bill which we need not approach from a particular political angle as in other matters.

We can look upon the problem to be dealt with as one which is a challenge to our ability to attract tourists to this country and at the same time to ensure that having come here once the tourist will be so pleased with what he finds and the manner in which he is treated that he will want to come back again. It is probably not too difficult to get a tourist to come to a place once. Many hotel keepers will tell you that they have often had a guest who never came again. What we want to do is to create the tourist who will want to come again because the attractions we offer him are too irresistible for him to want an alternative place for a holiday. The sooner we appreciate that that is important to the whole tourist industry the better and the quicker will we find a solution to the difficulties which radiate around the whole problem of attracting tourists.

We will never be another Switzerland. We have only to say that to realise how true it is. Switzerland has obvious advantages. Apart from its indescribable beauty it has attractions for the tourist in summer and in winter and has over generations built up a pattern of catering for tourist traffic which attracts the tourist the whole year round. It attracts them particularly in the summer time, but it also attracts them in the winter. As well, Switzerland is situated at the crossroads of Europe surrounded by teeming millions who want to get to its well-advertised attractions and its scenic beauties. We are in a somewhat different position. We are the outpost of Western Europe. We are not at the crossroads by any means but on the perimeter of Europe. We are not surrounded by the teeming millions who constantly move to and fro about the territory where Switzerland is situated.

Because of our climatic conditions, we have a short season and in the main our problem is to attract tourists during three or at the very best four months of the year. What we must do is to make the most we can of these three or four months by attracting very many tourists during that period. It is true, of course, that we can get some tourists at other periods of the year but they will never be very numerous. However, to the extent that they come in the off-season, they are probably all the more welcome because they tend to spread out the tourist season, and to engage in activities which would be absent if they did not come even in small numbers.

Because we have a short season and are not like other high-powered tourist countries we must approach our problem in a somewhat different way from those countries. Nobody would suggest putting up a gigantic hotel in Glengariff or any other scenic spot throughout the country for the convenience of tourists with the knowledge that in the main we have a holiday season which spreads over only three or four months. No expensive hotel— by that I mean an hotel which costs a substantial sum of money to erect— could possibly pay its interest charges if it had to face the problem of paying its way by remaining open for only three or four months. Also during some of these months its bed accommodation would not be filled perhaps to a greater extent than 50 or 75 per cent. Because we have that short season, it does not pay us and would not pay us to contemplate catering for the tourist by the erection of hotels on American standards nor do I think that the tourist who comes here wants to pay anything like the charges which would inevitably be associated with a stay in any of these very large hotels.

The ordinary tourist who comes here, whether from England or America, is entirely different from the type of tourist you get in the South of France or in expensive holiday resorts in Switzerland. They might be described as people in regular employment with modest incomes. A fair number of them are in the middle income group, while a very small fringe could be described as being in the higher in-venienc come group, but that is an extremely small fringe indeed. What the ordinary tourist, therefore, wants is not an hotel spread over a large block of buildings in which he is just a cipher in relation both to the building and to the rest of the guests. What he wants is a small hotel which will suit his needs, an hotel distinguished by its cleanliness, its freshness and its provision of good food and, above all, he does not want to be salted in charges. He wants to stay at a modest hotel with these facilities I have mentioned at a reasonable charge. It is not a very difficult problem, the problem of providing accommodation for tourists, and we should approach it by encouraging existing hotels to expand in a reasonable way where additional accommodation is called for and, quite apart from expansion from the standpoint of accommodation, by encouraging expansion along the line of greater cleanliness and freshness and the provision of good, wholesome food with a recognition of the fact that the tourist who is well treated and charged a reasonable sum for his stay will not only be a good ambassador for that hotel by making its existence known to his friends but may very well come back again. In that way the hotel establishes perhaps a permanent nexus with the tourist which it treats well in the first instance.

I suppose we can divide our tourists into three broad classes. There are, of course, many classes of tourists, but broadly speaking, they fall under three headings. The first is the ordinary citizen who resides here and wants an annual holiday in a clean, decent hotel or boarding-house and who can pay only a very reasonable sum for the brief holiday which his slender means permit him. In our desire to attract foreign tourists we must not overlook the potentialities to our hotel and tourist industry of the resident citizen because it would be much better from the national point of view and from that of the tourist industry as a whole if we could attract our people to remain in our own holiday resorts. I do not by any means suggest that we should put a wall around the country and keep our people from going elsewhere. I think that there are obvious advantages to the nation as a whole in encouraging our people to travel, but at the same time there are national advantages in having as much money as possible spent by our own people here instead of that money being spent elsewhere on holidays by our citizens who for one reason or another are attracted outside the country. What we must do is recognise that it is to our national advantage to be able to attract our own citizens to remain here. If we can do that and they stay here because of a recognition that the attractions offered in various parts of this country are as good as those elsewhere, it is all to the good. It is all to the good of the citizen that he can spend his money on a holiday here from the point of view of the recuperation afforded to him, and all to the good from the national point of view that when these tourists, our own citizens, spend holidays here, they help in one way or another to provide a widening circle of employment and prosperity.

The citizen, the resident citizen, I am concerned about here is the man with a wife and two or three children. So far as the ordinary working-man is concerned, it is almost impossible for him to-day to take his wife and two or three children away on a holiday. First, the charge is crippling. He has to face the problem of rail fares and has to get down to a seaside resort or some place frequented by other tourists and compete for accommodation with people who are probably much better off than he is. When he gets the wife and children into the hotel, guest-house or boarding-house, he finds the charges so high that they are beyond his means, with the result that he is simply not able to take his wife and children away. So far as ordinary citizens are concerned—I am talking of the generality of workers who get a week's or a fortnight's holiday, such as a carpenter or any other craftsman—where they are young men with a wife and two, three or four children, it simply means that there is no holiday at all for them until the children grow up and are providing for themselves or until they leave home and get married. Anybody who takes the trouble to study the problem of finding out where the craftsman or ordinary worker goes for his holidays will find that, in the main, he spends it at home, taking perhaps a short trip to the nearest place of interest from his own home, but he is never privileged, because his resources do not permit him, to travel far from home, and it is an extremely difficult problem for him to contemplate taking his wife and children, having regard to the costs of doing so.

In Britain, to some extent, and indeed to some extent in continental countries, this problem is dealt with by the provision of holiday camps run, not on the basis of the commercial incentive behind the hotel, guest-house or boarding-house, but by groups or associations concerned with providing for the family of slender means and unable to pay the high charges inevitably associated with staying in an hotel or guest-house during the holiday season. Some four or five years ago, I endeavoured to induce the Tourist Board of that day to co-operate with another body which had considerable technical experience in this matter, in the establishment of a holiday camp to provide holidays, in the main, for the man with a wife and children.

At that time the Tourist Board had in its possession the excellent sites at Courtown Harbour, where both I and technicians felt a holiday camp could easily be provided, offering unrivalled facilities for children especially, and very many attractions because of the beauty of the surrounding area. Unfortunately, however, that project did not come to fruition for reasons on which I need not now dilate, but it occurs to me that the Tourist Board is the one body fitted to sponsor the idea of establishing holiday camps to provide accommodation at a reasonable price for the family who at present are unable to provide it from their own resources.

I have seen these camps operate elsewhere. In the main they consist of chalets with one room, or perhaps two, in which the family sleep. They have their meals in the main building around which the chalets are usually erected. I have seen people stay in these chalets and eat in the main building at charges which would represent probably no more than 40 or 50 per cent. of the charges which would be demanded of them if they were to stay in the local hotel or guest-house. Anybody who examines the financial side of this problem knows that it is well within the capacity of the Tourist Board or, indeed, any other body with financial resources available to devote to this problem, to provide such camps, and I think that if the Tourist Board would take the matter in hand it might be possible—I should hope that it would be possible—to interest trade unions, in conjunction with the Tourist Board, in the establishment of a number of these holiday camps for the purpose of providing holiday accommodation even for their own members.

In Switzerland and Germany and in Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia, in the days of their liberty one found a considerable number of holiday camps and holiday homes. Some of the finest hotels in Switzerland are owned by trade unions, but Switzerland has had hundreds of years of peace and these hotels did not grow overnight. I was convinced from what I saw in these countries of the efficient way in which these holiday camps and guest-houses could be run that we could do something on a similar pattern here, and while there are some obvious difficulties in the way of inducing trade unions to move along the line of providing holiday homes and holiday camps, I still think that there are no insurmountable difficulties in the way of getting the co-operation of the trade unions with the Tourist Board in an effort to provide that kind of holiday accommodation, not merely for our own people but for others who, through their trade union connections, may desire to come to this country and spend a holiday here.

At all events, I would like if that problem were examined by the board. I know that some members of the board were attracted by the prospect, and it was not their fault that the project did not materialise.

Apart from our own nationals we have the tourists who come here from Britain and America. Sometimes you find people engaged in the somewhat barren discussion as to which kind of tourist is the best to come here. I feel that every tourist is welcome and that our aim should be to attract tourist from as many places as we can. It is true, of course, that a larger majority of tourists come here from Britain than from any other country, and to the extent that that is so, the British are more valuable to our tourist industry than other outsiders. Visitors who come here from Britain are of a very friendly type and they are very good spenders. They are well acquainted with our pattern of life and they blend exceedingly well with our people. They have the advantage too that they can get here with considerable ease because of the proximity of one country to the other. There are many obvious advantages from an allover national standpoint, in our having as much social intercourse with our neighbours as possible, and I feel that it would pay us very well to attract as many English visitors as possible to this country. They would prove to be an asset to the tourist business, and we could send many of them back to Britain as ambassadors of goodwill from this country and as people who are calculated to make a sensible impression on their own fellow countrymen in their understanding of our problems.

Of course, we have also got the American tourist. I do not want to emulate another Deputy in trying to give a character sketch of the American tourist or in trying to determine which class of American is the best. I think they are all good if they come here and spend money as tourists. The American tourists can, in the main, be divided into two classes. There is the natural-born American who decides that he is going to leave the American Continent and see what is happening in other parts of the world. In the course of what he describes as an itinerary, he takes in a visit to Ireland. In the main, he is not a long stayer; he arrives and has a quick look around the place, and in a few days he will be away in Paris. He is constantly taking big steps all over Europe, and in the space of a few weeks he will have covered the whole European Continent and be back home again. He is welcome so far as he comes at all and spends money here, but one has got to bear in mind that he is on tour. It is very frequently a marathon race with that class of American; he does not stay too long, but whatever impression he gets during his 48 hours' stay will be a lasting impression for him of what the country is like. We ought to ensure that he sees the best and gets the best service while he is in transit through this country. There is another type of American tourist who comes here—the Irish-American who made good. He feels nostalgic, and he wants to come back and see his homeland, the friends of his childhood and of his adolescent years. He feels an urge to see how things are in the old land. He is an exceedingly good tourist, because he usually makes up his mind that if he is going to pay the fare from America to here he is going to stay for a long time and get value for his money. He is desirable, too, because he does not tax the already overtaxed hotel accommodation, because he usually stays with relatives. We have all met him in the towns and villages throughout the country, and it must be said of him that he spends money very generously for two reasons, first, because he is on holiday, and, secondly, because he is consumed with a natural human emotion to let his friends know how well he has done since he left Ireland.

