I should like to say first of all how interesting I found the discussion on this Bill and how pleased I was that so many Deputies contributed. Many novel, original and useful ideas were thrown out. Early in the summer Bord Fáilte produced a little booklet with the catchcry that tourism is everybody's business. This is quite true. It is reflected in the fact that so many Deputies are knowledgeable about the tourist industry and the role of Bord Fáilte. From reading the debate, Bord Fáilte executives will learn a good deal.
I should also like to congratulate Deputy Leonard on his contribution as spokesman on tourism for the Opposition Party. I appreciate the research he put into it. I am sure we will be able to work together. There will always be an element of working together between the Minister and the spokesman for the Opposition, and a necessary amount of collaboration and co-operation. I congratulate Deputy Leonard on his speech and on his constructive approach to the Bill.
A number of points were raised on which I feel I should comment. Deputy Leonard, Deputy Brennan, Deputy Brugha and other Deputies referred to the problems of hotels and suggested that a banking system for the hotel industry should be set up. I do not think that would make any difference unless the rate were to be subsidised. If they incurred debts the debts would still need to be paid off. Bord Fáilte already have an interest rate for hotels. They subsidise the bank interest. This is one of the grants they give.
We must try to get the tourist industry into such a healthy state that the hotels will not need assistance. We now have a good stock of hotels. Any further growth should be generated from profits inside the industry. This is a far healthier way of doing it. Early in the 1960s there was a need for Bord Fáilte to give an injection into the hotel industry to provide hotels where they were scarce and not up to Bord Fáilte standards. That day has gone. In fact, in the late 1960s and the early 1970s the pendulum swung too far the other way and, perhaps, we provided too much money for too many hotels, some of them in the wrong locations. That has steadied down. We are probably right now. I do not say we will be right for all time in the number of bedrooms we have.
It may seem strange to say that in a few years' time Dublin will possibly be looking for extra bedroom accommodation. It should be provided, if possible, through the industry itself, by the individual entrepreneurs who may want to go into the industry. I know a separate banking institution has been called for frequently to cater for the industry. It has been compared to the farming industry. The Agricultural Credit Corporation provide funds for the farming industry but I do not think a separate bank would be a suitable vehicle for financing hotels. Bord Fáilte have spoken to the banks and generally they have recognised the problems of the hotel industry over the past three, four, five or six years and have treated them as leniently as possible within the constraints of the banking stystem.
A number of Deputies also referred to the self-catering and rent-a-cottage schemes. I am very interested in these. They have been very beneficial to the tourist industry. That was the tenor of the debate. Deputy Carter and a number of others referred to the necessity to maintain standards. The rent-a-cottage scheme has certainly done that. In Europe and indeed most parts of the world now there is a movement towards a form of self-catering holiday as opposed to the hotel or guesthouse—a movement perhaps not so much from the guesthouse as from the hotel— which is growing in importance and in popularity among not alone incoming tourists but our own people. Although they do not show up on the balance of payments side of tourism, our people are tourists in the sense that they take holidays here, they must be catered for and the standards maintained for them as well. The rent-a-cottage scheme is a new concept. It is one on which I am very keen. The standards are high and it has a very good future.
Certainly we should encourage the growth of self-catering accommodation but we must be very careful of our standards. There is nothing worse than an advertisement appearing in an English or continental paper advertising a cottage or house for rent during the months of July and August in some part of Ireland, the advertisement reading: "Fully equipped; bring nothing." The visitor comes over and finds the cottage or house dirty, poorly equipped, with perhaps lack of furniture, utensils, heating or lighting. This does not give the industry or the country a good name. It is a sector of the industry I should like to see growing and perhaps we could develop a system of overseeing the standards of such self-catering units. It has advantages over the hotel—as the Leas-Cheann Comhairle knows perhaps better than any of us—and has tremendous social benefits for the area in which it is located. People who come to these houses benefit the local community and, in turn, they benefit from living in what is a strange community.
