Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 25 Feb 1960

Vol. 179 No. 6

Committee on Finance. - Vote 54—Tourism.

Minister for Industry and Commerce (Mr. J. Lynch)

I move:—

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £10 be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1960 for a grant to Bord Fáilte Éireann (No. 5 of 1955) and for certain additional Grants-in-Aid.

The purpose of this Supplementary Estimate is to make available to Bord Fáilte Éireann a sum of £30,000 to meet commitments which arise in the present financial year in respect of scenic development works and additional advertising and publicity overseas.

The grant made to Bord Fáilte Éireann for the current financial year for administration and general expenses was £450,000 but it transpires that this sum will not suffice to meet all the commitments arising under the two headings which are referred to. The additional sum of £30,000 required can, however, be met from savings on Subhead B of the Vote and consequently only a token additional sum of £10 will be required under Subhead A. The savings on Subhead B are due to the fact that proposals for the development of major tourist resorts have not proceeded as quickly as was originally anticipated.

A sum of £10,000 is required under the heading of scenic development works to finance the removal of permanent obstacles to scenic views. Bord Fáilte Éireann receive frequent complaints to the effect that visitors touring the country by car or motor coach are denied views of some of our finest scenery by the high obstacles which flank many of our roads. The powers of local authorities to incur expenditure on hedge cutting are confined to cases where traffic hazards or problems affecting road maintenance are concerned and it has become quite clear that the improvements which are desirable in this respect will not be achieved unless Bord Fáilte Éireann assume responsibility for initiating action in the matter and for seeing that the works are carried out.

Within the past twelve months or so Bord Fáilte Éireann have invited local authorities to submit schemes for the removal of walls and other obstacles which impede the view in important tourist areas, and schemes estimated to cost £100,000 have been received by the Board in response to this invitation. In the present financial year the Board have committed themselves to recouping local authorities to the extent of £10,000 in respect of schemes of this kind. This amount will have to be paid to the local authorities concerned before 31st March next.

There is, perhaps, nothing so frustrating for tourists as to find that some particularly appealing view which they would like to enjoy is shut off by high walls and hedges. The task of removing these sources of annoyance and irritation to visitors is one in which our landowners and farmers must cooperate and I should like to take this opportunity of again appealing to all owners of property to show their appreciation of the scenic attractions of their district and a realisation of the importance of tourism to the national economy by co-operating with Bord Fáilte Éireann and local authorities in this work.

An additional sum of £20,000 is required by Bord Fáilte Éireann for expenditure on advertising and publicity in the United States and Britain. This money will be expended entirely on activities designed to stimulate additional visitor traffic and no extra administrative expenses are envisaged.

There was an unexpected decrease in American tourist traffic to this country during 1959. This was experienced by other European countries. It is anticipated that there will be a big increase in American traffic to Europe as a whole during the present year and it is obviously desirable, therefore, that a vigorous effort should be made not alone to recover the ground lost last year but to increase our share of this important traffic. Although Bord Fáilte Éireann have opened an additional office in Chicago their overall expenditure in the United States during the year ended 31st March, 1959 showed a decrease of approximately 29 per cent. compared with 1955. This reduction was dictated by the increasing demands of the British market and by commitments on development works at home.

The principal decrease was in expenditure on advertising and publicity which fell by 56 per cent. since 1955, during a period when advertising and publicity costs in the United States have risen by more than 50 per cent. This means that the Board are now making a greatly reduced impact on the United States travel market which has expanded rapidly and become increasingly competitive during the period in question. The Board are seriously concerned at the fact that their current investment in publicity and advertising may not enable them to maintain, much less increase, their share of this rapidly growing market. The Board consider, therefore, that a supplementary programme of advertising, publicity and promotional activities should be undertaken in the United States before the end of the current financial year. This programme will cost £8,000.

In Britain the Board's overall expenditure has practically doubled since 1953. This increase has been largely due to the establishment and operation of offices in Manchester and Glasgow which were considered to be urgent priority operations for the exploitation of the British market. The funds available did not, however, permit the Board to budget for the additional advertising and publicity support which would ensure the maximum utilisation of these new information centres. In fact, the Board's expenditure in Britain on advertising and publicity during the current financial year is little above the level of 1956, although costs have increased during the past few years and the market has become highly competitive.