The rate of exchange is good.

As Deputy Corish reminds me, the rate of exchange is good, and the spending does not, therefore, seem to be as heavy on him as it would be if he were spending in a hard currency country. Seeing we are desirous of earning American dollars, I feel that the American tourist I have just described is the most desirable type. He is likely, too, to appreciate the desirability of bringing in American dollars to this country which others do not necessarily appreciate. In addition, by reason of the fact that he stays longer than the American who just comes on a flying visit, he spends more. In these days the American tourist has to be looked upon from the standpoint that he brings with him a currency which is difficult for us to lay hands on. If we had convertibility of sterling and no difficulty in getting a medium of currency to purchase in the American market, I would say that the best and most enduring asset from the tourist point of view would be the British visitor who comes, and who is likely to come back again, who spends generously, and who gets on well with our people. However, bearing in mind that we want American dollars, every American has to be looked upon as bringing with him rare jewels in the form of dollar notes. It is, therefore, particularly desirable that we should do everything we can to attract him.

I do not believe in the policy of attracting tourists merely for the purpose of getting all we can out of them, bidding them a platonic farewell, and doing the same thing with the next person who comes along. I feel that there is a moral obligation on us when we attract tourists from America or from anywhere else to do them well. That is the problem which is confronting the hotels in this country but, to some extent, it confronts each and every one of us as citizens.

There is nothing politically contentious in this Bill. As I said at the outset, any measure which is calculated to attract more people to this country is a measure which, I feel, every Deputy in the House will support. However, we must recognise that publicity is the best weapon in our armoury in the fight to attract more tourists.

I was never converted to the value of prudence in the form of meanness from the standpoint of publicity. We are so little known relatively in Europe and even the habits and the value of the country are so little known outside that we ought to regard ourselves as too poor to economise in publicity. We just cannot spend enough money making known the advantages of this country and whether that takes the form of Press advertisements, posters, talks, lectures, radio broadcasts or any other way you like, all that is valuable work if we are ever going adequately to publicise the attractions of this country.

Having done that, our problem does not end there. We must provide good hotels for the tourists and good food and the State here might well assist by providing good facilities for the tourist. These facilities could take the form of easement in the tourist impositions which are sometimes carried on when people are coming in and going out of the country. There might be car facilities for tourists who take their cars with them. The local attractions might be developed so as to make the stay of the tourist as interesting as possible. Both the Tourist Board and the local authorities ought to co-operate not merely in publicising the attractions of the particular areas throughout the country where tourists visit but they also ought to make access to those areas much easier than it is at some of those resorts at the present time.

As I said at the outset, I welcome this Bill which has within it the means of further substantial and intelligent development of our tourist organisation. I only hope that those charged with the direction of our organisational efforts to attract more tourists will ensure by every means at their disposal that our hotels will face up to the problem as to what has to be done from their point of view if we are going to attract tourists and, more important still, if we are going to create in the tourist not only an ambassador for goodwill towards this country when he goes back but a resolve in his own mind that he will come back again because the attractions of this country are irresistible to him.

Realising the value of the tourist industry to this country, I welcome any effort being made in this Bill to improve the position. Tourism this year will probably prove to be more valuable than the main industry of this country in hard cash—that is, agriculture. In view of the currency restrictions which are being applied in respect of British people desiring to go to the Continent it is only right to expect that tourist traffic will be diverted to this country. We should, as far as we can, ensure that we will give the people who come here a good holiday. It is probable, by reason of these currency restrictions, that the income which we will receive from tourism this year will rise from £32,000,000 last year will rise £50,000,000 and £60,000,000 this year. In that case the hard cash coming from tourism will actually exceed the sum total of our income from agricultural exports.

The dollar and the value of the dollar were mentioned in the course of the debate and when we look at the figures we can easily see the real value of the dollar to us. Taking 1949, before devaluation, and taking it that bed and breakfast cost 12/6 in this country, it took 2.5 dollars for bed and breakfast. Now, even if bed and breakfast has gone up to 20/- it will take only 2.8 dollars, which shows that the American tourist coming to this country can get much more for his dollar now than he could have got in 1949 when the rate of exchange was 4.02 instead of 2.85, as it is at the present time.

Considering that we are going to have, and can expect, such a great influx of visitors during the holiday season, it is only right that we should take immediate steps to ensure that the people coming here will be properly received and properly treated. We must remember, with a sense of shame, the conditions under which many people who came here in previous years went home. We remember the all-night queues at Dún Laoghaire and other seaports—people anxiously awaiting some kind of transport back from this country. It might be argued that we were not to blame for these conditions, but surely there is a measure of the blame which must be placed upon us; and, since such a large number of people are to be expected during the coming year, I think we should immediately set about the acquisition of boats which will ensure proper travelling facilities for these people. Let us not have it said by anybody who comes here that when he got here he could not get home for lack of sailing facilities

It is only right that some steps should be taken to ensure that tourists will not be exploited. We do not want them writing letters to the newspapers and signing these letters with the two words: "Never Again". We want people to return home with goodwill towards this country. In that respect we must see that visitors will get value for their money and that they will not be mulcted and overcharged —that charges will be reasonable. If reasonable charges are applied people can be expected to come again. If they are overcharged, not alone will they not return but they will do harm to the country by speaking to their friends and neighbours advising them not to come here.

There should be some kind of uniform charge for certain services rendered. It is an extraordinary thing to find such a great difference between the cost of bed and breakfast in one place compared with another. The law of supply and demand is applied very vigorously and when there is a strong demand for one or other particular place they immediately disregard the actual value of bed and breakfast to the people concerned and increase the charge according to the demand for accommodation. I think that is a deplorable attitude to adopt. Hoteliers, in their own interest, should ensure that charges will be reasonable.

I observe that under the Bill it is proposed to give grants up to £200 to local development companies. I should like to know from the Minister if he has considered the question of giving any kind of grants towards the establishment of travel bureaux by the various local authorities. The local authorities have already co-operated in this matter. In fact they were the very basis of tourist organisation from 1926 onwards until the more recent legislation was brought into force. At the outset it was the local authorities, through the Irish Tourist Association, who publicised the attractions of this country, encouraged tourism and tried to organise in some way facilities for tourists in the matter of providing the necessary information. I should like to see in this Bill a clause which would permit of a grant being made available to a local authority so that a bureau could be set up in the district and that would enable the local authority to prepare a detailed guide. Take any particular local authority. There are within its area many places of historical interest, many centres of scenic beauty and other items of interest, the details of which could all be compiled and printed in the form of a guide book and published by that bureau. Such bureaux could be established even in a small way at the small seaside resorts.

I should also like to have seen a provision in the Bill to facilitate local authorities in the development of amenities at seaside resorts. We know that there are very nice strands at many seaside resorts. I refer in particular to those on the County Dublin coast. How many of these resorts have even the barest amenities for people who desire to bathe? In many cases there is no shelter or no dressing facilities. I feel that if the necessary finances were made available for local authorities under this Bill, permanent structures could be erected at these resorts. The absence of these facilities takes from the fact that there are very good strands and suitable bathing places at these resorts.

We have, of course, a couple of holiday camps in this country. I was wondering whether the Minister would consider the question of establishing some kind of super-holiday centre in this country. There is none at present. It has been stated that this country should rely more on its natural beauty and its Irish way of life to give a good holiday to our own people or to people who come from abroad, but these people also need a type of diversion that is available elsewhere. They just have not got it here. Many of our people would like the type of holiday available to them in the Isle of Man or in Blackpool; that type of holiday, as I have said, is not available here. The nearest approach to that kind of holiday is to be found in our holiday camps. I think we should consider the question of providing a centre of our own which would become known internationally. Blackpool, the Isle of Man and other such places are internationally known for the type of amenities and amusements they provide.

The only other point I wish to make is that I am not in favour of the proposal to have three tourist bodies functioning at the same time—the Irish Tourist Association, An Bord Fáilte and Fógra Fáilte. I think that An Bord Fáilte and Fógra Fáilte, at least, could operate as a unit. One is concerned with administration and the other with publicity, but I do not think there is any necessity to have separate units. You will have a person going to Fógra Fáilte to make an inquiry and he will be told that he can get the information from An Bord Fáilte. Similarly, if he goes to An Bord Fáilte he will be told to go to Fógra Fáilte. I think it would be better if the tourist organisation were operated as a unit rather than having it divided into separate administrative units. The present arrangement tends to confuse people, particularly people from outside the country.

I welcome the Bill inasmuch as it is an attempt to encourage tourism and to make the best of the country. The food available in this country will prove, I think, a very great attraction to people coming from abroad, particularly from Britain. If we take steps to ensure that it will be made available to them at the right price, I think we shall be doing a good day's work for the nation. Many unemployed workers in this country say they would take a job in England were it not for the food situation there. Certainly, people in Britain who may be tired of the kind of food obtainable there, and who know that they can get good food here, will be encouraged to come here. They will not come here, however, at any price. They will not come here, even if there is good food available, if they know that it is very expensive. I hope, therefore, that steps will be taken to prevent any exorbitant charges for meals and foodstuffs, now that we have got a real opportunity to develop tourist traffic in this country. Due to the currency restrictions applied in Great Britain, an opportunity will present itself of developing tourism in this country during the coming year such as was never presented before. I hope this Bill will enable us to take full advantage of that situation in order to increase the national income from tourism.

I do not think that there is any suggestion I can add at this particular juncture in the debate to those which have been already put to the House. As a matter of fact, were the Minister to put into effect the many and varied suggestions which have been made to him since last Thursday, it would cost such a colossal sum that he might well ask himself the question: "Is the game really worth the candle?"

Every Deputy is aware that for the past few years we have undoubtedly experienced an increasing influx of visitors to this country. We know very well that everything is favourable to an improvement in the volume of that influx in the coming year. It might be well to ask ourselves why it is that all these people have been flocking to our shores for the past few years. If we are honest with ourselves we will not neglect to take into consideration the state of Europe to-day.

I do not wish in any way to express pessimistic views on this Bill. So long as I am a member of this House I shall support any measure which seeks to improve our tourist trade. At the same time, I should like to be cautious and when it comes to the spending of money I should like the money to be spent in such a way as to bring in a return not only in the immediate future but in the years to come. I should like the money to be spent on industries which will last down through the years and which will give a good working profit during all these years.

A lot has been said about hotels, catering, the way the food is served and the charges. I do not think that tourists come to this country solely for the purpose of eating and drinking. If I were to visit a foreign country I know that not alone should I like to eat well but I should also like to see the beauty spots and the places of historic interest in that country.

