Vol. 723 No. 1
21 Deputy Jimmy Deenihan asked the Minister for Tourism; Culture and Sport the action she is taking to alleviate the downward trend in tourism figures with nearly 900,000 fewer visitors to Ireland to date this year; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [44378/10]
The most recent published figures from the CSO show a reduction of 15.7% in the number of overseas visitors to Ireland in the first three quarters of 2010 compared to the corresponding period of 2009. Figures for the third quarter of this year show that the fall-off is slowing down, at just over 8% compared to the corresponding period of 2009.
While any decrease is disappointing, the figures must be viewed in context. Tourism worldwide has been deeply affected by global economic difficulties and loss of consumer confidence. Furthermore, the exceptional weather conditions in the early part of the year and the closure of airports due to the volcanic ash cloud meant that it was inevitable that a fall-off in the numbers travelling, particularly in northwest Europe, would be experienced in the first half of 2010. At the same time it is important to recognise that more than 4.6 million overseas visitors came to Ireland in the first nine months of the year with hugely positive benefits for the Irish economy. The Government recognises the opportunities to grow this figure further and ensure that tourism plays a key part in Ireland's economic recovery.
Based on my recent experience in supporting the international marketing effort, I know that the industry and the tourism agencies are fighting hard for every bit of available business for the remainder of this year and into 2011. Tourism Ireland is finalising its 2011 business plan and next week I will launch its marketing plans for 2011. The main focus of the plans will be on those markets offering the best real prospects of growth in 2011, namely, Great Britain, the United States, Germany and France. The marketing campaigns will emphasise that there has never been a better time to holiday in Ireland in terms of the value available and the quality of the tourism product on offer.
On the business tourism front, the new Convention Centre, Dublin will be highlighted and further enhance our capacity to attract international events. Other significant events next year such as the Solheim Cup at Killeen Castle, the start of the tall ships race series in Waterford, Dublin Contemporary, Imagine Ireland, and the UEFA cup final at the Aviva Stadium will also provide significant opportunities to boost our international profile and the tourism agencies will work to maximise the tourism benefits of these events.
In terms of the broader policy environment, the report of the tourism renewal group set out a clear plan for the survival, recovery and growth of Irish tourism. I established the new tourism renewal implementation group in July 2010 to oversee and further drive actions on measures, based on the wide-ranging framework for action, that support tourism in Ireland, increase competitiveness and ensure that the sector is ready for recovery and growth. Good progress has been made with regard to the survival actions recommended by the renewal group and the implementation group will continue to meet to pursue outstanding measures that can ensure that Irish tourism returns to growth next year and plays a major role in Ireland's economic recovery.
I remind the Minister that there will be almost 1 million fewer tourists visiting the country this year than in the previous year, with a possible loss of €1 billion in revenue. The Minister has outlined some of the measures she has taken but what further measures does she intend to take? It is agreed right across the industry that the travel tax is having a detrimental effect on visitors. Yesterday at the Bord Fáilte annual conference the Minister said she is against the tax and, as reflected in The Irish Times today, that she would more or less scrap it. Will she confirm she is in favour of scrapping this tax?
I call the Minister to reply.
May I finish?
Please get in a question.
Of course. I am asking questions.
Can I explain to the Deputy that ——
There is no need to explain.
The Deputy should have some respect for the Chair.
Could I complete ——
No Deputy, the Deputy should have some respect for the Chair. The Deputy should take his seat when the Chair is on his feet. The Deputy should sit down.
Can I ask ——
No, not until I explain. The Chair will be respected and will not be shouted down.
Absolutely.
The Deputy has one minute to ask a question, otherwise he is eating into other Deputies' time.
This is new procedure.
No, it is standard procedure.
Tourism Ireland said it is impossible to plan without regular CSO figures. Has the Minister done anything to address the staffing problem at the CSO so that we can get the monthly figures as we did in the past?