The Board consider heavier publicity expenditure in this market to be essential especially at the present time when the buoyant state of the British economy offers a favourable opportunity for increasing their efforts there. The Board, accordingly, propose to undertake a supplementary programme of activities during what remains of the current financial year. These activities include co-operative advertising and promotion with carriers and travel agents, additional advertising coverage in the Press as well as the production of additional printed publicity material to support these activities. The estimated cost of this supplementary programme is £12,000.

I am confident there will be general agreement regarding the desirability of incurring the expenditure for which provision is made in this Estimate and I recommend that the House should approve of the Estimate.

Mr. Lindsay

Owing to the small amount involved in this Estimate it really does not merit any criticism at all. Permit me to say immediately that we accept this Supplementary Estimate and that the activities for which the money is required appear to be very praiseworthy indeed. In fact, I think that more and more will have to be spent on advertising as time goes on and the market becomes more and more competitive. I must say that in parts of the country I have been extremely impressed by the removal of barriers and by the scenic views hitherto hidden from the native and the tourist. It is amazing how often a native finds that when a hedge has been cut away there is something really beautiful to be seen.

Bord Fáilte have a tremendous task before them in the development of tourism and I think that advertising is probably the field in which they will have to exercise greatest activity. There are other activities which might merit some criticism but these can be left until the discussion on the general Estimate. For these reasons, we accept this Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. Corish

There are only one or two comments I should like to make on this Estimate. The Minister has said that he needs only £10 in view of the fact that there has been a saving under subhead B. If I understood him correctly, subhead B is a heading of expenditure which provides for the development of tourist resorts. We have been led to believe by various Ministers and members of the Government that tourism could be a great source of income to this country and that the sooner we develop Ireland to receive tourists the better.

While we have a certain amount of natural attractions in the country we still have to create artificial attractions to attract the tourist and one of these would be in the line of resorts and especially seaside resorts. It seems a pity that Bord Fáilte cannot spend £30,000 on the development of resorts in the year which ends on the 31st March, 1960. It is amazing that Bord Fáilte could not find some resort or resorts on which to spend money in the present financial year.

I have received complaints that this year a very important part of the country, the south-east coast, could not get a penny for development. I am led to believe that from Arklow to Tramore not one penny is to be spent on resorts. I think most people will agree that that part of the country could be well developed as regards resorts and seaside resorts. Owing to the nature of the coastline and the soil it has extremely good beaches and resorts generally. Year after year. I am sure, Bord Fáilte are asking for extra money. Why is it they now find themselves in the position of handing back £30,000? We all know that money spent on tourism is money well spent. Now it is being described as a "saving,"—as if the Board set themselves the task of saving unnecessarily. Of course there is a difference between savings and economies. When replying the Minister might say what difficulty Bord Fáilte had in spending the money provided for the development of resorts.

Some years ago the Board of Works gave encouragement to local authorities to clear obstacles in order to open up scenic views. That is very laudable. Board Fáilte and local bodies are now co-operating in the resumption of that work. Could the Minister say—or perhaps it is the function of Board Fáilte—how that money is distributed? It seems to me that a bigger proportion of the money is spent in certain areas. When people outside this country think of a holiday in Ireland, they think of Killarney. Killarney already has a famous name and its beauty is unsurpassed either in this country or anywhere else. We also have the unrivalled attractions of Connemara and Donegal. But these are the names one sees plastered on every advertisement issued by Board Fáilte to encourage tourists to come here.

I do not think any place in Ireland has better attractions to offer than Killarney, Connemara, Donegal and what I would term the generally accepted tourist centres. But I am afraid Bord Fáilte will have to approach the whole problem from a different point of view. Apart from those who land at Shannon, people coming to this country arrive in the east, at Dublin Airport, the North Wall, Dún Laoghaire or Rosslare Harbour. Some of them can afford to go to Killarney, Connemara, Donegal and the other accepted tourist resorts. However, there are a big number of people in Britain who want to go to Ireland—a lot of them because they are of Irish extraction—simply for the sake of saying they have been in Ireland. If they get as far as Louth, Dublin, Carlow, Kilkenny, Wexford, Wicklow or Waterford, they are proud that at least they have had a holiday in Ireland.

We should, therefore, publicise and make more attractive the eastern parts of the country to attract that type of potential visitor, especially visitors from Britain. It costs only a few pounds to come across from London to Dún Laoghaire, the North Wall or Rosslare Harbour. We encourage them to go to Killarney, Connemara and Donegal. If they can afford it, they are welcome to do so; but the ordinary, working-class visitor landing in Dublin will find that if he wants to travel to any of the places in the south and west, it will cost twice the amount of money. I do not want to take people away from these places and bring them to the east. We must readily admit that the scenic attractions in the south and west surpass anything we have to offer in the east. But we can still attract to the east a lot of people who cannot afford to go to these other places.