I feel that while many people who visit this country come to see our beauty spots there are many who are aware of our recent history and of the traditions of our country and who have that added interest in visiting this country. When these people come here they like to study our people and our way of life as well as to visit our beauty spots and places of historical interest. I fear that it frequently happens that we have not suitable accommodation for these purposes and I am not referring now to buses or to Córas Iompair Éireann but to the scandalous and disgraceful condition of our roads. Whilst our main roads are in a fairly good condition, our county roads—the roads which so very often lead to the very places which visitors want to see—are in a shocking condition and will, I fear, remain in that condition until something is done by the powers that be to help the public bodies of every county in the Republic to improve them, because it has come to the point when it is away and beyond the capacity of the ratepayers to pay for them.

I should like, also, if the moneys to be spent in the development of the tourist industry of this country will not be what I might term "centralised." I hope that all the money will not be spent on Dublin. A lot has been said in this debate about Dublin and Deputy Corry has said a good deal about Cork, although his colleagues did not altogether agree with him. No matter how the Deputies from Clare may differ in their views on other matters, I am sure that the Taoiseach, the Ceann Comhairle, Deputy Dr. Hillery and myself are of one mind in our desire to publicise the fact that Clare has amenities to offer to tourists which no other county in the Republic can offer. We even have health services to offer and in that way health and pleasure can be combined in a visit to Clare.

This is not the first time that the tourist industry has been experimented with. There is an old saying to the effect that we learn by our mistakes and if there have been mistakes in the past—I do not say that there have been—this is a glorious opportunity for the new board to benefit by past experience.

I do not think that Deputy Murphy exaggerated or gilded the lily when he stated that Clare has the greatest health resort in Ireland. In fact, I think he could have gone much further and said that, in Lisdoonvarna, Clare possessed one of the greatest health resorts in the world. Too little, unfortunately, is known of Lisdoonvarna in this and in other countries.

I quite agree with Deputy Murphy that more attention must be given to our roads and particularly to our county roads if we want to encourage tourists to visit and revisit this country. The condition of our roads for some years past has been unsatisfactory and I think that the Minister for Local Government must, of necessity, play a great part in making this Bill a success. Again, the Minister for Local Government and the Minister for Health can be of great assistance in the matter of the provision of more grants, if possible, for the repair and improvement not alone of hotels but of old family homes and private houses. If modern sanitary arrangements are installed in the old homes of many of our kith and kin who have gone to America, Australia and elsewhere, it will help in no small way to encourage them and their descendants to visit us.

I hope the Minister will see his way to amend Section 39 of the Bill because I think it gives too much scope for the granting of licences and there might be a danger that there would be interference to too great an extent with the existing licensed trade. We must realise and appreciate that if we interfere with the trade of the ordinary licensed holders in the country we may be killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. The revenue derived from the licensed trade is huge and I hope we are not going to give licences to every person who builds an hotel and complies with certain regulations, that these people are not going to get carte blanche. Above and beyond all, the right to object to the granting of a licence should remain. I earnestly hope that the Minister will reconsider that section, as otherwise we might have people building hotels in certain parts of the country in order to get a licence when the granting of such a licence might be detrimental to the interest of the licensed trade.

The Department of Fisheries should play a big part so far as tourism is concerned. I am afraid that our system of distribution of fish is not what it should be. If we are to cater for tourists in a proper way, a fish meal must be one of the meals they will get, especially if they observe fast days when they come here. The proper distribution of fish should be one of the concerns of the Department and the Minister responsible. Fresh fish, of which there is an abundance around our coasts, should be made available to hotels and to our inland towns and generally throughout the country.

I think it was Deputy Rooney who did not agree that there should be three boards. Personally, I should like to see half a dozen more set up if they would help to increase tourism. We have got to realise that our tourist trade is of immense value. It is worth more to us than all the fat cattle we export. In 1947, the income from the tourist trade was in the region of £35,000,000. With the much-needed boost which this Bill will give it, I hope it will reach £50,000,000, if not this year, then next year.

This debate has gone on so long and so many suggestions have been made that there seems to be very little more to be said on the matter. Despite the case made by Deputy Davern, I think there is pretty general agreement that three boards are unnecessary to cater for this industry which is playing such a large part in our economics. It is now accepted as our second industry and there is no doubt that it is capable of much greater development. Many suggestions have been put forward which are worth while. I am confident, from the fair manner in which the Minister introduced the Bill, that suggestions made by Deputies will be borne in mind.

Some Deputies were slightly unfair in the criticisms which they offered of some of our services. I represent an inland constituency and I am not very conversant with the difficulties encountered by tourists on disembarkation here. I appreciate, however, from the remarks of Dublin and Cork Deputies, that such difficulties exist. But I am concerned with the transport which is available within the country itself. There appears to be a great increase in the number of people who prefer to travel throughout the country in cars driven by themselves. The day tours by bus, particularly in the South, give those who avail of them very good value. I have met dozens of tourists who availed of them, and they deeply appreciated the facilities provided. Our main line trains, particularly from Cork to Dublin, are providing a good service. The carriages are very comfortable and the food provided is first class. I know that many of our railway stations are very drab-looking and not very comfortable. Yet, at Christmas time, when Córas Iompair Éireann brightens up Kingsbridge Station, it shows to our returning emigrants that there is a Christmas welcome awaiting them.

Considerable difficulty is encountered by those who like to drive their own cars on tours throughout the country in getting out from the centre of the city here. If some method could be devised by which there would be directions as to how they would reach the half-dozen arterial roads which would take them to places of scenic or historic interest, it would help considerably in easing the traffic problem which they encounter. I agree that if we brought our roads up to the standard which would encourage more and more motor tourists it would cost such an amount of money that it would be impossible for the ratepayers to bear it. I feel that if the job is to be done as it should be done, there must be some kind of central directive given so as to emphasise the overall idea of providing the country with a good coastal road plan which should be carried out in such a way that there would not be any gaps. I know of counties which have great scenic value but, where they merge with the adjoining county, there is such a lack of cohesion that there are lamentable gaps which are practically impassable. Therefore, I feel that a direction from the Local Government Department, with that idea in mind, would bear good fruit.

There is a regrettable absence of road-houses on our main roads. The rigid three-course menu which is available at most places does not suit some people and the provision of something in the nature of light snacks could be encouraged by the new board. Our petrol stations also should be provided with better toilet facilities which would give a better impression to people coming into the country as well as providing much needed accommodation.

Most of the Deputies who have spoken have referred to the great natural scenery in this country. I would introduce a little note of warning. It is that unless there is some restriction on commercial advertising there is great danger that our natural scenery may be very greatly marred. In Killarney, there is rigid protection of the major part of that beauty spot. We all know that it is recognised as one of the great world beauty centres, and it is well that there is that protection to ensure that its natural beauty will not be destroyed. Throughout the country there is, unfortunately, an increase in the number of huge commercial hoardings which, I think, detract from the natural beauty of the countryside. There are also too many derelict buildings which should have the attention of our local authorities, and perhaps it would be no harm if they were demolished. There is also the defacement of dry walls all over the country. These are matters which should receive the attention of the board.

There is, too, I am afraid, a lack of civic spirit. Perhaps something could be done to correct that in our schools. Our youth should be taught to realise how important it is to this industry that good impressions should be created on visitors coming into the country. I think it was unfair, on the part of a Government Deputy, to pass a slighting remark about the Garda force. They are, I think, deserving of very great credit for the courtesy and kindness they show to people who come in contact with them in the discharge of their official duties or who merely approach them to obtain some information.

The Automobile Association has been commended for what it is doing. I should like to mention the courtesy which our Córas Iompair Éireann drivers show in the discharge of their duties. I am of opinion that if all motorists were as considerate to other traffic on the road as they are, and were to display the same courtesy, the number of accidents would be greatly decreased, with the consequent result that there would be an immense improvement in our transport services.

The introduction of the regulations relating to hygiene in our shops and licensed houses will, I feel, have the result of leaving a good impression on tourists. I agree with what Deputy Flynn said about the restrictions which operate in regard to fishing rights. I come from a riverside which is noted for its fishing—the Blackwater. Recently, an association drew our attention to the very small portion of that river which is available for free fishing. Perhaps steps could be taken to protect that small portion and to ensure that people who come here and desire to fish in our waters, would be located in places where free waters would be available to them. I think steps in that direction would be advisable.

I regret that there is provision in the Bill whereby certain facilities are to be afforded to the luxury tourist— I refer to the drinking facilities which are denied to our own people. I completely agree with Deputy Corry that we should look after our own people first. I do not think that we should allow our desire to give every attention to the tourist to blind us to the fact that our own people are deserving of some facilities, and that we should not give to others what we would not give to our own.

I do not think there is anything more I have to say except that in my view there is a need for making available summarised histories dealing with local historic spots. Our visitors are not prepared to sit down and wade through a voluminous history to get particulars of the places they visit. I think it would be well if a summary were available so that in an hour or so visitors could find out everything they wanted to know about the locality they were visiting. I think that such histories would be appreciated by visitors.

Something might be done, too, to improve the standard of the mementos and tokens which are offered for sale in shops at seaside places, and indeed in more important tourist centres. I think that would be a good thing, because we ourselves carefully examine what is brought home to us from abroad. In fact, I might say we form certain impressions of foreign countries from the quality and appearance of those objects. I am afraid if that were the measuring rod by which other people judge us, the result would be pitiable.

In conclusion, I want to unite my voice with the view expressed by many other Deputies—I am sure that the Government will agree that there has been a unified voice on this—that it is deplorable that a third organisation should be established now to look after the tourist industry. I think that will cause confusion to tourists. They will find themselves faced with a multiplicity of organisations. I do not agree at all that there is any need for it. While welcoming any project which will encourage tourism, help our hoteliers and transport authorities, and help everybody interested in this industry, we think it is a pity that the whole thing was not co-ordinated under one organisation.

A debate of this kind does not allow one to go too much into detail. It is quite possible that one is liable to forget the wood for the trees. I am sure the fact that last year the sum of £33,000,000 came into this country by way of tourism impresses many people. What strikes me in connection with it is, where does the money go which accrues from tourism? What sections of the population benefit by it, and how much of it percolates down to the ordinary people? I think it would probably be impossible to say. Many will give expression to the opinion that everybody benefits by tourism, from the porter on the pier at Dún Laoghaire to the agricultural worker in the field. That, I think, is far too extravagant a view to take of this industry. That should be the case, but unfortunately it is not the case.

A great deal of this money which accrues as a result of large numbers of people visiting here during the holiday season is of very little benefit to the nation as a whole. It is lodged in deposit accounts belonging to that small section which controls the tourist industry, the commercial end of the industry. We do not have to go very far to find an example of what I am stating now. If one walks 200 yards from here one will find hotel workers who have been walking up and down outside a particular establishment for the past five or six months, right through the autumn and the harsh winter weather. Many of them are elderly people who have lived for the greater part of their lives as hotel employees and who are now making this effort to get something approaching a decent wage.