The Deputy has asked about three distinct issues. I agree, we would rather have the CSO figures on a monthly basis than on a quarterly basis because that would allow us to plan. The CSO has said it is not in a position to do that at the moment, but at least every time we get the figures they assist us in our targeted marketing. We now do our marketing on a seasonal basis rather than an annual basis so the quarterly figures are helpful.
On the question of what measures we are taking to promote tourism, we are targeting each of our four major markets in a different way. The World Travel Market last week was very successful and the agencies supporting the industry are very involved. This is a successful way of promoting tourism because the people involved are the best people to promote Ireland. We are also improving marketing through promotions such as television campaigns in Germany. These are critical. In Great Britain we are focusing on coach tour operators, retail travel agents and the Internet agencies. For example, at the World Travel Market I met people from Expedia through which many visitors book their trips. We also have an extensive marketing programme in North America and work with tour operators there on specific promotional activities. We do the same in France.
Investment in the capital programme is also important because people come to Ireland to attend iconic events. We try to ensure that special events like those I mentioned in my response, Imagine Ireland and Dublin Contemporary are part of our plan.
What about the travel tax?
I will come to that. The industry has been telling me that the travel tax goes against the spirit of trying to attract tourism and while it was originally targeted at bringing in approximately €125 million, it looks like it may only bring in approximately €80 million this year. However, €80 million is very hard to find. I have asked the airlines to indicate to me what they could give me in return for the removal of the tax. Ryanair has indicated what it would provide if the travel tax and the increased charges at Dublin Airport, Shannon Airport and Cork Airport were reversed, but has not indicated what it would provide if only the travel tax was involved. This is part of our negotiation platform.
I am rather surprised, despite the indication yesterday that the Minister is in favour of scrapping this tax, that this is not mentioned in the national recovery plan. Obviously, the tax and the revenue from it is very much part of the programme for the next four years. Will the Minister clarify that position? Is it factored into the plan?
It is part of our discussions for the budget and that is the reason it is not in the plan. Individual taxes are specifically part of the budget. No decision has been made on the issue yet. Discussions are taking place with the industry and we are looking at the overall financial context to see whether it is possible to remove or reduce it or to see how we can replace the €80 million otherwise. The issue is on the table and I am very open to specific proposals on that.
22 Deputy Mary Upton asked the Minister for Tourism; Culture and Sport in view of the implications of the recommendations of the report on the special group on public service numbers and expenditure programmes regarding her Department, the actions she has taken to evaluate the recommendations of the report; if she has identified ways by which similar efficiencies or savings could be made without resorting to the actions in the report; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [44227/10]
The report of the special group on public service numbers and expenditure programmes, published in July 2009, made a number of recommendations, including, to reduce or discontinue expenditure programmes, to reduce the numbers employed in each area of the public service, to re-allocate staffing or expenditure resources between public service organisations as appropriate and to rationalise State agencies.
The work of the special group resulted in the identification of potential expenditure savings of €5.3 billion in a full year, with associated reductions of more than 17,300 in public service numbers. This was far in excess of what was then envisaged for budget 2010, so the special group's report was viewed as a suite of potential savings from which the Government could choose on the basis of its own assessment of the area of spending involved. In evaluating the recommendations of the report, Ministers and the Government necessarily had regard to the fact that all expenditure programmes confer benefits on various stakeholders and that no proposals for reductions are painless. With particular regard to my Department, it was noted that all three sectors, tourism, culture and sport, make major contributions to Irish society and to the real economy. The recommendations of the special group for my Department included proposals to reduce programme expenditure by almost €105 million in 2010 and to structurally reduce 170 staff across the Department and its agencies. The special group's report also proposed that consideration should be given to the discontinuation of the then Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism as a Department in its own right. In responding to these challenging proposals, savings of more than €35 million were achieved in the Revised Estimates for 2010 for the Department's Vote group compared to 2009. In addition, the Government's moratorium on staff recruitment and promotion and its incentivised early retirement scheme continue to achieve reductions in staff numbers across my Department and its agencies.