That brings me to the question of the administration of the moneys at the disposal of Bord Fáilte. Recently Bord Fáilte issued a circular headed "Better Hotels", in which they offered hotel owners certain financial inducements to improve their hotels. That is laudable in itself. But I should like to bring to the attention of the Minister a paragraph in that circular.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I feel that that would be a matter for the main Estimate rather than the Supplementary Estimate, which is confined to the items mentioned by the Minister when introducing it.

Mr. Corish

With respect, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I think the practice on any Supplementary Estimate has been to deal briefly with any aspect of the general Estimate.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The practice has been to confine the debate to the sub-heads mentioned in the Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. Corish

In so far as the Minister mentioned tourist development, I should like merely to refer very briefly to this matter.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I feel that it would not relevantly arise on this Estimate, and I am sorry that I must rule it out of order. The Deputy will get an opportunity on the main Estimate to deal with the question.

Mr. Corish

I wanted to raise the matter only in view of its urgency. What I want to convey to the Minister may be said in two sentences. With your permission, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I should like to put it.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Other Deputies may seek a similar right and it would be entirely out of order. I am sorry but I must rule the matter out.

Mr. Corish

I think the Minister is aware of what I was going to say and, therefore, I shall conclude.

Mr. Moloney

I am glad the Minister has referred to the Board's attitude towards the removal of barriers obstructing scenic views. I hope no time will be lost in having an approach made to the local authorities, and to the landowners concerned.

There is another matter which I should like to bring to the notice of the Minister in that regard. Quite a number of advertising hoardings have been erected—whether by accident or design, I do not know—at points on our main roads which give very appealing scenic views. I sincerely trust that either through the local authorities, if they have any powers to do so, or through the intervention of Bord Fáilte, some control will be exercised in future over the erection of these hoardings.

Deputy Corish also made the point —and made it very well—in connection with the Board's policy of more or less laying emphasis on advertising certain tourist centres, and not advertising others to any great extent. My view, for what it is worth, is that we have not, so far, tapped the English market in the matter of tourism as well as we might. There was probably a very good reason for that in the past in that we were depending on the American traffic. Most people realise now that there are large numbers of people in England who are anxious for many reasons to come to this country.

Deputy Corish mentioned some of those reasons, the main one being that some of those people are of Irish extraction and naturally have a tendency to come to the country of their forebears. There is more to it than that. There are people in England who are anxious to spend their holidays—particularly the working people —in a centre not too far removed from their homes and, for that reason, this country appeals to them. The distance is not great and the expense of getting here not too great. I respectfully suggest to the Minister, and to the Board, that they might cater for that type of tourist.

Someone said to me, some time ago, that if we could understand the value to this country of the English working class tourist, we would be rather surprised. That was said to me by a gentleman who has some knowledge of the matter. He suggested that the ordinary working class tourist from England would be as useful as an American millionaire. I am doubtful if that is quite correct, but perhaps we have not assessed, as fully as we might, the value to this country of the English tourist.

The point made by Deputy Corish with regard to certain centres being selected for advertising purposes by Bord Fáilte is a good one. English people work mostly on the basis of information they receive from a travel agency, if they are lucky enough to be in a financial position to book their tour through such an agency, but if they arrange it themselves, they go on the information they get in official publications. There are many tourist resorts, not necessarily seaside resorts, which would have an appeal for holiday-makers, so a more comprehensive list should be circulated, particularly to tourists from Britain.

On the question of publicity which the Minister mentioned in regard to the British trade, I am glad that the Board are looking into that matter. More effective advertising penetration is necessary to capture the British tourist trade which we are probably losing to other countries at the moment, and various methods of approach to the potential trade have been suggested. I remember when the main Estimate for Tourism was before the House last year, one speaker suggested that some direct type of approach to the British working people might prove a very effective means of capturing their support for the tourist trade here.

There are many other forms of contact, of course, which advertising can make. The showing of films in clubs, canteens and places of entertainment in Britain, could prove to be an effective medium, and I recommend that suggestion, for what it is worth, to Bord Fáilte. The Minister also referred to the possibility of a substantial increase in tourist traffic this year by reason of certain well-known events on the Continent. I subscribe to that view, and I appeal to those who service that industry in the matter of hotels, guest houses and transport companies, to play their part in trying to get the best that can be got from the industry.

