When introducing this Bill to the Seanad, I do not think it is necessary to speak at any length upon the importance of the tourist trade in our economy. Its importance has, I think, been fully recognised by everybody, at least since the end of the war, and there is general agreement that it can be enhanced greatly if steps are taken by the State and other appropriate authorities in various directions.
The State here has interested itself in tourist development for quite a long time. The initial steps were somewhat timorous, it is true, but they expressed recognition of the fact that if effective organisation was to be introduced into the development of the tourist trade, some central authority was necessary, and some arrangements to provide that authority with funds.
In 1931 legislation was passed which empowered the Minister for Industry and Commerce to grant recognition to voluntary tourist organisations, and to empower local authorities to contribute to the funds of recognised organisations. The Irish Tourist Association, which was the only body which secured a licence under the 1931 Act until recently, functioned during the years before the war by means of the funds which were contributed to it by local authorities and other receipts from organisations and individuals interested in the tourist trade.
In 1939 it was thought desirable to go further than had been contemplated in 1931 and by the 1939 Act the Irish Tourist Board was set up. That Act contemplated the financing of the Tourist Board out of State funds to the extent of £45,000 per year. It also gave power to the Government to make advances to the Tourist Board for development projects, subject, however, to the board being prepared to certify that these projects were of a profit-making character.
As the House knows, the Tourist Board had barely been established when the outbreak of the war put a stop to its activities and it remained in cold storage for many of the war years. When it seemed likely that the war was coming to its close and when it was recognised that the period after the end of the war would offer us a new opportunity to develop tourist revenue, the Tourist Board was taken out of cold storage and put functioning again. These years immediately after the conclusion of the war, were, of course, exceptional in character, and during them the number of visitors coming to this country from abroad and the revenue which they represented to the country were very much greater than anything experienced in the pre-war years.
At an early stage in the post-war period it was recognised that the existing legislation was defective in many respects, that the funds which were provided for tourist development purposes were inadequate and that new legislation was required. Through a variety of circumstances the preparation of that new legislation was delayed. My predecessor, however, did introduce in the Dáil early last year a Bill to amend the Tourist Development Act of 1939, but that Bill had not secured a Second Reading when the Dáil was dissolved. Following the dissolution of the Dáil the responsibility for making proposals to the Oireachtas in this connection fell upon myself on resuming office last year. I had consultations with the Tourist Board, with the Tourist Association and with the expert whose services had been made available under the E.C.A. technical assistance project, Mr. Christenberry, who had already submitted a report following his visit to this country in the previous year.
Following these consultations I undertook the drafting of this Bill and in doing so endeavoured to make it a comprehensive measure giving the proposed organisations to be set up under it ample powers to do a good job of work and adequate resources as well. The view, I think, is generally held that the increase in tourist revenue which is deemed to be practicable— and Mr. Christenberry expressed the confident view that it could be at least doubled—cannot be realised unless the State is prepared to invest more money in the business to secure the extension of tourist accommodation, the improvement of amenities at holiday resorts and the extensive advertising abroad of the facilities for holidays available in this country.
Long before last year it had been recognised that the amount provided for the financing of the Tourist Board under the 1939 Act was insufficient and, in fact, early last year my predecessor authorised the Tourist Board to incur expenditure in that year in excess of the limit fixed by the 1939 Act, undertaking to produce to the Dáil the necessary proposals for legislation to sanction that expenditure within the financial year. In framing this Bill I included provisions to redeem that undertaking of my predecessor, but for various reasons the Bill could not be passed through the Oireachtas within the 1951-52 financial year. Senators will note that there is contained in the Bill a section which is designed to authorise that excess expenditure of last year retrospectively.
The proposal in this Bill is to empower the State to make advances up to a limit of £500,000 per year, if that amount should be required, for the purposes of tourist organisation and publicity. It is also proposed that the Government should facilitate the improvement and extension of hotel accommodation by guaranteeing loans to hotel proprietors up to a limit of £3,000,000, loans which can be free of interest for a period. The manner in which the State can best help private interests in the hotel business to extend and improve the accommodation they provide for visitors is a matter upon which some difference of opinion may exist.