I was in north Mayo last Sunday opening a scheme of cottages and six or eight out of the total ten are occupied at present. Therefore it is a season that can be stretched, perhaps not at the full economic rent but at least in a way that will contribute to overheads. In many ways it has changed Ballycastle in north Mayo since the scheme first started functioning in July, 1974, inasmuch as the people shop in the village, go to the pub to buy a drink and, when they walk down the road to the beach, they pass people and stop and talk to them. Therefore it is of tremendous financial and social benefit to the natives living there.
I have spoken with Bord Fáilte in this respect. They are at present participating in a pilot scheme with a large operator in England advertising self-catering accommodation in this country. I hope it will be very successful but I must stress that we must be terribly careful of standards. People are becoming more and more discerning, not alone about hotels and guesthouses but accommodation generally. Deputy Lalor spoke about the condition of our streets and roads. We must always be very conscious of standards and ensure that they are maintained at a very high level.
Deputy Brennan spoke about the limited provision of money. He totally misunderstood the purpose of the Bill. Under the old Act the limit was £13 million. To date nearly £12 million of that has been spent on holiday accommodation. It was to allow a further £3 million, raising the amount to £16 million, that the Bill was introduced. But that does not mean that £3 million will be spent this year. I think Deputy de Valera referred to this also this evening. It is merely a provision to lift the ceiling of what can be spent. Bord Fáilte will have to come back to the Government and normal budgetary constraints will obtain in their case also. If the money is to be spent they will have to seek specific permission for any individual amounts spent under this subhead in the budget. Because £3 million is passed here it does not mean they can spend it all in the current financial year or the next one. Each individual item will have to be approved by me and by the Department of Finance.
I cannot remember any Deputy who did not refer to pollution and the environment. This realisation of the necessity to preserve our environment is very healthy. This applies not only to visitors, although it is important to them as well because many of them come from countries where there is a greater awareness of the ugliness of a dirty atmosphere and conditions and they are appalled at the condition of some streets in this country. In this regard the tidy towns competition has done a very good job in lifting the standards in villages and small towns. Regrettably that message does not appear to have got through to the larger towns or cities yet.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach and a number of Dublin Deputies spoke about this. In this city and my own city of Cork I am afraid the standard is extremely low in spite of the large sums of money that ratepayers in both these places contribute towards the clearing of litter. It may be a long haul. Perhaps education is what is needed.
If this message is got through to the three, four and five-year olds, and we keep plugging it through, they may come out better, cleaner and more litter-conscious than were we. With regard to control in this respect, Deputy O'Leary seemed to think it should be left to the local authorities and I think it was Deputy O'Kennedy who felt that local authorities should have no say in the matter. The middle road here would appear to be the correct one. What Bord Fáilte are doing is exercising their powers under the 1963 Planning Act in conjunction with the local authorities. This means a partnership and certainly the local authorities have a function to play. Bord Fáilte, from their very real concern and knowledge of the effect on tourism and revenue of a poor environment, have a function also. They and the local authorities should concentrate on this in an effort to achieve higher standards.
Deputy O'Kennedy also made the case that a Department of the Environment was necessary. Practically every Government Department have what might be described as an environmental interest—Industry and Commerce from the point of view of the IDA; Local Government which have perhaps the prime interest; my own Department in tourism; and Health from the point of view of health standards. It is for that reason that an inter-departmental committee was set up, as the Taoiseach mentioned in answer to a parliamentary question about three or four weeks ago, to investigate how co-ordination between the various Departments involved can be achieved in this matter of pollution and environmental control.
I spoke at the opening of an effluent treatment plant in Ballineen, County Cork, in September. For those Members who are on local authorities it is worth restating what I said, and I quote from it now as follows:
We must also ensure that Industrial, agricultural and residential development is not achieved at the cost of serious environmental damage. This applies particularly to water and air pollution and to waste disposal. At the same time we must be realistic. Economic expansion and the planned programmes for housing, industry and agriculture cannot but make some impact on the environment, bringing about changes in the landscape and increased pressures on natural resources.