Mr. Wycherley

The activities of Bord Fáilte are appreciated more now than they were some years ago because tourism has become big business, so to speak, in this country. The responsibility for increasing that business must, to a certain degree, rest with us and also with our hoteliers and owners of guest houses. There is very little use in Bord Fáilte carrying out a great advertising campaign in England, Scotland, America, or anywhere else, about the facilities we have to offer, and the great beauties of our country, unless the local people are prepared to co-operate whole-heartedly in living up to the beautiful picture painted by the advertisements.

Unfortunately, there are times when people do not leave the country with a good impression, if we do not live up to what they expect. It is absolutely essential that when tourists come here, they should be treated well, that they should get their board and lodgings at a reasonable price, and that we do not take too much advantage of them. For the greater part, they are not over-wealthy. They have to be careful during the year to put so much aside each month to save for their holidays, and we should ensure that they get good value for their money while in Ireland.

One other very important aspect of the development of tourism is the cooperation which should exist between Bord Fáilte, the local authorities and the local development associations— more especially, the local authorities because they are elected by the people, and have the spending of public money for which they must answer to the people. Where local authorities are prepared to spend public money for the development of a local resort, it should be very carefully considered by the Board, and every help should be given by Bord Fáilte to the local authority for whatever project they have in mind, because, as a rule, they cannot afford to spend public money wastefully. The Board should consider very seriously any recommendations for the development of tourist resorts.

Tourism, then, is big business, because every tourist who comes here will consume a certain amount of food and a certain amount of drink, both of which are produced in this country. We should ensure that whatever we advertise in connection with any resort—let it be sea angling or fishing or hunting—when the tourist comes seeking certain amusements, he will not be disappointed. Whatever we advertise, we should be prepared to give, and then the tourist will be reasonably satisfied that he has got at least what he came for and what he expected.

Mr. McQuillan

I should like to ask the Minister is it the fault of the local authorities or the fault of Bord Fáilte that the money he refers to has not been expended on the development of resorts? If the fault lies with the local authorities then, of course, we cannot blame Bord Fáilte to any great extent but, if the fault lies with Bord Fáilte, we should have an opportunity in this House of having a discussion on the matter.

We are confined in this debate to a discussion of the items that appear under the subheads in the Supplementary Estimates. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle rightly pointed out that we cannot widen the scope of the debate, that there will be opportunity on the main Estimate.

I would put this to the Minister for consideration:— These matters are generally part of and buried in his main Estimate for Industry and Commerce and he may in the course of his speech on that Estimate cover a very wide field, including tourism and all the other aspects of his Department, with the result that there is no opportunity for any Deputy to deal thoroughly with any of the various departments for which the Minister has responsibility. Therefore, since there is not a special debate on Bord Fáilte and tourism, it should be open to Deputies to discuss the whole field of tourism on a Supplementary Estimate. I do not propose to do so on this occasion because I am sure the Acting Chairman would put his foot down but I would ask the Minister in future, on the occasion of an Estimate in respect of a State body, to consider having a special debate in the House on the matter, so that in the following April or May, when the Estimate for Industry and Commerce is being discussed, tourism and Bord Fáilte could be debated separately.

Within the limited scope available to me, I should like to make a few comments. Bord Fáilte are seeking more money in this Supplementary Estimate for publicity in America. An extraordinary position has arisen in the last 12 months on the American scene. Our expenditure on publicity to sell whiskey has been doubled; we are increasing our publicity and expenditure in America to sell tourism. Despite the increased expenditure, the returns in both respects are diminishing. Can that be explained? I cannot query the Minister in regard to whiskey but I can query him here in regard to tourism.

The Minister more or less suggested that generally tourism of American origin has declined in Europe this year, that there were fewer American visitors to Europe and, consequently, we were affected. That is the type of argument adduced in this House when anything goes wrong. When we complain about emigration from rural Ireland we are told that emigration is occurring all over Europe, that it is an international trend. We are increasing expenditure in America on publicity in order to attract tourists but the number of tourists did not increase last year.