It is not good enough that we should bring in the maximum number of tourists and spend money on propaganda abroad to induce them to come here if we do not at the same time take steps to ensure that the income that accrues from the industry is made beneficial to the people as a whole and not just to one small section of our community. We have seen a conscienceless display of utter disregard for the workers in this industry in the past six months. It is a display which certainly does not encourage the average person to have any sympathy with those who are working for the advancement of tourism.

In the world in which we live tourism can be of tremendous benefit to the nation. Let us not, however, run away with the wild and fanciful idea that because £33,000,000 came into the country last year our people were so much the richer by that sum. I am sorry that there is not some authority to force those who are battening on tourism to give a fair deal to those who make tourism possible, the operatives and the workers in the hotels throughout the country. I am sure that every Deputy here has on occasions spoken to visitors from other countries and particularly to visitors from the other side of the Irish Sea. It has been made quite plain to all of us that they regard our hotel charges as fairly high. They have expressed satisfaction with the food but they say they have to pay fairly high prices for it. The landladies at a certain seaside resort not very far from Dublin have made their names synonymous with meanness. They are famous for the infliction of the highest possible charges. That should not be so, but it is so. Enormous profits have been made out of tourists. The unfortunate people who work in the back rooms or down in the kitchens to produce the food, keep the hotels clean and do all the hard work are compelled to walk up and down outside their places of employment through all sorts of weather in an effort to get a few shillings a week. Let us not lose sight of the hard facts of the present situation when we talk about the tourist industry.

Deputy Rooney referred to the desirability of providing some kind of holiday resorts on Blackpool or Brighton lines. I do not know if Deputy Rooney is very familiar with these places. I had the misfortune on one occasion to visit Blackpool and I would not like any of our seaside resorts to develop into anything like those so-called centres of recreation. We have here the natural beauty of our countryside, a natural beauty which does not need any embellishment. It does need the application of a little bit of imagination and progressive thought.

Above all, it needs control from the point of view of giving the ordinary working-class tourist, who is the backbone of that industry, a fair deal in so far as charges are concerned so that he can rest assured in the knowledge that the money that he pays is not money that will benefit a small group of people but is something that will benefit the country as a whole. It is essential that he should feel welcome and go away with the desire to return. How many go away and never return? How many were out all night last year on the pier at Dún Laoghaire in the most inclement weather with no shelter of any kind? Some of them were even denied the use of empty railway coaches which were standing there. People subjected to treatment like that do not return. I do not refer to that matter for the purpose of doing any damage to the future of the industry. I do not think my mentioning it here will have any effect whatsoever but that kind of thing should not be allowed to occur because it does create in the minds of our visitors a prejudice against returning.

The most important aspect of tourism is that based upon the percolation of the income that accrues from that industry to the great masses of the people. Those who say that the farmer and the industrial worker benefit from tourism are talking so much nonsense. It makes very little difference to the agricultural labourer if a tourist never crosses Dún Laoghaire Pier. He will still be living at the lowest level of existence. There are people who benefit a little too much and they should be compelled to share their benefits. They should at least have some shame in them and they should not sacrifice elderly people as they are sacrificing them at the moment.

Dublin County Council and Dublin. Corporation have under consideration the question of developing Portmarnock for the benefit of the citizens of Dublin. Portmarnock offers the finest natural amenities to the population of Dublin, but it is in a very undeveloped state. Both Dublin Corporation and Dublin County Council propose at an early date to plan the development of that area. Portmarnock strand is probably the finest in Ireland. If it were possible that any of these three boards to which reference has been made in this debate had funds at its disposal, it could do very much worse with some of them than help in the development of Portmarnock.

That was one of the Coalition economies. The land was bought but it was sold again.

The Minister is not going to suggest that the County Club at Portmarnock——

I am talking about the 200 acres of land that are there.

They employed three workers.

Plans were made for the development and for the building of roads and putting up shelters.

It is like a good many more plans that were made. They were not carried out.

Glengariff Castle went also.

When I speak of the development of Portmarnock, I do not speak about the provision of a luxury hotel on an estate of 200 acres.

I was not talking about the hotel. I was talking about the plans for the building of roads and shelters.

I am talking about the importance of Portmarnock to the people and not about the fanciful idea of luxury hotels.

Nobody is talking about hotels.

Nobody knows what the plan was.

The Deputy should find out.

This Deputy knows about the matter and the facts are not as the Minister states.

The work would have been done in 1947 were it not for the county council.

I should like if we went down to Ballinahinch instead.

What I am talking about is——

——the development of Portmarnock as a holiday centre for Dublin workers under the Bill.

For Dublin workers. That is what I am talking about.

The plans that were in existence would not have provided for that.

They would have been carried out in 1947 if the co-operation of the Dublin County Council had been got. The plans are there.

I challenge the Minister to tell the Dublin County Council and the Dublin Corporation about them.

Dublin County Council know all about them and if they had co-operated in 1947 they would have been carried out.

We can only assume that our county manager has been keeping them a secret over the last three years.

They are there since 1932.

If you were here before 1932 you would know about them.

We will be going back to 1922 in a minute.

We are discussing the Tourist Development Bill.

Portmarnock offers the greatest promise of any seaside resort in the country from the point of view of tourism. Because of the fact that it has not been developed on any great scale over the past 50 years, it has not got the opportunity to get the stigma that attaches to other areas to which I referred. There has been no exploitation in regard to tourism in Portmarnock so that we have a chance to start, as it were, on virgin ground with the most perfect natural amenities within a 15-miles railway run from the City of Dublin. On a Sunday afternoon in the summer it is no uncommon thing to see anything from 20,000 to 30,000 Dublin working-class people spending their leisure time there. The local authority propose to develop Portmarnock and I think it is the duty of the central authority, of one of these boards, or of the three of them or some other board to give some help to the local authority who are the initiators of this proposal. We never heard of any plan to develop Portmarnock. There was a country club employing two or three people.

What do you mean by developing Portmarnock? Is it not buying the land and opening up the strand to the people?

I mean the provision of essential services right down to the strand and providing amenities, the ordinary civilised amenities, which people require wherever they may foregather.

That is what the land was bought for and it was to prevent that that the land was sold.

That is a good excuse but nobody will accept it. It is just a debating point made by the Minister.

It is a matter I am very sore about. It is one of the things I was very keen on.

You kept it a great secret.

That was done just because Deputy Costello happened to be a member of the Portmarnock club.

Is that remark in accordance with the decorum of the House?

I withdraw it. I am a member myself.

We have spent a very long time in Portmarnock and I suggest that we get along with the Tourist Bill.

We could not spend too long in it, Sir.

We are too long in it now.

The Minister is interrupting the whole time.

If the Ceann Comhairle had been here earlier he would not have objected to hearing his colleague singing the praises of his native county. Having made those few points in regard to Partmarnock and the hotel strike, I will now conclude.

I think there is unanimity in the House with regard to the importance of tourism. Undoubtedly it has assumed an importance that nobody could have anticipated 20 or 30 years ago. Like my friend, Deputy Murphy, I am rather sceptical about its permanence. I, too, share the view that conditions in Europe have a terrible lot to do with the prosperous state of tourism in this country.

Man is an animal and he has to be fed. There is no place in Europe that man, as a holiday maker, can get better food for less money than he can get in the Republic of Ireland. I think that that explains to a great degree why Ireland has become so popular as a tourist centre. For that reason I am rather sceptical about its permanence but with altered conditions in Europe that prosperity might not continue. I think it would be unwise, in the circumstances, to spend too lavishly on this particular item of our national economy. I admit that at the moment it is a good proposition but it will want to be enduring before it would justify the expenditure that some Deputies would like to see undertaken.

I have heard many Deputies complain about high charges in Dublin hotels. I do not think that anywhere a traveller will go he will get better service or better value for money than he will get in the good-class Dublin hotel to-day. I do not think it is fair and I do not think it is a good advertisement from the point of view of tourism for any Deputy to get up and decry either the services or the conditions in our Dublin hotels. He has only to leave the country to find out how really good that service is and how relatively cheap—I do not say for our people here on their level of income, but in comparison with what they would get for their £1 elsewhere. They are cheaper than a traveller would get in any capital in Europe to-day.

Tourism must be looked at in two ways—first of all, from the point of view of publicity. We must publicise the fact that this is a good country in which to have a holiday, that you can have for your holiday packet better value here than you can get elsewhere. That must be emphasised at every possible point of contact, such as railway stations and bus termini, not inside the country but outside it. We must let people know that we are here and that we want them to come here.

Publicity can take a shape other than ordinary posters or brochures. A land can sometimes become popular, a place which people would like to see, because of the utterances of its statesmen, and I think that any man with a sense of responsibility should be very careful about what he says of the peoples of other countries, because it is quite easy for a public representative to give offence. I regret to say that some of our public representatives have given offence to our friends in the United States. Last year one man who represented this country made insulting references to the people of the United States when he was a member of the Council of Europe. It was a wanton attack on the American people, and I have no doubt that a statement of that description would antagonise a number of Americans. Neither have I any doubt whatsoever that if they read in the American Press to-morrow the statement of Deputy Seán Flanagan last week a number of our people resident in America would be insulted. If we are to bring American visitors here, most of them will be returned Irish. The real Americans who will come will be very few, but we want our own people to come back and spend their holiday money with us, and we will not get them back by insulting them from the national Assembly. I was rather surprised that any responsible Deputy should make what I consider a grave mistake. The dollar is the most valuable currency in the world to-day. Our people who have those dollars would naturally come to the land of their birth to spend them, but they will not be inclined to come if they think there is no welcome for them here or that we look on them in the manner expressed here last week.

At the risk of boring the Minister, I want to say that I share the view that there should be unified control of this question. Also, from the little knowledge I have of the Minister and the opinion I have formed of him, I would have expected that if there were three boards in existence, he would be one man who would make one board of them. That is the attitude I would have expected him to adopt, because I have always regarded him as a man with a businesslike approach to a problem. His approach might not be mine, but I must confess that I have always regarded him as a man with a businesslike approach. The very fact that you have divided responsibility is a handicap.

You are only leaving the way open for one body to say: "That is the other fellow's fault, not mine." But if you have one body and charge one body with responsibility for all phases of tourism I honestly believe that you would get a lot further. I do think that when this Bill goes through and the Minister or somebody else in his place has experience of its working you will ultimately revert to unified control.

