Vol. 399 No. 10
8 Mr. Moynihan asked the Minister for Tourism and Transport if he has received a submission from Bord Fáilte and from the Confederation of Irish Tourism relating to the necessity of increased State spending on the promotion and marketing of tourism; if he accepts the urgency of providing such increased expenditure; and if the potential in jobs and expansion is to be achieved in the short term.
14 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Minister for Tourism and Transport the funds which will be made available to implement the joint plan for tourism promotion drawn up jointly by Bord Fáilte and the Irish Tourist Confederation; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8 and 14 together.
A joint plan by the Irish Tourist Industry Confederation and Bord Fáilte —Promoting Irish Tourism 1991-1993— was formally presented to me on 24 May last. The plan is currently being examined in my Department, and the question of the level of Exchequer funding for tourism in the light of this plan will be considered by Government in the context of the Estimates for 1991, the projected first year of the plan's operation.
As far as the potential of Irish tourism in terms of expansion and jobs is concerned, the Government have set out their targets for the sector in the Operational Programme for Tourism for the period 1989-1993, namely, to increase overseas visitor numbers by 90 per cent, overseas tourism revenue by £500 million and, in the process, create 25,000 new jobs.
We are now into the second year of this programme. On the basis of the 1989 results, when overseas visitor numbers and revenue increased by 16 per cent, creating an estimated 5,000 new jobs, and having regard to the trend in the first four months of this year, I am confident that the targets will be achieved.
Would the Minister accept that there is concern in some sectors of the tourist industry that in the absence of a substantial increased expenditure on aid, the anticipated growth in jobs in the tourism industry will not be achieved in the short term?
As I have said, Deputy, I am satisfied we are more than meeting our targets at present and we are well ahead of targets in terms of tourist numbers. While I accept that tourist numbers bear a strong relationship to marketing, they also have a lot to do with other things such as access transport costs, airline charges, access ferry charges and how we handle our environment. I have the report from Bord Fáilte and the Irish Tourist Industry Confederation, but I remain to be convinced that spending additional moneys necessarily brings in a pro rata increase in business.
I want to make sure that Bord Fáilte and the tourism industry have the right amount of money and not necessarily more money. I know the Deputy will appreciate from his previous work in this area that the industry are now beginning to do well as a result of the pick up in business and more and more they will have to help to fund the costs of promoting the industry. I am anxious that the tourist industry themselves will use their own money to back Government money in the promotion of tourism. The Government will not be found wanting in this area but the industry must contribute.
I wish to raise three points in response to the Minister's reply. First, the details from the CSO of numbers coming in and out of this country — I know the Minister accepts this to a point — cannot be absolutely accurately related to tourism because of our abnormally high levels of emigration.
Questions please, Deputy.
Second, the overwhelming majority in Irish tourism do not have the resources to engage in substantial marketing and promotion and that is the reason the State should intervene. Finally, would the Minister accept that State expenditure on tourism is totally insignificant when compared with expenditure in other sectors such as agriculture or industry when account is taken of the value of the Irish tourist industry to the national economy?
I agree with the Deputy that the numbers who visit the country are not the only measure and that is why I have laid fresh emphasis on the earnings from those who come and the jobs created as a result. Quite frankly, I am much more interested in the jobs and the cash we can get as a result of visitors than in the numbers coming through.
It is between 15 and 18 per cent.
I have to say that the time available for priority questions is exhausted.
Question No. 9 has not been taken.
I am sorry, Deputy, the Chair does its best.
We have had only 15 minutes.
That is all and we have gone quite beyond that.
On a point of order, Sir, Question No. 9 is very straight-forward and surely we could get a brief reply to it?
No, Deputy, it is nearly five minutes past the time.
The Chair is depriving me, as the main Opposition spokesperson, of time in this House when the minority parties are allowed to monopolise the time.
If the Deputy is unhappy about Standing Orders of this House, which the Chair seeks to administer, he has a remedy.
The Chair should be reasonable.
Deputy Mitchell, it is now five minutes past the appropriate time. I am calling the next question.
I represent 50 Members of the House.
I am not prepared to set a precedent of this kind.
I got the same amount of time as one of the smaller parties.
The Deputy's party imposed Standing Orders.
We let people like the Deputy get away with murder and get too far in this House.
There are more questions and the Deputy is wasting valuable time.
We will change Standing Orders so that you will not get away with it.
Question No. 11.
I am not prepared to be shouted down by The Workers' Party. I represent 50 Members and I will not be put down by anybody on the benches over there.
It is disgraceful behaviour.
I am calling Question No. 11.
We cannot talk about the important issue of transport in Dublin.