Could it be that we are making a great mistake in the beaming of our publicity on America? Are we directing the publicity at the right segments of the American population? There are a number of Irish-American societies who cater for a large number of Irish people and people of Irish extraction. Occasionally, these societies protest at the actions of our Ministers abroad. There was a recent example of an Irish-American society protesting against the decision of our Minister for External Affairs in the United Nations. Instead of having these societies engaged in protests of that nature, their aid should be enlisted by Bord Fáilte in encouraging their members to show a true love of Ireland by supporting our tourist campaign.

It is a better proposition to spend money in making these societies aware of their responsibility to this country rather than on television programmes in America which cost fabulous sums, the effect of which is ephemeral and may be gone in a few hours while the money expended is out of all proportion to the results achieved. It would be better to spend the money, or some of it, in encouraging Irish-American groups to take an interest in this country and, instead of criticising the actions of our Government, to show a practical interest in the country by returning on holidays or encouraging their friends to come here.

I agree that there should be greater expenditure on publicity in Britain. It is time that Bord Fáilte woke up to the untapped tourist well that is next door to us. The majority of the people who come to this country and who are described by Bord Fáilte as tourists are Irish people resident in Britain coming home on holidays at various times of the year, particularly the summer months and Christmas. We will not discuss that misnomer of our own people on this occasion. It is sufficient to remind Bord Fáilte that on occasion they take credit for the return to this country of people who normally would come home on holidays by describing them as tourists. There should be some practical way of segregating these people from people of British or European origin.

There is a possibility that the funds expended on tourism in Britain are not being expended in the best possible way. To give an example, I have often seen more publicity given to the arrival in this country of half a dozen snobs in jodhpurs for a hunt in Kildare or with the snobs in Galway and their lady friends than would be given to an entire shipload of English middle class or working people. Is there any comparison between the importance of the two to this country? The same encouragement is not given to the working class people, who constitute the majority of the people of Britain, as is given to certain elements catered for in a monthly magazine issued by Bord Fáilte. That is a very expensive piece of work and I am presented with a copy of it every month as, I am sure, is every other Deputy. In practically every issue we find an article singing the praises of the hunt in Ireland. The normal person in Britain who reads that would be of the opinion that this was still a country of squires and squireens.

I doubt if there is much appeal in that type of publicity for the Englishman who wants to bring his wife and family to the seaside here or, if he is a sportsman, who wants to bring his wife here and spend a holiday fishing or shooting. I am not suggesting that the element interested in the hunting fields are not welcome but greater value to the Exchequer would be gained by encouraging a greater proportion of the ordinary English people to come here.

The question of scenic development was mentioned and also the question of removing high walls which prevent people from seeing various beauty shots. That is very desirable but I do not think there is any power available to Bord Fáilte to take action in that regard. The Minister in his opening statement used the word "invite", that Bord Fáilte can only invite local authorities to submit suggestions for consideration by the Board. I may be wrong but I think Bord Fáilte have no power to interfere directly, compulsorily or otherwise, and that the initiative must come from the local authority.

The greatest offenders as far as high walls are concerned are those people, groups or companies—I shall not give them any more detailed description than that—who reside behind the demesne walls. From here to Maynooth, which is only 15 miles from the city, there is mile after mile of high wall preventing the public, whether tourists or Irish people, seeing some of the attractive scenery behind these walls.

We shall be told that in this regard we are up against the rights of private individuals and private property owners. However, when Bord Fáilte know of road widening taking place or the removal of dangerous corners they should suggest at that stage that the local authority would remove these high walls in the vicinity and erect attractive iron railings in their place. That could be done in conjunction with improvements taking place on the roads and it would be a cheaper proposition in the long run to have those things done together. It would at the same time protect the privacy of a number of people who might object, if the walls were removed only in part. I do not suggest that gaps should be created in the walls presenting an ugly appearance but you could remove sections of these walls and substitute iron railings and have the work done in an artistic fashion. We know there will be a great deal expended this year and in the next few years by the local authorities on the improvement of roads and perhaps Bord Fáilte will consider communicating with the various local authorities.

These high walls are a problem in every local authority area and not merely in what might be described as tourist centres. Very often people on their way to Connemara, down to West Cork or up to Donegal, come across these forbidding high walls and it is in these areas rather than in the tourist resort areas that money could be spent.