There was in the Bill which my predecessor framed early in 1951 a provision authorising the making of what were called the incentive grants. The decision of the Government then in office was that a sum of money should be made available to the Tourist Board for the financing of these incentive grants from the sterling equivalent of the Marshall Aid grants. It was, in fact, stipulated that if, for any reason, money could not be made available from that source, then it would not be available to the Tourist Board for that purpose. There was, initially, agreement by the American authorities that a sum of £100,000 from the grant counterpart account would be available for tourist development purposes, but before that money had been, in fact, expended, before this legislation to which I have referred was submitted to the Oireachtas, changing conditions in the world led the United States authorities to intimate that they would not then favour any proposals to appropriate grant counterpart moneys for tourist development purposes. In the circumstances, it seemed clear that the total amount that could be made available for incentive grants out of the grant counterpart money was the £100,000 initially allocated.
In the view of the Tourist Board that amount would be completely inadequate and they informed me that they preferred not to have it, that any useful grant incentive scheme would involve a much larger sum of money, and that a sum of the dimensions I have indicated would be only an embarrassment to them and would be unlikely to be effective in securing the results desired.
My discussions with the Tourist Board and with various hotel-owning interests led me to the conclusion that what was needed was availability of capital on loan on terms which would induce hotel proprietors and hotel-owning companies to invest their own funds and which would relieve them of the difficulties of repayment or paying interest on the loan during the development period or before the expected trade had developed, and it is along these lines that the proposals in the Bill have been framed.
There is at the present time an insufficiency of hotel bedroom accommodation in the country. The views of all the experts whom we have consulted and the outcome of our own examination of the position indicate that the expansion of the tourist trade and the revenue from the trade requires that hotel accommodation should be substantially enlarged. We have a comparatively short tourist season, and, although measures are being considered to extend it, nevertheless, it is obvious that the dimensions of the trade we can secure are governed largely, though not entirely, by the number of hotel beds that are available during that season. It is hoped that the help to be given under the Bill, together with the general recognition of the future potentialities of the trade, will, in fact, induce a substantial investment of private funds in the extension of the hotel business.
The funds for that purpose will be administered through the Irish Tourist Board, which it is proposed in future to call "An Bord Fáilte". I intimated to the Dáil that I was not necessarily committed to that name. I thought that we should try to have a distinctive name of a more imaginative character than the "Irish Tourist Board". The name should be comparatively easy for foreigners to pronounce and should be of such a character as to convey something to them. The title of the proposed board in future, "An Bord Fáilte", seemed to me to meet these requirements, but if anybody has a better title to suggest conforming with these conditions, I would certainly be prepared to consider it.
That board will have, in addition to a number of the functions previously exercised by the Irish Tourist Board, certain additional functions to which I attach considerable importance. Generally speaking, it will administer the hotel grading scheme and be responsible for the whole of the strategy of the tourist development campaign. The hotel grading scheme is suspended this year. That grading scheme was devised by the Tourist Board shortly after the end of the war and was applied by them with a staff which at that time was comparatively untrained. Various criticisms of the scheme and its administration were expressed and the board itself recognised that it was defective in many respects.
I was perturbed, however, last year by the board's announcement of its intention to suspend the scheme, but following my discussion with the board I appreciated that its suspension was for the purpose of devising a better scheme capable of easier application and to give the opportunity of the building up of a trained staff to carry it into effect. The deterioration in hotel standards which I feared might eventuate in this year was, I realised, not likely to take place because it is on the basis of the service given in this year that the grading of hotels next year will be made. The new grading scheme has not been finally prepared by the board. It will, I gather, be of a more comprehensive character than the old scheme, but I am not in a position yet to announce its details.