In March 2010, the Government made structural re-alignments to a number of Departments. As part of these re-alignments, the former Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism was restructured as the current Department of Tourism, Culture and Sport, with an enhanced focus on maximising the benefits to Ireland in financial and other terms of both our tourism product and our cultural and sporting heritage. In addition, responsibility for the horse and greyhound racing industries was transferred to the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.
In preparing for budget 2011, all possible measures are being considered to ensure that the proposed budget adjustment of €6 billion is achieved, including the outstanding recommendations of the report of the special group. In addition, the ongoing implementation of the Croke Park agreement in my Department and across the public service has led to the identification of a range of potential savings. While it is clearly not possible for me to reveal the details of what may be announced in budget 2011, my objective is to ensure that an appropriate level of resources is provided to ensure the continued and successful development of the three important sectors for which I have responsibility.
I am pleased to hear that changes are to be proposed. Correspondence I received in August stated that the Department then employed 156 staff, of whom 77, or 48 full-time equivalents, had responsibilities in the arts and culture section. Given the number of staff employed by the Department, why do several quangos continue to exist? The replies to seven parliamentary questions I submitted today state that the Minister has no responsibility to Dáil Éireann for these matters. It is extraordinary that my questions cannot be answered. Why is there such a need for consultancy given the number of staff employed by the Department?
Having gotten rid of other bodies while serving in previous Departments, I genuinely believe that the agencies attached to the Department of Tourism, Culture and Sports are best served for supporting areas such as international and national marketing. The fact that Tourism Ireland is a North-South body should also be considered. The Arts Council is not only able to allocate grants, but it also enjoys a direct relationship with cultural and arts groups all over the country. The same can be said for the Irish Sports Council.
In regard to staffing levels in my Department, 44 staff work in the National Archives, which has a specific remit. Given that type of allocation, the Deputy can see where the rest of the work is done.
My main concern is the lack of accountability. I have raised this issue in a recent policy document in respect of sporting organisations. Direct ministerial responsibility is the way to proceed and significantly greater accountability is required.
I accept the Deputy's point about accountability. Significant sums of money continue to be spent in the three areas under my remit.
That is my point.
The expertise we require does not rest within any Department. The marketing skills needed in the United States are entirely different from those needed in Germany and France. The agencies must employ people who are based in these countries. That would not be possible for a Department unless new embassies were established. It is our responsibility to determine the budget for these employees and to ensure they are accountable. If we can develop ways to ensure greater accountability, I would be happy to do so, but we would not serve the needs of the country by subsuming these four agencies into the Department.
23 Deputy Jimmy Deenihan asked the Minister for Tourism; Culture and Sport her views on the suggestion that one restaurant is closing every day; her plans to combat this collapse in our restaurant sector; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [44379/10]
Neither Fáilte Ireland nor I can substantiate the suggestion that one restaurant per day is closing because restaurants are not obliged to officially register under existing tourism legislation. However, I am aware that there is a high level of turnover in restaurant establishments internationally.
It is Government policy to develop and support the tourism and hospitality industry through an appropriate range of policies and programmes in partnership with key representative bodies, including the Restaurants Association of Ireland, the Irish Hotels Federation and the Irish Tourist Industry Confederation. Since becoming Minister I have taken the opportunity to meet each of these representative bodies individually in order to hear their concerns and to see how the businesses they represent may be supported and made more competitive.
The State tourism agencies are maintaining their marketing drives to attract overseas and domestic tourists to holiday in Ireland, thereby boosting demand for tourism businesses, including restaurants. In 2010, the Restaurants Association of Ireland was approved grant funding of €44,250 by Fáilte Ireland towards its marketing activities under the market access support scheme. Fáilte Ireland is also offering a number of business supports to individual restaurant establishments, for example, business tools for kitchen management and food cost control, business mentoring, e-business support and advice on promoting and marketing.