Many theories have been put forward as to how we could best advertise the country, and I am not going to repeat them. They are all good, but there was one thing which struck me. I think it was Deputy O'Sullivan who referred to the necessity for signposts to the various exists from the city. That is more important than might strike us who know quite well how to go north, south, east or west from the city. I remember that last summer a young hitchhiker from Central Europe accosted me at Maynooth for a lift and I was astonished by what he had to tell me. When he came down from Belfast he asked somebody in Dublin City what road to take to Galway and the man he accosted told him: "Oh, you will have to go to Limerick first and then up to Galway." That is an astonishing thing to occur to anybody in his own city, to be unable to direct a visitor on the road to Galway.

He may have been a Limerick man.

Even if he were a Limerick man, if he were an Irishman he should know the road from Galway to Dublin, or at least if he did not know it I would expect him to find out and tell the unfortunate visitor rather than send him down to Limerick. I think Deputy O'Sullivan's suggestion a good one and that it is necessary that people who come here should be able to see at a glance which road to take in order to go north or south or any other way.

If it were Deputy McGrath he would send him to Cork.

And probably keep him there.

He knew all about Cork already. One point was not touched upon and that is the part local development associations can play in this matter. In small towns practically all over the country local development associations have been formed, and if contact were maintained between the tourist bodies and these associations with regard to procuring information on places of historical or archæological interest a person arriving in a country area could know what was worth seeing and study the history of the district. I think that in that way some useful work could be done.

I would conclude with the pious wish that the Minister will still come round to the idea of one control.

We have had a long and, on the whole, very instructive debate upon this Bill. In the course of it, we got a multitude of suggestions covering the operation of transport by land, sea and air, of local authorities, educational authorities, the Garda, of taxation, and of a number of other organisations and interests. All that, I think, tends to emphasise that the development of the tourist trade requires the active co-operation of a multitude of interests and that it cannot be promoted merely by legislation of the kind we are discussing here, or the establishment of organisations such as the legislation provides for. Unless we can get, as Mr. Christenberry pointed out in his report, a general understanding amongst all our people of the importance of the tourist trade to the country, the efforts of these central organisations will be negatived by the lack of effective co-operation on the part of the other authorities which have been named here, and particularly the local authorities and those responsible for the provision of transport services.

Every Deputy spoke as an authority on tourism, and that is not a peculiarity of Deputies. Everybody who ever stayed in an hotel regards himself as an authority on tourism and forms his views by a process of generalising his own experiences, assuming that the experiences he has undergone are the same as those of everybody else. That also is interesting to note, because it is in many ways a justification for legislation of the kind we are discussing, imposing certain restrictions upon the operation of hotels and making provision for the extension of the amenities available to visitors, because every visitor coming to this country will also generalise his experiences.

If he finds himself in a bad hotel, with damp beds, bad clothes or dirty washrooms, he will go back and say to his friends in the place he came from that a holiday in Ireland involved these inconveniences. It is because one bad hotel, one badly organised or conducted hotel, can damage the reputation of all hotels, because the absence of facilities or amenities in one county can prejudice the prospects of the tourist trade in every county, that we require legislation and organisation, if we are to make the best out of the prospects of this industry.

It has been agreed during the course of the discussion by practically every Deputy who spoke that this tourist trade is of major economic importance, of so great an importance that it is worth our while taking exceptional measures to extend and consolidate it. Deputy Dr. Browne and some other Deputies confessed that they were belated and perhaps even yet shaky converts to the economic importance of the tourist trade. I do not think that anybody who has even a slight acquaintance with the present position of the national economy can have any doubts about it now. No doubt, we would like to have industries manufacturing precision instruments or high-class machinery, involving the employment of highly-skilled workers and capable of developing exports to the extent of £30,000,000 a year. That would be a very healthy position to be in, but we have not got these industries, and it will be a very long number of years before we can hope to deal with the balance of payments position by the expansion of visible exports.

The balance of payments position is very grave. I confess that I think many Deputies, like many people in the country, do not realise yet how grave it is. Certainly the capacity of this country to maintain, on the basis of present standards, its present population will depend largely upon our ability to move towards an adjustment of that balance in this year and the best prospect of doing it is offered by the tourist trade. In fact, of all the activities open to us, there is none which yields as bright a prospect in relation to that problem as tourism.

There was no adverse comment during the whole debate upon many of the main provisions of the Bill. There was no comment upon the financial provisions, and I am glad of that, because it is now obvious that the Bill will not be law before the end of this month, as I had hoped, and consequently it will not be possible for the organisations to be set up under the Bill to undertake the higher expenditure for which the Bill provides as early as I had intended; but, in view of the fact that the financial provisions of the Bill appear to have secured the general approval of Deputies, I think I can take the risk of telling them to proceed upon the assumption that the Bill will pass with these provisions more or less unchanged, even though actual expenditure may not be incurred until the Bill has become law.

Approval was also expressed or implied of the provisions of the Bill relating to national monuments, the improvement of the sign-posting of roads and other matters of that kind. Disagreement was expressed by many Deputies opposite with some of the details of the organisations for the administration of the tourist industry which the Bill proposes to set up and some proposals were made for the amendment of the licensing provisions. Let me deal first with the question of the so-called third organisation. I want to make it as clear as I can that I am not proposing to set up a new organisation much less a third organisation. I am not proposing to introduce any new body into the organisation of the tourist trade to do something which somebody else could do better, or is doing now. The proposal in this Bill is to end the disorganisation which now exists. At the present time, you have this work of tourist publicity done by two separate organisations, the Tourist Association and the Tourist Board, each with a separate staff engaged in the work.

Was any publicity done by the Tourist Board?

There is a staff there.

Very little—practically none.

Most of the money spent last year upon tourist publicity came out of Tourist Board funds and not Tourist Association funds.

Yes, but not spent by the Tourist Board.

That situation exists, that there are two separate bodies which were not even on friendly terms with each other. I decided that if there was to be effective concentration of that effort for tourist publicity, either one or the other of these bodies had to be wiped out of the publicity field altogether or, alternatively, I had to get an arrangement for bringing them together. I decided it was better to bring them together, and this new board is a board to take over the publicity functions of both association and board, and it consists of three members of the Tourist Board and three nominees of the Tourist Association. Its sole function is to ensure more effective publicity by concentrating under the supervision of that joint board, consisting of representatives of both of the existing organisations, all publicity work.

Will we not have three boards then?

There will be the Tourist Board, the Joint Board and the Tourist Association.

Call them boards if you like. Some Deputies suggested that this work of tourist publicity could be done by a sub-committee of the Tourist Board. In effect that is what Fógra Fáilte is.

Except that there are added to the members of the Tourist Board on the committee the representatives of the Tourist Association.

There is an entirely different staff.

It is an autonomous body.

I intend to deal with the question fully. Let me take the history of it first. In 1939, when the Tourist Board was set up, it was not intended that they should have anything to do with tourist publicity. It was intended that the direction and financing of tourist publicity would be the concern of the Tourist Association, which would have sole charge in that field. That idea-as I said when introducing the Bill—was based upon the rather modest plans of those years with regard to expenditure on tourist publicity. It was felt that the revenue of the Tourist Association would provide adequate resources for that purpose. That proved to be completely erroneous in the post-war years. Not merely did the revenue of the Tourist Association not increase with the rising level of costs, but the more favourable opportunities for developing the tourist trade in the post-war years obviously called for much heavier expenditure than the Tourist Association could under any circumstances attempt. That is why the Tourist Board began to encroach upon the publicity field, and to devote to publicity a substantial and a growing part of the money provided for it by this House.

Is the Irish Tourist Association being wiped out under this measure?

No; on the contrary.

If not, what function will it have under this Bill?

This issue of wiping out the Tourist Association was, in fact, faced by my predecessor, Deputy Morrissey, and by Deputy Cosgrave, his Parliamentary Secretary. They had this problem to face as well as I had and they got a recommendation from the Tourist Board which in effect meant wiping out the Tourist Association. They accepted that recommendation and brought it to their Government and got the approval of their Government to that proposal. Now, there was, I think, pressure put upon them from the Tourist Association to change that decision. How great that pressure was they know; I do not. After Deputy O'Higgins became Minister for Industry and Commerce, there was a reconsideration of the decision and it was thought well, at any rate, to postpone its operation; and the Tourist Association was told that things would remain as they were. for that year and that the whole issue would be re-examined before the end of the year, that is, the end of 1951.

Pending the introduction of a Bill.

Similar to the one the Minister has introduced now.

Not quite.

Not quite, in Part V, I agree.

The recommendation of the Tourist Board, which in effect meant the elimination of the Tourist Association, was that licences should be given under the Tourist Traffic Act of 1931 to local associations. One such association was formed in Sligo, as I told the House, and inevitably it succeeded in securing for itself a large part of the local contributions from the rates for tourist publicity purposes. It was obvious that a number of these associations would be formed if licences under that Act were to be given and that they would divert to themselves the revenue on which the Tourist Association had previously existed. I felt that that was an unwise decision, but more than that I understood from the developments last year that any proposal which involved the elimination of the Tourist Association was likely to be a controversial one—and I mean controversial in the political sense—and that if we were to get effective action in the development of the tourist trade it would be wise to avoid that type of controversy, if possible.

I met the Tourist Board and discussed their proposal with them. I indicated that I thought there was need for a reorganisation of the publicity services which then existed. I told them it was my intention to ask the Government to provide substantial additional funds for publicity purposes and that that seemed inevitably to involve the reorganisation to which I referred. In my first discussion with the Tourist Board I did not find them in agreement with my view. I have mentioned that they had submitted their own proposals to my predecessor, which involved proceeding on a different line.

I then met the board of directors of the Tourist Association. Their view was that we should get back to the 1939 position, in which all tourist publicity work was entrusted to them, the Tourist Board carrying on its functions under the 1939 Act.

A deputation from the directors, not all the directors.

I accept the correction. An objection to that course, as I saw it, was that we would be giving substantial annual sums to be administered by an organisation which was not ideally designed for the purpose and over which the Government and this House would have no control. The board of directors of the Tourist Association consists of representatives of various local authorities that strike a rate for tourist publicity purposes and representatives also of voluntary subscribers to the funds of the association. The personnel of the board of directors of the association changes fairly frequently, and in any case it is a very large board, too large to be an effective instrument of administration.

In the course of my discussions with the Tourist Association, I indicated my willingness to consider setting up this joint board, Fógra Fáilte, a board consisting of representatives of the Tourist Board and of their association, provided they were prepared to agree on handing over to the joint board the publicity functions that they had been undertaking, on the understanding that the Tourist Board would do the same thing. I got agreement on that basis. It ended a feud which was developing between the association and the board and it set up, in my opinion, an effective instrument of tourist publicity.

The Minister is not quite right. He says he got agreement. That was only when the joint board agreed to re-delegate back to the association the operation of the bureaux.

No; I will not accept that as a correction. It is not true.

It is a fact.