Then I went on to say that frequently towns and local authorities, by not having proper control of pollution in the area within their control, are ruining the very tourist amenity by which many of them live. They are killing their own golden egg. I think of two towns in particular who have very valuable fishing lakes into which they are pumping sewage from the town. If those two towns do not realise the damage they are doing to their own businesses and do not face up to the cost of treating this effluent before it is discharged into the sewers, then they will kill tourism in their area, to the detriment primarily of their own area because there are other areas which are treating it and in which there are lakes and rivers that are clean. Hopefully, the worst that would happen in that regard is that the people who normally went to these areas to fish and enjoy themselves would switch to another Irish town, but it is possible that they would switch away from Ireland altogether. We must face up to the fact that we can no longer put into our lakes and rivers untreated agricultural, industrial or ordinary domestic effluent. There is a cost involved here that will have to be borne either locally by ratepayers or nationally by the Government or a combination of the two. Otherwise we will kill some of our fish stocks in rivers and also our tourist industry. As well as that, we shall ruin the environment in which we grew up and which we want our children to enjoy. They will not enjoy it unless we apply our minds to this problem.
In this regard Deputy O'Kennedy referred to Bord na Móna and to the damage that peat silt draining off the bogs was doing to part of the Shannon. This is something that was denied before by Bord na Móna. I remember answering questions on this here in the House about six months ago. Bord na Móna deny they are doing this and say that this pollution of the stretch of the Shannon in question has been observed comparatively recently, whereas they are draining the bogs into the Shannon for over 20 years. The section of the river that is involved is the catchment of the Shannon above Portumna, but, in fact, the area of bog being worked there by Bord na Móna is only 1.5 per cent of the total catchment involved. Nevertheless, they agree there is a mixture of silt and turf peat in the bottom of the river that makes boating difficult, this they have undertaken to remove this next spring at the low water. They have engaged An Foras Forbartha—and I think most Deputies will agree that this is an independent organisation in this regard —to see what damage, if any, has been done to the fish in the river and, if so, who is to blame. I will not anticipate the findings of An Foras Forbartha here today, but Bord na Móna are quite confident that when the report is produced they will be found to be innocent in this regard. If any Deputy is interested, I shall be glad to send him a copy of the report, which I think will be available in about another month.
A number of Deputies spoke about the new zoning strategy of Bord Fáilte. These zones are being drawn up in consultation with the various local authorities. They are not permanent zones. If as time goes on they are found to be wrongly drawn they can be redrawn. The worst thing tourism could have is a set policy for all time. It must be flexible and allow for changing circumstances, changing fashions, changing bank balances, and the changing sets of values of the customers, who are the tourists. These zones will be published by Bord Fáilte in their new development plan which will be out some time early in the new year. Most Deputies are members of local authorities. They will have a chance to see the zones in their own areas, and if they feel changes are necessary they can take the matter up with their local authorities. As I say, the zones have been drawn up mostly in conjunction with the local authorities.
While on local authorities, I would refer to the financing of the local tourist boards. A number of Deputies suggested that Bord Fáilte should supply more of the finance. I do not agree with this. These regional boards are established now about 10 or 11 years, and were a first move in decentralisation. Whoever pays the piper calls the tune, and if the local authorities and local interests allow Bord Fáilte to pick up more and more of the cost of the regional boards, then Bord Fáilte will want to have more and more say. If more say is to be kept at local level, then local interests should supply more money. When the boards were set up Bord Fáilte were supplying 65 per cent of the money and the local authorities and local interests were supplying the balance. Bord Fáilte are now supplying about 80 per cent of the funds involved. The Deputies here who are members of local authorities should make the speeches they made in this House on the value of tourism at their local authority estimate meetings and they should see that their local authorities contribute as much as possible. There was a limitation prior to 1963 on the amount of money that a local authority could vote for tourism. There is no such limit now. Some of the counties got this message very early and they are the ones who benefited most. Others did not. Some of them are contributing even less now than the statutory limit prior to 1963. If you want the benefits in your area, you must not alone promote tourism through your local authority but also get private people to contribute to tourism. The less funds you get from Bord Fáilte the more say you will have locally. A lot of tourism depends on local debate, local activity and local promotion.
There was some criticism of the money being spent on promoting tourism in Australia, New Zealand and Japan, which were so far away, and it was suggested that this money should be switched to the Continent of Europe where we had a very good result, and that is true. Deputies might bear in mind that in the last few years when so much of our tourism came from one source and when for certain reasons that source dried up, we had nothing to fall back on. Bord Fáilte, while continuing to develop the existing markets to their fullest, must also probe around for new markets and see if they can get tourists from any other source. There was no money spent in Japan this year. The amount spent in Australia and New Zealand this year was £30,000 from which we earned £1,5000,000 in tourist revenue. That is a very good return.