Fáilte Ireland has established a food and hospitality innovation office which, in partnership with key stakeholders, has the ultimate goal of having Ireland recognised by domestic and international visitors alike for the accessibility, quality and value of our food experiences. To achieve this goal the State tourism agencies must work in partnership with the industry to grow and develop the restaurant sector. This is the approach that has been taken through the food tourism industry working group, which was established by Fáilte Ireland and includes key industry stakeholders such as the Restaurants Association of Ireland, Good Food Ireland, Eurotoque Ireland and sectoral entrepreneurs such as Darina Allen. It will shortly finalise a national food in tourism implementation framework which it plans to launch over the coming months. The focus of the implementation framework is to increase the availability and accessibility of local food and to capitalise on Ireland's potential to expand our reputation for good food and to become a destination for international and domestic food lovers.
The Restaurants Association of Ireland claims that one restaurant closes per day and the evidence for this can be seen in towns and cities all over Ireland. It has also reported that eight in ten restaurants operate at a loss and that 21,000 jobs are at risk. I ask the Minister how she proposes to address the issues it has raised. Food costs are 24% above the EU average and the joint labour committee structure needs to be examined. Restaurant operators have to contend with 27 different statutory and other regulatory bodies. Fine Gael has proposed a number of measures to deal with these issues. Restaurateurs have limited access to credit and are required to pay excessive rates. Can the Minister indicate whether she will introduce budgetary measures to address the challenges facing the restaurant industry?
I suspect that the majority of the bodies with which restaurant operators must deal come under the auspices of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Obviously, health and safety issues are not in my Department's remit. The programme being launched today takes account of the costs faced by businesses, including those involved in the tourism industry, and refers to joint labour committees and the minimum wage. Tourism, including the restaurant sector, is among the areas covered by the Credit Review Office to which people can appeal if they are refused credit.
The food strategy group and Good Food Ireland are investigating the issue of food costs. The best way of reducing food costs is to ensure we have good quality local food. If we are going to promote Ireland as a food destination, we should also be promoting Irish food.
Would the Minister agree with the Restaurants Association of Ireland's claim that jobs are at risk? Does she accept this is an urgent matter and that unless something is done at Government level to protect these jobs, they will be lost?
Finally, the Minister indicated that restaurants are very much part of our tourism infrastructure. An increasing number of visitors to Ireland enjoy not only our landscape and meeting our people but more particularly they enjoy eating locally produced produce. If these restaurants are taken out of the infrastructure, it will weaken our tourism product.
I accept the importance of restaurants as part of our tourism industry. This is why Fáilte Ireland has established a food and hospitality office to specifically deal with issues that are relevant to them. Organisations such as Good Food Ireland and the Restaurants Association of Ireland serve their members very well. A number of issues have been raised by them with me, on which we are working. I have already referred to the JLCs and the cost of labour, which is one of the issues, but there is also the cost of rates. Everybody in the industry is seeking that the revaluations be progressed quickly to ensure they are fairer, which was also referred to in the plan. However, where the revaluations took place for south Dublin and Fingal, the hotel valuations came down but those for restaurants actually increased. A fair and speedy system of revaluation is something we have set out in the plan. These are issues that can be addressed to support the industry over and above what I have said already.
24 Deputy Mary Upton asked the Minister for Tourism; Culture and Sport if she will detail in tabular form the annual percentage change in funding in real terms, taking account of inflation, of the Arts Council for each year from 2000 to date in 2010; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [44228/10]
I am supplying the Deputy with a table that sets out the following details in regard to the Arts Council for each year from 2000 to 2010: total grant in aid; the nominal percentage change in funding compared with the previous year; the rate of inflation as measured by the consumer price index; and the real percentage change in funding compared with the previous year, taking inflation into account. The overall position is that total Arts Council funding has increased from €45 million in 2000 to more than €68 million in 2010, which is an increase of 52.3% in the ten-year period. This is equivalent to a real increase of 19.2% over inflation for the ten-year period, as measured by the CPI. It also represents an average real increase of 1.8% each year over the ten-year period.