My original proposal to the association was that this Fógra Fáilte would consist of five members— three directors of the Tourist Board and two of their association. The only alteration they recommended was that there should be six members, three from each body, and I accepted that suggestion. The proposal to give to the association the administration, as agents for Fógra Fáilte, of the bureaux in this country emerged much later, and in no way arises from my discussion with the association directors. I said to them that I thought they had a very considerable part to play in the whole tourist business. The most important part I saw them fulfilling was the education of Irish public opinion in relation to the importance of tourist publicity—doing that particular job which Mr. Christenberry said had to be done by somebody and which, if not done, would negative the whole effort we were making. I asked them to submit to me their views as to what other activities they could usefully engage in, having regard to their agreement that this publicity function should be entrusted to a body representative of the two existing organisations. I got their recommendations in that regard. I did not agree with all of them; I agreed with some.

Some of them have not yet been decided. They are rather wider in character than the matters of administration we were dealing with at the time. It has been suggested here, first of all that this is going to mean a more costly administration and, secondly, that behind it there was the idea of creating jobs. So far as the jobs are concerned, I dispose of that suggestion straight away by pointing out that this board, Fógra Fáilte, consists, as I have told the House, of three existing members of the Tourist Board and three directors of the Tourist Association. As far as the organisation is concerned, there is nothing in that contention. This business of tourist publicity is entirely distinct and separate from the ordinary activities of the Tourist Board.

It requires a specialist staff. That is why it was considered quite practicable in 1939 to leave it with the Tourist Association, with the Tourist Board going ahead with and carrying out its own activities. I do not agree at all that it is necessary to have it entrusted to the one board that is also dealing with these other matters to which this Bill relates. Even if we did that, there would be under that board a completely separate organisation working up to a general management and it does not matter a rap, it seems to me, whether that organisation works under the Tourist Board or under this new joint board, Fógra Fáilte. It would be the same organisation and there will not be one additional member on it because of the existence of Fógra Fáilte.

If we decide to do what was suggested here and to get rid of Fógra Fáilte and give An Bord Fáilte, the present Tourist Board, the sole responsibility in relation to publicity, the job of supervising the work of that publicity organisation, what are we going to do with the Tourist Association? Some Deputy said to give the Tourist Association representation on the Tourist Board. I would disagree with that because it is bringing the Tourist Association into a field in which they never were before, and there is no reason to think that you will get out of the Tourist Association people with any specialised knowledge in relation to these functions. You may do it but the constitution of the Tourist Association is such that you have no certainty that you will and, in any event, it is obvious that there would be political difficulties there too.

The Tourist Association is based upon the local councils. The local councils are political bodies and even Deputy Palmer, when he was dealing with my agreement with the association and referred to the fact that I picked three directors out of six persons nominated by them, turned immediately to criticise me because I did not pick one of the six who was nominated by County Kerry and who happens to be, as everybody here knows, the lynchpin of the Fine Gael organisation in that part of Ireland, an excellent man in that job and, as I know, a real enthusiast for tourist development.

I would like to get this clear because this is likely to be the only part of the Bill on which there will be any major contention. It would be well if we could get the matter clarified. The Minister said a moment ago that he would not take a certain course because it would involve wiping out the Tourist Association. That is, in fact, what the Minister is doing.

No, I do not think so.

Perhaps the Minister will allow me for a moment. The main, if not the only function of the Tourist Association since it was established was publicity. That was its sole function. A new board is being established under this Bill, the sole function of which will be publicity. Once the Tourist Association nominates these three members for that board, it has no other function.

No; the Deputy misunderstands me there.

That must be got clear.

I have told the Tourist Association that I expect them also to discharge the function of criticising the work of that board if it requires criticism, of furnishing it with proposals and suggestions and, in that way, working up to that board as they work to their own councils. In other words, the Tourist Association, instead of discharging its publicity activities through its own general manager and staff, will now discharge them through its representatives on Fógra Fáilte.

I will agree with any Deputy who says that if we were starting afresh, without any of the complications arising out of existing organisations, we would not think at first of doing anything except setting up one organisation. But we are not starting afresh. There is the Tourist Association there. It is a body which has been in operation in this field for 25 years, a voluntary body which commands a great deal of public goodwill and which is particularly important because of its association with the local councils. I am in favour of keeping it in the picture, of giving it specific functions in this field, and I think it is possible to do that without interfering in any way with the efficiency of our tourist organisation.

Deputy Lehane said that in the new circumstances the Tourist Association may not get contributions from local rates. I made it clear to them that, if they do not, then this arrangement will have to be reconsidered. The claim of the Tourist Association to representation upon this board dealing with publicity is based upon the fact that they are at present making a substantial contribution from their revenue to the expense of publicity.

I know Deputies have been attaching importance to this part of the Bill. I do not think it is important at all. I do not think it makes the slightest difference, from one point of view, whether we maintain An Bord Fáilte and An Fógra Fáilte or amalgamate the two, except in relation to the Tourist Association. It would be quite an easy matter to effect that amalgamation if the consequential effects upon the Tourist Association could be foreseen. Unless we are prepared to proceed on the lines we are suggesting here, the Tourist Association must go out of the picture altogether.

It is going in this case.

I do not agree.

It would be more decent to kill it out and out.

I am strongly of a different opinion.

That is only from the teeth out.

If that view is held amongst any number of directors of the Tourist Association it is because they have been so confined in their approach to tourist problems to the one issue of publicity that they have failed to realise that there is a much wider field of activity in which they could usefully engage, and in many ways more important activity.

There is not any director of the Tourist Association who does not feel that publicity is their whole being.

It was their primary function.

Their sole function.

The Tourist Association has been spending on tourist publicity £15,000 or £16,000. There is a proposal here to spend out of State funds £250,000, and I think the House will agree that if the State is going to put up that money the State must have some say in the nomination of the persons who will control the spending of it and that that organisation must be responsible through legislation to this House for this expenditure.

Even though there is that position being created by this Bill, I still think it is desirable to link in with this publicity organisation the Irish Tourist Association and that is what I tried to achieve by my agreement.

I said the Minister could not make a convincing case and he has not.

It is true that it would be difficult to amend the Bill to eliminate Fógra Fáilte altogether now. It would involve its complete recasting. It is not a problem for me and Deputies who think I had some political motive in proceeding in this way are completely wrong. It is my view that the publicity part of tourist development is big enough and important enough to be entrusted to a separate organisation and entrusting it to a separate organisation upon which the Tourist Board has the predominant voice is a more efficient way of getting at it than of entrusting to one board the two jobs.

Has the Minister taken into consideration the fact that, as far as tourists are concerned, if they make a complaint to the publicity section of Fógra Fáilte in connection with some hotel the danger is that they may be fobbed off by this organisation saying: "We have nothing to do with that."

There will be no difficulty keeping those two bodies working harmoniously. The Irish Tourist Board, An Bord Fáilte as it will be known when this Bill becomes law, has a majority of the directors of Fógra Fáilte and the Bill provides that of the six members of Fógra Fáilte three members, including the chairman, will be directors of the Tourist Board. Therefore, they have ample means of ensuring that there will be no disharmony between them.

That still does not get over the point if a complaint is made to Fógra Fáilte.

The complaint will be made normally to one of the tourist bureaux which are operated up to now by the Tourist Association, and there was no difficulty arising out of the fact that the bureaux were operated by the association while the grading and inspection of hotels was done by the Tourist Board. Under the agreement between the Tourist Association and Fógra Fáilte, these bureaux will continue to be administered by the Tourist Association. There will be no change in the position at all.

Thereby giving the whole case away.

The case is this that if the Irish Tourist Association is to be linked with the Tourist Board in the direction of publicity then you have got to set up this committee or other board and give them equal representation with the Tourist Board to do that job. The alternative is to bring the Tourist Association into the Tourist Board itself and give them functions that they never had before and, I think, functions they should not have.

There is another alternative.

However, I am just trying to make it quite clear that, so far as I am concerned, my meeting with the Tourist Association was inspired by my feeling that it was undesirable that the Tourist Association position should be undermined. I met them to see if I could reach agreement with them on any arrangement which would keep them in the swim of tourist development. I reached agreement and I think it is a good agreement.

They will not swim with this because it is a millstone and they will go to the bottom.

At least the alternative was to sink themselves.

The Minister is telling them he is giving them a lifebelt, but instead he is giving them a millstone.

I am giving them a continuing voice in the direction of tourist publicity, and I am giving them an opportunity to devote their undoubted energy and talent to another very important sphere. However, that can be discussed at a later stage.

I want to deal with the licensing provisions—another part of the Bill which aroused some controversy. Let me make it quite clear about these provisions. There is a great deal of misunderstanding in this connection. There is no proposal in this Bill to give any hotel the right to operate a public bar. Is that clear? The only proposal here is designed to ensure that somebody proposing to spend money on building an hotel or extending an existing hotel can find out in advance whether he can get a licence for it or not and will be entitled to get that licence without objection on the ground of the facilities for drinking already available in the locality. There may be objection when the application is made initially, on other grounds permitted under the Licensing Acts, for instance, objection on the grounds of convenience by people in the locality, that the building and operation of a licensed hotel would interfere with their amenities. The only thing we want to make clear is that the person building an hotel can find out beforehand whether he can get a licence and, secondly, we provide that his application for a licence cannot be refused on the grounds of the existence of facilities in the locality. I think that is reasonable enough. It is not merely based upon the recommendations of the experts who advised us but it seems to be a normal and desirable development. In fact, and this, I think, must be emphasised, the great majority of applications for hotel licences are granted by the courts. The number of hotel licences that have been refused because of objections on behalf of those who already had licensed premises in the locality were very few. But it is the uncertainty which will deter development. There is further objection that the practice may differ from one district to another according to the personal views upon this matter held by the courts.

And does, in fact, so differ at present.

And so it does, as Deputy Sweetman points out. I think we must recognise that if we are going to develop tourist business here we must be prepared to agree that hotels should be free to sell drink to residents. That is all that is involved. There is no other proposal in this Bill except to give assurance to an hotel proprietor that he can get a licence to sell drink for residents. He cannot get a right to a public bar. If he wants that he must apply under the Licensing Act and be subject to all the hazards that are involved under that Act. If he fails to maintain the premises as an hotel or if he so develops his business that the sale of drink becomes more important than his hotel business, then he loses his licence under this Act and if he wants to get the licence back he will have to apply under the Licensing Acts.

Who checks up on that?

That is provided in the Bill.

But who checks up?

The provisions of Section 39 (2) provide that in order to get this licence renewed the premises must continue to be registered with the Tourist Board and he must qualify for the reduced licence fee under the Finance Acts, that is to say, the revenue from the sale of drink must not exceed one-third of the total revenue from the business.

That is not taking the human nature element into consideration.

It is because Deputies have been reading more into this part of the Bill than is intended that they are attaching significance to these things. In the ordinary course people who build an hotel can apply for a licence and be reasonably certain of getting it. I want to eliminate the word "reasonably". I want to make it certain that if I build an hotel I will get a licence. The proposal here is that if I decide to build an hotel I get my plans prepared and show them to the court. If the court approves of the plans I get an assurance that when the hotel is built a licence will be given.