I do not know what the position is with regard to the expenditure on hotels, whether provision is made in this Supplementary Estimate for grants and loans to hoteliers. If there is not, I suppose I cannot say very much about it. However, it strikes me as rather peculiar that we concentrate so much on seaside resorts while the inland areas which are ideal for tourist development are still neglected. The best way I can make this relevant is by referring to the expenditure on publicity in Britain. It was only a very recent development that Board Fáilte gave their blessing to the development of Midland towns like Athlone. All the development took place in these areas before Bord Fáilte knew anything about it. I refer specifically to Athlone as an area to which hundreds of people come from Britain each year to stay in private houses while on a fishing tour. There are places like Banagher and other towns along the Shannon.

The private houses in various parts of the town of Athlone have been catering for these anglers for the past ten or tweleve years and a number of housewives in Athlone and elsewhere did special courses in domestic economy in order to be able to cater efficiently and at a reasonable charge for the middle income and lower income groups from Britain. There is no question of luxury accommodation, but clean food and comfortable lodgings are provided. These facilities were made available by private houses in various towns in the midlands and were so much appreciated by the visitors that each year the number of people coming from Britain has increased.

These houses are not recognised by Bord Fáilte as guest houses or anything else. They are playing a very valuable part in the economy generally as well as in their towns in bringing much-needed finance here. They are playing their own part in the tourist drive. Credit for what they are doing is very often given to another section. Very often Bord Fáilte take credit for the fact that hundreds of these visitors come to fishing areas, inland lakes, and so on, while all along the local people are directly advertising in fishing journals, for example, and have their own direct connections with Britain.

Acting-Chairman (Mr. Sheldon)

That would appear to be outside the ambit of the Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. McQuillan

I was trying to make it relevant by suggesting that the extra expenditure on publicity in Britain, for which authority is now being given, should be spent on advertising the tourist attractions of inland facilities as far as fishing, and so on, are concerneed. I shall not dwell on what has been mentioned already but I have in mind the value of attracting not so much the higher income groups in Britain in this respect as the working-class and the middle-income groups.

I should like to suggest again that it might be possible for the Minister to arrange that the debate on tourism generally be taken separately rather than have it, as in the past, buried in the middle of his Estimate which is for one of the most important Departments for which any Minister is responsible. The field is wide and the amount of time limited. It is desirable, in respect of sections of his Department which deal with State or semi-State companies, that there should be a separate discussion on each of these sections for which in the long run the Minister carries responsibility. The argument will be put forward that it is open to a Deputy on the debate on the Estimate for the Department of Industry and Commerce to cover any aspect of it he likes. I appreciate that that is true but from the point of view of making a searching examination and perhaps a more constructive contribution to the debate in connection with various matters under the Minister's control it might be advisable to adopt my suggestion, namely to have the particular section discussed separately.

Mr. J. Lynch

I am grateful to Deputies for the manner in which they have received the proposal that this extra £30,000 be authorised for the expenditure I suggested. The principal question, I think, which was raised was: How is it possible to effect a saving so as to require only a token Estimate? I would point out that, under the ordinary Administration and Promotional Expenses, Bord Fáilte have power to make grants for resort development but that envisages resort development of a comparatively minor nature when on compares it with the powers they have under Subhead B for major resort development.

Major resort development was made possible by reason of the passage through the Dáil and the Seanad of the recent Tourist Traffic Bill which was passed at the end of July of last year. There was, however, an advance provision in the Estimates to cover a certain portion of that expenditure. The over-all sum was £1,000,000 over a period of, I think, ten years and a due proportion of it was set aside for expenditure in this year. The legislation was passed in July but the type of expenditure envisaged was of a major nature which would require to be well-planned and to which the local authority would make a reasonable contribution. It may have been too optimistic to expect that a considerable sum of that money would be spent in this financial year. The fact is that while Bord Fáilte have, in broad outline in certain respects and in detail in others, outlined the schemes for the expenditure of that money on major resort development none of them has come to the stage when actual expenditure could be incurred in this financial year.

Deputy McQuillan asked me at whose door the blame should be laid. I can only say that he could gather for himself from my remarks where he would see fit to lay the blame. Perhaps there was delay on the part of Bord Fáilte or on the part of the local authorities concerned. I think Bord Fáilte did proceed with due and commendable expedition to select the areas which would be suitable for this type of expenditure, to communicate with the local authorities that they had selected such areas and to request the local authorities to put forward well-planned schemes of development. I will not suggest that the local authorities were in any way dilatory in meeting the request of Bord Fáilte. I am leaving it at that for the Deputy's own conclusions.