The Continent has been marvellous, the receipts from some countries being up over 30 per cent in 1975, and the expenditure on the continent on promotion this year has been £1.2 million. Furthermore, I think we are the only country in Europe that will show an increase in American tourists this year over last year. Every other country will show a decrease. I am keeping my fingers crossed, not having the final figures before me yet, but I am hoping we shall have a 4 per cent increase, which is a very good achievement for Bord Fáilte and one on which every side of the House should congratulate them. In this very difficult year for world tourism they have managed to show this very significant return from the Continent of Europe, a very good return from America and a balanced or perhaps a slightly increased position from our nearest neighbour, England. As planes get faster and bigger perhaps fares will come down or at least be a smaller proportion of people's income. There is a vast tourist market in Japan, New Zealand and Australia. If people are coming to Europe, it is right to try to bring a proportion of those people here to stay in this country.
Reference was made to the licensing laws, signposting and lay-bys. As Deputies know the licensing laws are a matter for the Minister for Justice and I will transfer to him the remarks made here. The matter of signposting is something which Deputies could best take up with the local authorities but I will pass on to the Minister for Local Government what has been said here.
Deputy O'Connor referred to fishing and, as far as I remember, he said this was neglected. This is not true. In 1974 Bord Fáilte spent £27,000 on access roads, car parks, signposting, jetties and slipways and a further £6,500 was spent on angling festivals, competitions and so forth. Angling associations were helped to the tune of £3,000 and £5,000 was provided for boats on inland waters and other facilities. The development of fishing will continue to be a priority with Bord Fáilte.
Deputy de Valera spoke about the wisdom of providing this money in times of financial stringencies and economic difficulties. I made the point that we are not actually voting this money; we are voting to raise the limit. In my Estimate each year the amount to be spent by Bord Fáilte will have to be discussed here. Investment in tourism is productive and provides employment in areas which are hardest hit in time of recession and places where there is least industrial employment.
Deputy Lalor raised the question of Aer Lingus operations particularly on the North Atlantic route. The whole attitude of Aer Lingus towards the North Atlantic, all the options open to them, whether to increase their charters, whether to come off it or whether to stay as they are, are matters which are under examination at the moment. I would be the last person to say that they should come off the North Atlantic. I know they are losing a considerable amount of money on it. The ancillary activities which they are engaged in will hopefully produce profits which will help to cut away some of that loss. They should be encouraged to go out and earn money from other sources to allow them to balance the loss on the North Atlantic. It is essential that this country should have a presence on the North Atlantic, not alone from the tourism point of view but from the morale point of view and the prestige point of view. These are things one cannot put a pounds, shillings and pence value on but they have a value. If we come off the North Atlantic there will be no competition for other carriers and that would not do.
I would like to encourage Aer Lingus if they can, within their own resources, to provide money to invest in ancillary activities that will provide them with a profit that they can put against the loss on the North Atlantic so that we can stay on the North Atlantic until times improve and that that will again turn out to be a profitable sphere of their operations. Of course, it is true that every airline in the world are losing money at the moment and the North Atlantic is a particularly heavy loss-maker for all of them. We should grit our teeth and try to get other sources of revenue that will help cover some of this loss and wait for the good days to come again, as I am sure they will.
I would like to thank everybody who took part in this debate and to repeat again what I think came through very clearly in the debate, that the two things we must watch in tourism are that the standards of everybody connected with it—from the first contacts somebody coming to this country has with somebody connected with Ireland, be it a girl in the booking office in Frankfurt or San Francisco, the staff on a boat or plane, people in the garages, hotels, guesthouses or the people on the street—should be the highest possible and that the environment into which we ask people to come is not ruined by our carelessness in the type of development we allow or in having standards which are not acceptable to our visitors. If we do that I am confident that the money I am asking the House to provide today for Bord Fáilte will be repaid one hundredfold in the years to come.