Is the Minister serious in suggesting that an hotel proprietor is going to refuse business from the point of view of drink? I am not disagreeing on the question of the limitations imposed——

The licence that will be issued in consequence of this part of the Bill will be the same licence as every other hotel proprietor holds.

Hotel proprietors hold two different sorts of licences.

That is right, but they only get one under this Bill. A number of Deputies have made suggestions that we should take advantage of this Bill in order to remove anomalies that exist in the provisions of the Licensing Acts relating to hotels. I am going to resist any such attempt. The Licensing Acts are the responsibility of the Minister for Justice. All I am providing for here is that a new hotel can get a licence. If the conditions of hotel licensing are changed by amendment of the Licensing Acts, these changes will apply here also. I am not going, in this Bill, to remedy any defects in the Licensing Acts or to extend their scope or operations in any way. All I am providing for is that new hotels will get licences and have the rights and privileges of an hotel licence, whatever they may be.

Who checks up on the sale of drinks?

The Revenue Commissioners do that. Under the Licensing Act of 1939 the holder of an hotel licence pays a reduced fee. It is the Revenue Commissioners who decide if he is entitled to obtain a licence at a reduced fee. If he does succeed in establishing his right to such fee, he will qualify under this section. Should he fail, he will cease to be entitled to a licence under this section, but that does not prevent him from going to the courts for a licence under the Licensing Acts.

The Revenue Commissioners' figure cannot be produced in public.

We are not asking him to do that. We are only asking him to show to the courts that he succeeded in getting a licence at a reduced fee.

Under Section 39 of this Bill there is a provision that an hotel can get a licence. Under the 1902 Act there is a provision that an hotel can get a licence in a different way. Is it on the 1902 procedure that this Bill is based, or does it remain as an alternative method to the procedure under this Bill?

I have already decided that a certain amendment may be desirable in this section in order to make the position clear. I think it is clear enough, by a strict interpretation of the law, that an hotel which has not got a public bar already cannot be licensed under this Bill to open such public bar. There is a proposal also that instead of referring to the Borough of Dublin the reference should be to the metropolitan area which, I gather, is a different area and is the area prescribed under the Licensing Acts. It is desirable to keep it the same. An objection was raised to the fact that a person may wait for years before actually proceeding with the building of an hotel or proceeding with the alteration of his premises although he has gone to the courts with his plans and has got approval for a licence. It was suggested that we should put in a time-limit for the work. I feel that that is a reasonable enough suggestion.

So far as the provisions relating to holiday camps are concerned, let me make it quite clear that what is proposed here is that they should have the same rights to sell drink to residents as hotels have as far as Sundays and public holidays are concerned. A number of Deputies spoke about the reference to St. Patrick's Day, to Christmas Day and other days on which holiday camps are being given permission to sell drink to residents. I do not think that there is a holiday camp in Ireland open on these days. Apart from the desirability of keeping certain uniformity in the law relating to holiday camps and hotels, I do not think it is of any importance.

The Minister is, of course, aware that a Bill containing that provision was introduced into this House during the past six months and was kicked out.

That is irrelevant.

I am not aware of that. There was one defect in this part of the Bill which nobody noticed. It does not provide for any penalties for a breach of any of the conditions of the Licensing Acts. We will have to rectify that.

That would be a glorious situation.

Yes, it would. It is also suggested that the right of objection to the granting of a licence for a holiday camp should extend to cover inconvenience. I think that is reasonable. I feel that any persons who want to make objections to the granting of a licence to a holiday camp on the grounds that such licence would interefere with their convenience should be entitled to lodge such objections.

Mr. O'Higgins

Would that include the area in which the camp is situated?

Yes. A resident of the area could object.

Mr. O'Higgins

Can the Minister say why the Section 45 certificate provision is not put in in relation to holiday camps—the provision about one-third of the bar receipts?

Because that does not apply in the case of holiday camps. They are not being granted the right which is being given to hotels, that is, the right to go to the courts for a decision on the licence in advance of any expenditure of capital. The holiday camp cannot get a licence until after it has been in existence. It is being merely given in this Bill the right to get a licence which it has not got at the moment. The proprietor of a holiday camp is in a different position from an hotel proprietor. The provision in relation to hotels does not apply in the case of holiday camps, because the holiday camp is not being given the privilege which a proprietor of a new hotel is being given—the right to get a predetermination on his application.

Could the Minister say why?

I am in full agreement with what was said here by Deputies, that is, that we should be very careful to ensure that the bona fide holiday camp, properly organised and properly conducted, is actually in existence before an application for a licence is allowed to be made. It is difficult to put into words the doubt that is in my mind which, in my view, justifies us in being slightly more stringent in that regard in the case of holiday camps than in the case of hotels.

Mr. O'Higgins

I do not think that that clears up the trouble about the receipts from the bar. Why should there be a different system for the licensing of holiday camps? Why are you not providing that the receipts from the bar should not exceed more than one-third of the receipts from the whole business?

That is the provision of the Finance Acts. It relates to the amount of licence duty paid.

Mr. O'Higgins

But you provide, in relation to hotels, that, unless they get that certificate, they will lose their licence.

We provide, in relation to hotels, that unless they get that reduced licence fee they cannot get a renewal of their licence. In that case, of course, they could look for a licence under the Licensing Acts for an ordinary hotel licence.

Mr. O'Higgins

Then you lose the licence?

Yes, under the special provision, but they would be put back under the ordinary provisions of the Licensing Acts.

Holiday camps come under the ordinary provisions. The only thing we are doing here is to give the courts power to give a licence to holiday camps which they have not got at the moment. I do not profess to be an authority on the licensing laws, though I have learned a great deal about them during the past few days. I do not feel that, in fact, we are altering the position in that regard very much.

The next point I want to deal with is the matter of the registration of hotels. Objection was taken to the power given to An Bord Fáilte to cancel the registration of an hotel, if it exceeds the charges which it had announced its intention of maintaining during any season. Again let me explain that there was a great deal of misunderstanding, based upon a failure to realise that the registration of an hotel with An Bord Fáilte is a voluntary act. An Bord Fáilte is given power to refuse to a premises which is not registered the right to use the name "hotel," but anybody operating a premises of that kind, and who is prepared to avoid using the name hotel, and to call his premises an inn, a club, a dump, a joint or anything else, need not register with An Bord Fáilte at all. Registration with An Bord Fáilte is a voluntary act. It is true that it secures for the proprietor of such premises the right to use the name "hotel" and it confers other advantages as well such as the insertion of particulars of the facilities which it affords in the annual publication of the board which is no doubt very important.

In my view it would be completely impracticable to have official control over hotel charges. People staying in an hotel will be found willing to pay more for the same accommodation and the same food which is given with a smile, than they would be willing to pay in another hotel where it is given with a scowl. No one can attempt to assess the value of service in an hotel for the purpose of determining what is a reasonable charge and of enforcing it with official sanctions.

All that we ask the hotel proprietor to do is to set out at the beginning of the year the charges he proposes to make and, having set these out, to see that he will maintain them. The intention is to eliminate the kind of abuse where the charges of the hotel are related to the appearance of the customer, where the proprietor tries to size up the customer, and to decide how much he will stand in the way of charges. The intention is that the charges should be known beforehand. The hotel proprietor can fix any charges he likes, but, having fixed them, he must stick to them. At least he cannot go above them. That is a very useful safeguard for visitors to the country. The great majority of people who come here to stay in hotels select from the Tourist Board list of hotels. They look down the list and know the charges fixed by the proprietor and the accommodation and other services given in return for them. They plan their holiday without knowing anything more about the hotel than is contained in that book. The most constant source of irritation amongst tourists coming from abroad was to find that they were, in fact, being charged in hotels more than they had been led to expect from these publications. It is to eliminate that type of abuse that this arrangement is designed.

Why are they not enforced?

They are enforced. If the Deputy wants to discuss with me whether the Tourist Board organisation was good or not during the past three or four years, I am quite prepared to say that I think there is considerable scope for improvement.

Why confine it to the last three or four years?

I was thinking of the period after the war.

If the Minister reads the tourist guide sent out two weeks ago he will see that, in the case of some hotels, the charge is represented by just a dash after the name of the hotel. There is no charge stated.

I did not see why that should be.

I do not see why that should be so either. They should not be given the benefit of free publicity if the charges are not clearly set out.

The reference in the debate was to the fact that there is a withdrawal of registration where stated charges are exceeded. I think we might put in an amendment on Committee to make it clear that they must be exceeded persistently, not merely that there is an occasional overcharge.

Mr. O'Higgins

Would that cover an intentional overcharge?

Yes, a persistent overcharge. It is obvious that the board must have that power but the exercise of that power is a matter for its own discretion. I think it is to be anticipated that it will use it intelligently for the purpose of securing the development of efficient and suitable hotels.

Mr. O'Higgins

Would the Minister consider an amendment providing for an appeal?

To the courts, no.

Mr. O'Higgins

Would the Minister agree that the effect of cancellation of registration involves a serious capital loss to the proprietor?

No. I think that is where the Deputy was mistaken in his observations in regard to this Bill. There are hotel premises, if one may use that term in connection with them, operated here whose registration with the Tourist Board was terminated. The effect of that was that they could not call these premises "hotels", but they could carry on business as hotels just the same. The penalty is that they are deprived of the use of the word "hotel".

Mr. O'Higgins

They lose their licences.

They lose their licences. under the special section. They would have to go to the courts for it under the ordinary law.

Mr. O'Higgins

They cannot get it under the ordinary law unless they are an hotel.

Unless they are an hotel within the meaning of the Finance Act. But there are places which are hotels within the meaning of the Finance Act which are not entitled to call themselves hotels under the Tourist Acts.

Mr. O'Higgins

Under this Bill there is a new type of penalty, that caused by the board on cancellation.

My objection to giving an appeal to the courts is that it is going to introduce considerable discrepancy in the administration of the Act. You will have a number of separate courts and you will have different practices established in several areas. I think it would be unwise to give an appeal to the courts. It would make for a lack of uniformity in the administration of the law, and it would tend to nullify the provisions of the section because on the first occasion, at any rate, the court will always favour the applicant for re-registration.

You might give an appeal from An Bord Fáilte to Fógra Fáilte.

Fógra Fáilte has nothing to do with it.

Mr. O'Higgins

Would the Minister allow the proprietor to be heard by An Bord Fáilte before registration is cancelled?

Certainly.

Mr. O'Higgins

That is not in the section.

Not in that section.

Mr. O'Higgins

Or anywhere in the Bill.

The withdrawal of registration by An Bord Fáilte is subject to a number of conditions. It provides for three inspections.

Mr. O'Higgins

That is for grading, not for overcharging.