Deputy Corish complained about the lack of expenditure along the south-east coast. He referred in particular to Wexford. I do not think he can sustain the suggestion that Bord Fáilte have in any way been ungenerous to Wexford. I think he was rather mistaken in suggesting that no money was spent in Wexford on tourist development. No money was spent on major tourist development as is envisaged in the Act of last year but that is true of all the country for the reasons I have stated. Bord Fáilte have to my knowledge contributed to a considerable extent, under the ordinary resort grants schemes, to making amenities available in the Wexford area. I do not have to refer to the extent to which they have assisted the establishment and the undeniable success of the Wexford Festival. Considerable expenditure was involved there which was well justified in the event.

Deputy McQuillan was wrong in suggesting that increased publicity in the United States has resulted in decreased tourist results in this country. I set out fairly clearly in my opening remarks that the amount spent in the year ended March, 1959, was about 29 per cent. less than the over-all amount expended in the year 1955 on tourist promotion in the United States. I pointed out, too, that the cost of publicity in the United States has increased by roughly 50 per cent. That may have been a contributory factor to a falling-off in American tourist traffic in 1959. I would say that that was an experience shared with other European countries and I am given to understand the reason is that 1959 represents what might be described as a valley year in American tourism.

In 1958, there were two outstanding events in Europe—the centenary of the Lourdes Apparitions and the Brussels Exhibition—which attracted something in the region of 12 to 15 million people, many of them, of course, coming from the United States. The year 1959, as I said, was a valley year and, in 1960, there are many other outstanding events in Europe, including the Olympic Games and the suggested year of the Revelation of Fatima. It is reasonable to assume that Americans who desired to travel to Europe in that period, between, say, 1957 and 1960, would possibly have decided to come either in 1958 or 1960 to coincide with these outstanding events in Europe. That is a reasonable suggestion which is open to acceptance.

As far as unsightly obstructions in the countryside are concerned, I do not want to suggest that Bord Fáilte have power to remove all unsightly obstructions of this nature. The Department of Local Government is preparing a Bill to give greater power to the local authorities to remove derelict sites. That would be an exercise quite apart from Bord Fáilte's activities but Bord Fáilte, as a result of their general obligation to promote tourism and develop scenic attractions, have the power to expend money on removing obstructions of this nature. These are obstructions to places of scenic interest but they can do so only by agreement, first, with the owners of the particular property and secondly, in consultation and in association with the local authority itself.

I do not think we could ever get away with what Deputy McQuillan suggests, that all the high walls should be knocked down, much as we object to them. There are high walls in many of the most beautiful parts of the country. They obscure beautiful scenery from the passing traveller, whether he be cyclist, walker or motorist, but I do not think that we could justify such an invasion of the privacy of the individual as knocking down any high walls that surround his property much as some of us might like to do so.

Mr. McQuillan

May I say that I did not suggest that they should all be knocked down. I specifically referred to the fact that when local authority improvement work was being carried out, where they were removing dangerous corners or widening roads attractive iron railings should be substituted so that tourists will be able to see the scenery.

Mr. J. Lynch

I am sorry if I misunderstood the Deputy. I did not intend to misquote him. As far as the suggestion about the installation of railings where walls have been knocked down is concerned, I think that has been carried out fairly extensively, not only by the local authorities at the present time, but by the Board of Works.

It is a form of expense that I should like to see proceeded with at an increasing pace but I should like to say that this is not the main function of Bord Fáilte. It is not a function they can undertake of their own volition except with the necessary consent and co-operation I have referred to.

I do not think there are any other points that were raised that I need reply to except perhaps the suggestion made by Deputy McQuillan that there has not been a fair share of expenditure for tourist development in midland areas by Bord Fáilte. I do not know to what extent they can show figures to differentiate between expenditure in the midlands and seaside areas but the fact is that Bord Fáilte have assisted materially in the promotion of angling on inland lakes. They have assisted, to my own knowledge when I was in the Department of Education, to a very material extent in the equipping of people living in houses where they can provide accommodation for tourists. They have equipped them with a knowledge of fundamental housekeeping so that they might be able to cater for tourists. Perhaps they might be able to devote a greater part of their budget in that way but I am sure Bord Fáilte will be fully alive to the matter.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

Could the Minister undertake to speed up the construction and erection of a landing platform on the banks of the Shannon at Clonmacnoise? I understand that the matter is under consideration and in view of the history of the locality, it should be erected as soon as possible.

Mr. J. Lynch

The matter is not relevant but the Deputy may be sure that his remarks will be noted.

Vote put and agreed to.