The Government appreciates the economic and social importance of the arts and culture sector. The economic value of the arts and creative industries, and their role in supporting enterprise and innovation in the economy as a whole, was highlighted at the Global Irish Economic Forum at Farmleigh and at the follow-up group of the Global Irish Network, which I chaired in New York. The value of our unique cultural assets in helping to distinguish Ireland from other tourism destinations has been also stressed as an increasing focus has been put on cultural tourism in recent years.
At the same time, while our arts, culture and heritage are important contributors to sustainable economic recovery, we appreciate that their contribution should never be measured in financial terms alone. Rather, they should be appreciated also for the social, cultural and educative benefits they bring to communities large and small around the country. The Government directed major increases in funding at the arts when resources were available. The unprecedented level of capital investment in arts facilities in particular will stand to the sector in the coming years. The challenge in the coming years will be to assist the arts in working smarter within the limited public financial resources available, building on our strengths and seizing new opportunities. Despite the undoubted challenges that will face the sector over the next few years, I am confident it can come through these difficulties stronger and in a position to achieve greater success in the years ahead.
The following table shows the annual grant-in-aid to the Arts Council from 2000 to 2010 inclusive together with the nominal changes and real changes in those years. Real changes are calculated by reference to the Consumer Price Index or CPI from 2001 to 2009 as published by the Central Statistics Office. The CPI for 2010 is taken from the most recent Department of Finance forecast.
|
Year |
Total Grant-in-aid |
Nominal Change |
Inflation Consumer Price Index |
Real Change |
|
€000s |
% |
% |
% |
|
|
2000 |
45,080 |
|||
|
2001 |
48,140 |
6.8 |
4.9 |
1.8 |
|
2002 |
47,669 |
-1.0 |
4.6 |
-5.3 |
|
2003 |
44,101 |
-7.5 |
3.5 |
-10.6 |
|
2004 |
54,500 |
23.6 |
2.2 |
20.9 |
|
2005 |
66,233 |
21.5 |
2.5 |
18.6 |
|
2006 |
82,310 |
24.3 |
4.0 |
19.5 |
|
2007 |
83,000 |
0.8 |
4.9 |
-3.9 |
|
2008 |
81,620 |
-1.7 |
4.1 |
-5.5 |
|
2009 |
73,350 |
-10.1 |
-4.5 |
-5.9| |
|
2010 |
68,649 |
-6.4 |
-1.0 |
-5.5 |
|
Total change 2010/2000 |
52.3 |
19.2 |
I thank the Minister. I appreciate that my question related to the period from 2000 to 2010. However, if we move to 2005 and consider the relative changes between 2005, when we were still in Celtic tiger mode, and 2010, there was a decrease in real terms when corrected for inflation. While there was still an option for increasing the relative amounts, taking account of inflation, the figure was actually reducing. My fear is that the arts will become a soft option, so to speak, in terms of budgetary considerations. We recognise very much the contribution of the arts to society, and it is hugely important to make that recognition. However, there is also a major economic value. If the funding is cut, it is certain small groups throughout the country will become the victims. Theatres will close down and there will be a knock-on effect in terms of jobs. I want an assurance that this will not be allowed to happen and that the arts will be protected.
Deputy Upton is being a bit disingenuous in regard to specific areas and figures. The figure she refers to for 2005 was €66 million but that had jumped 21% from the previous year and was only €54 million in 2004. On the question I was asked, the figure was €45 million in 2000 and €68 million in 2010. The key point made by the Deputy was on the need to ensure the arts are not a soft option. I assure her the arts and culture sector is not a soft option for cuts in the coming budget or for the next four budgets. The figures in today's plan will outline this. We accept the importance of the arts sector, particularly at a time of difficulties for communities throughout the country. Whereas the sector will of course have to take a cut, like everybody else, it is not a disproportionate one.