It is desired to give the board power to deal with persistent overcharging. How can you do that except by inserting certain provisions in the Bill? You can only say that it will be left to the board. Certain difficulties have arisen this year owing to the fact that the grading system has not been in operation. It will come back next year, and the intention is that in order to secure registration maximum charges must be stated by the proprietor. Many references were made to the grading system. I agree fully we need a grading system, and that it must be on a somewhat different basis from that which existed before— that there must be segregation of hotels into types as well as a grading of standards within each type. I think these are the lines on which the Tourist Board proposes to work, but I have not yet received their ideas in any detail.

I should mention that, arising out of remarks of a number of Deputies regarding signposts, it is not intended that An Bord Fáilte will erect any signposts. They will provide them to the design approved by the Minister for Local Government and supply them to the local authorities who will be asked to erect and maintain them.

Deputy Morrissey suggested that the provisions of this Bill regarding grading and financial assistance should apply to restaurants as well as to hotels and guest-houses. There are so many restaurants that it would be impracticable to do so. It would mean a considerable increase in the administrative costs of the board. In the Six Counties they attempted the grading of restaurants but I think they have got themselves into considerable difficulty because various legal decisions have, I think, applied the description of "restaurant" even to fish and chip establishments. It would be very hard to draw the line of division between establishments of that character and restaurants which are interested in the tourist or holiday business to which we were referring.

I know that it is difficult but I think it is a vitally important matter.

It would mean a considerable expansion of the work given to the Tourist Board.

I hope the suggestion will not be lost sight of.

Deputy Corish suggested that organisations of hoteliers or workers should be represented on An Bord Fáilte. I am completely against giving membership of these boards to anybody described as a representative of any outside interest. A director of An Bord Fáilte should be one of the team responsible for the carrying out of its functions. He should never be there as a representative of some outside organisation, responsible to that outside organisation for the line he took in discussions at board meetings.

What about the hotel owners? They are there.

There is no representative of hotel owners there.

That is a very thin line.

I do not think so. I agree that it would be desirable to have people there with certain special qualifications and experience of a particular kind but I do not think that they should be there as representatives of any organisation.

I come now to the matters of hunting, shooting and fishing. It is open to An Bord Fáilte to assist organisations or agencies for that purpose. It would be their duty, as I see it, to interest themselves in the work of the organisations concerned with the development of these activities and, by advice and coordinating activities, to help them to achieve results. There have, in fact, been consultations and discussions between the Inland Fisheries Trust and the Tourist Board. So far as I am concerned, I should certainly encourage An Bord Fáilte, when it becomes that, to interest itself thoroughly in the possibilities of developing these sports.

If they do not, there is not much use in talking of expanding the season.

It is along these lines that we hope to secure an extension of the season, which is our main prospect of increasing tourist revenue. In the peak holiday period, all our hotels and guest-houses are, as a rule, fully occupied. It will be understood that we cannot get increased tourist revenue by bringing in more tourists at that peak period because, unless they stay with friends or in private houses, there is not much room for them. It is by extending the duration of the tourist season that we can mainly help to increase the revenue from it.

There are only three ways of doing it—the three attractions which I mentioned.

There may be other ways.

These are the main ones.

A number of references were made to facilities at ports and internal transport services. I refer to this merely to remark that action has already been taken to prevent a repetition of what happened on a few occasions at Dún Laoghaire last year when a number of passengers were outshipped and had to remain overnight on the quay there or in the railway station, and to avoid the necessity for queueing which was experienced there last year. Let me be quite clear on this matter. The blame for the difficulties that arose last year is not all to be left at the door of the transport company. The shipping companies operated a reservation system. A person got his boarding ticket. That gave him the right to accommodation on the ship for which it was issued. However, with the fine weather and the attractions of holidays in Ireland, a large number of people just did not go on the ship for which they had a boarding ticket. They waited for the next ship—and always it was the last ship of the evening. It came about, therefore, that persons who had no boarding tickets—who had already given up the right they had to travel by an earlier ship—presented themselves at a later ship and caused the congestion which resulted. As the House is aware, I summoned a conference, over which I presided myself, of all the interests involved—British Railways, Córas Iompair Éireann, the Board of Works (as owners of Dún Laoghaire harbour), the local authorities and the tourist organisations. It was a very large and useful conference. There arose out of that conference the suggestion that if we could provide at Dún Laoghaire pier additional accommodation for customs examination so that passengers coming off a ship could be passed through the customs on one side and passengers joining the ship could be passed through the customs on the other side, the company could then utilise the other side of the pier for loading passengers and that that would permit of the operation of another vessel and the avoidance of the type of congestion which occurred last year. The necessary alterations to bring that situation about, on a temporary basis, are at present proceeding at Dún Laoghaire pier and, subject to all the contingencies that may arise in that connection, will be ready for the tourist season this year.

There is a long-term plan for a very substantial constructional project at Dún Laoghaire. It was prepared before the war and, while I do not think that it was ever finalised, it is still there as an idea for development. The Board of Works tell me that it would take at least six years to complete the construction work involved.

Who held it up?

The Coalition Government.

No. It was handed to you before the outbreak of the last war.

The Deputy asked me a question and I told him the truth. We did not go on with it during the war.

You had no Coalition Government then.

A Deputy

But you have a Coalition Government now.

It is a very big project involving a great deal of money, but certainly it would not ease the problem this year or for the next six years. However, the temporary structure which is now being erected at Dún Laoghaire will ease the problem this year and, as has been announced to the Press, Córas Iompair Éireann propose to make certain changes, too.

Costs are going up while you are waiting.

We are not waiting.

This has been going on since 1939.

I have been Minister for Industry and Commerce since last June. I attended to the matter immediately and the job will be finished by next year.

I saw the scheme and I know where you kept it too.

Córas Iompair Éireann are planning a very substantial number of bus tours for this year. I think they will be able to do a really first-class job in that respect. These are organised tours for visitors going from one hotel to another—three-day tours, seven-day tours, tours of various duration. All the plans are made for them, and I hope they will proceed. I think they will add considerably to the number of visitors who will be able to get well-organised and attractive holidays here. Deputy D.J. O'Sullivan paid a tribute to the day tours and other tours organised on the railways which, I think, are very popular and which are certainly well-patronised.

A reference was made to the necessity for organising the production of decent souvenirs. It is a matter on which I am very keen personally, and I have set up a committee representing the various interests to see what we can do in that regard.

I confess that I was somewhat shocked by the advice I got from Mr. Christenberry and others as to the type of souvenir that American visitors would like to buy. I have a prejudice—I think most Deputies have—against leprechauns, fairies, shillelaghs and blackthorn sticks. When I expressed that prejudice to Mr. Christenberry, he said: "I am sorry to hear that, because I have an order for 20 blackthorn sticks for friends which I have to bring back. There is no doubt that they are the type of souvenir that American visitors are going to buy." I think we can do something to eliminate the more objectionable type and provide a wider variety of the artistic type of souvenir which is, I think, important in connection with tourist trade development. In any event, the committee has been set up, and it is trying to see what can be done.

What about clay pipes?

I rather draw the line at the clay pipes. Reference has been made to the dollar aspect of the tourist trade, and I was asked whether in fact the American tourist visiting this country via Great Britain does contribute in any way to our dollar resources. He does indirectly; at least an arrangement exists between the Department of Finance and the British Treasury by which we are credited with the dollar expenditure of such a tourist, but it is obviously desirable that we should get the dollars direct. It would be preferable to the alternative arrangement from many points of view, and Irish hoteliers, travel agencies and others have been asked to co-operate in securing these direct dollar payments for services given here.

The suggestion that we might have a differential rate of exchange for tourists, as other countries have, is, I fear, impracticable because of its consequences. At present we have no restrictions upon financial transactions between this country and Great Britain. The great bulk of our tourists come from Great Britain, and the operation of any differential exchange system for dollars would inevitably involve a restriction upon the movement of funds between this country and Great Britain, and we would lose far more in inconvenience to British tourists than we would gain by attracting American tourists by such a system.

Has any other country that scheme except Switzerland?

Spain certainly operated it last year. Finally, I want to say that I agree completely with Deputy Sweetman that we must not lose sight in all this development of the importance of providing facilities for the enjoyment of holidays by our own people. I do not think Deputy Sweetman was fair to me when he suggested that I was losing sight of it. The Bill is framed to give An Bord Fáilte functions in relation to the development of holiday traffic in the State and to the State, and during my remarks, in introducing the Bill, I referred repeatedly to the desirability of improving the amenities available in Ireland for enjoyable holidays by the Irish people. It is as important that we should encourage our own people to spend on holidays at home the moneys that might otherwise be spent abroad, as it is to attract other people to come here and spend holidays in this country.

Our interest in this whole business of developing holiday resorts and amenities originated with the passing of the Holidays Act, 1936, when for the first time workers got a statutory right to paid holidays. It was recognised, by me, at any rate, that if the full benefit of that legislation was to be secured for the workers of the country we would have to do something more than merely giving them a statutory right, that we would have to go out and organise facilities which would enable them to secure holidays within their means which would be attractive to them.

Deputy Norton spoke this evening about the need for holiday camps for that type of holidaymaker. I am in complete agreement with what he said. The average worker with a wife and family can take a holiday for himself but he finds its impossible to organise a holiday for his wife and family also because accommodation in an hotel is usually beyond his means and, if he rents a house at the seaside, it is no help to his wife as she has to wash and cook just the same. It was because of that, that I conceived the idea of holiday camps with separate chalets in which a family could reside, with common dining-rooms, where they could get meals provided and with nurses in attendance to look after and organise recreation for the children. As Deputy Norton said, it was planned to organise the first camp of that kind at Courtown but that was not proceeded with. It is not intended now that An Bord Fáilte shall have functions of that kind, but I should like to encourage that idea as a development of private enterprise and I think I can say that anybody who takes up the idea and proceeds to develop it along sound lines can rely upon the support of the Government and of An Bord Fáilte.

A number of other points were raised relating to the Bill which I am afraid I will have to leave over to the Committee Stage. Many of the suggestions made by Deputies, however, did not relate to the Bill at all and they could not be implemented by amendments to the Bill. They would relate to the operations of Córas Iompair Éireann, local authorities or other organisations. Many of these suggestions have been noted and will be brought to the attention of An Bord Fáilte as an indication to them of the views of Deputies and suggestions which they might investigate.

Might I ask the Minister if Fógra Fáilte can provide for the production of scenic and feature films and for their development in this country?

I do not know how many birds the Deputy is trying to kill with that stone. They can undoubtedly finance the production of tourist development films but there are no facilities for their development in this country at the moment. That is another day's work.

Could money be expended in that way?

That can be done by commercial enterprise.

Question put and agreed to.
Ordered: That the Committee Stage be taken on Tuesday, 18th March.

You will take amendments up to to-morrow week?

Barr
Roinn