One of my concerns is in regard to the small theatre companies throughout the country. Although these are not high profile nationally, they are very high profile locally and are extremely important. I am aware of some small theatre groups and companies that are already in a difficult situation and are very concerned about funding for next year. Some of this relates to local government support, and it is very important we make a strong connection between local government, arts support and the national slice of cake in terms of budgetary input into the small theatre groups. There is genuine concern that there will be a significant local knock-on effect if those theatres and companies are allowed to disappear.
Looking back at the funding that has been paid out for capital projects and in current funding in recent years, we can see that a huge number of very small groups has benefited. While I do not have the day-to-day decision making in regard to the expenditure by the Arts Council, I will suggest to the council that it needs to be considerate of this in making its allocations for next year because there are many jobs involved and much good work is carried out throughout the country.
25 Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Tourism; Culture and Sport when she expects the full legal costs of the VAT case involving the National Aquatic Centre will be determined; if she expects the Exchequer will as a consequence need to provide levels of funding to the National Aquatic Centre to meet its liabilities; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [44380/10]
The matter of Campus and Stadium Ireland Limited and Dublin Waterworld Limited came before the Supreme Court in November 2009, and the judgment of the court was issued on 30 April 2010. In a further hearing on 11 May, the Supreme Court ordered, inter alia, that the costs of the High Court and Supreme Court hearings be awarded to Dublin Waterworld Limited. The level of such costs has yet to be determined. Any such costs will fall to be met by the National Sports Campus Development Authority, which in turn receives its funding from this Department.
I wish to clarify several points. Has the Minister asked for a report from the national sports campus with a view to the costs involved? There have been various media reports suggesting the costs could be up to €4 million and some of my sources suggest they could be up to €7.5 million. If this is the case, will the Department have to pay an extra subvention to the sports campus to make up for these costs? Will this impact on the amount of money available for sport in Ireland? Does the Minister believe it is fair that the taxpayer has to pick up the tab for this case when all of the advice from the Attorney General and the Comptroller and Auditor General was that it would be lost?
No agreement has been reached in regard to the costs. I know the sports campus has been in contact with its legal advisers but they are not able to predict what the cost claim is likely to be at this stage. If agreement is not reached on that, it obviously will be referred to the Taxing Master. There is obviously correspondence between the legal advisers on both sides. Whatever that figure is, the national sports campus will have to pay it. As matters stand, it is dependent on a subvention from the Department and although the aquatic centre is very successful and is the fourth most popular paid visitor attraction in the country, it still needs a subvention every year, as would every facility of its type internationally. That money would have to come by way of a subvention from the Department.
Effectively, the Minister is saying the taxpayer will have to pick up the tab for this and there will be less money to spend on sport as a result of the allocation. Might the money come from the funding allocated to sport?
In a reply to Deputy Enright on 14 October, the Minister stated the VAT invoice was issued and provided for under legislation at the time. In view of the Supreme Court judgment which took an entirely different view, does the Minister wish to withdraw that statement? In addition, the Attorney General mentioned highly paid advisers. Are these advisers being held to account for the mistake they made in pursuing this case and thereto advising the Minister? Can the Minister confirm whether she has sought a refund of €3.5 million paid to the executive services team which got the VAT wrong by more than €10 million and made so many other wrong calls?
A number of issues were raised by Dublin Waterworld Limited which has been in contact with me and with all Deputies present in the Chamber. As this case has been before the courts, including the Supreme Court where it was determined upon, I do not think it appropriate to reopen all the issues which precede my time in this position. However, I have replied to Dublin Waterworld Limited on the issues it raised in its letter.
Does the Minister agree that the VAT bill issued at the time was a mistake, as the Supreme Court has ruled?
I reiterate I will not reopen issues determined by the Supreme Court. This case went to the High Court and the Supreme Court and was returned to the Supreme Court in regard to costings. I do not think it is appropriate to discuss it again because a final decision has been made. It preceded my time and relates to 2004.
I understand the Committee of Public Accounts is examining it.