Next to the extension and the improvement of hotel accommodation I think that the greatest importance must be given to the development of holiday resorts. Under the 1939 Act, the Tourist Board could acquire properties and advance money for resort development schemes subject to the condition that these schemes were likely to be profitable. For various reasons that did not work out successfully. The intention was that the board would acquire properties in various holiday resorts and by the development of these resorts enhance the value of the properties they had acquired and then resell them at a profit or lease them on favourable terms. Every resort development scheme, however, required the very active co-operation of the local authority and it was not always found possible to get that co-operation either because the local authorities had other projects to which they were committed or were for one reason or another unable to conform to the board's requirements.
That part of the 1939 Act has been dropped. The provision in the 1939 Act which authorises the making of advances by the Tourist Board for these purposes is being repealed. It is proposed instead to rely on local development companies. A number of these companies are in existence and it is hoped under the provisions of this Bill to induce more to come into existence. These local development companies will themselves be very largely confined under the provisions of the Bill to the initiation of development projects which are likely to be self-liquidating if they are not profitable. For any such projects these development companies can secure guaranteed loans through the Tourist Board and grants towards the payment of interest on those loans. They may also obtain grants towards their initial foundation expenses. I have been personally impressed by the work done in a number of holiday resorts by local companies and associations of that kind and I have no doubt that if in every resort some energetic body could be brought into existence, it would be able to effect substantial improvements there partly through its own efforts in the provision of amenities and partially by working upon the local authorities for the area.
These local companies will not be licensed under the Act of 1931. I should make that clear because some doubt may still persist regarding it. My two immediate predecessors did not quite see eye to eye upon the future of our tourist organisations. There was a decision which was, in fact, carried into effect in one case to give licences under the 1931 Act to local companies. It was recognised that a local company licensed under that Act would inevitably draw off for its own benefit the contribution of the local authority in that area for tourist development purposes which previously went to the Irish Tourist Association and that the outcome would eventually be the disappearance of the Irish Tourist Association.
That decision when it became known, aroused considerable discussion and the next Minister for Industry and Commerce who immediately preceded myself had pressure put upon him to reconsider it. He agreed to leave the position as it had been for a year, that is to say, to allow the Tourist Association to remain the only licensed body and not to issue new licences to these local associations for a period of a year, a year which had not elapsed when the change of Government took place and responsibility was given to myself. I found that one such organisation, that in Sligo, had undertaken certain expenditures upon the basis of the undertaking that a licence would be given to it and had in fact been promised half of the local contribution to tourist development purposes from the local authorities there, and I gave them that licence for the year, on the understanding that it would not be renewed this year, although I expect and hope that the local company there formed will be one of the most active and progressive in the country and one of the first to avail of the new provisions in this Bill.
There are new powers being given to An Bord Fáilte and, with them, new responsibilities. Three of these are perhaps worth referring to because I personally attach very considerable importance to them. First, there is the matter of historic buildings. It is a common complaint of visitors that historic buildings, shrines and places of tourist interest generally are not easily accessible, and that little is being done either to open them up to visitors or to make known to visitors their historic importance or other features. It is proposed to enable An Bord Fáilte to acquire such places, if necessary, to acquire land in their vicinity, to build paths and railings, to erect notice boards explaining the nature of the locality, and to do all other things that visitors from abroad might expect to be done in connection with historic monuments, shrines and other places.
It is recognised that there are a number of historic monuments which are in the custody of the National Monuments Committee, which functions under the Board of Works, and it is promised in connection with these monuments that An Bord Fáilte will do nothing except in consultation with the commitee, and may, if anything is to be done, arrange for the committee to do it, making the funds available to them for the purpose. It is also proposed to exclude from the activities of the board historic monuments which are being used currently for ecclesiastical purposes.
It is not merely with historic monuments, shrines and such places of interest that the new board will be concerned. Any place or locality which might be of tourist interest can also be opened up by it. Perhaps a fair example would be the cliffs of Moher in County Clare. Anybody who has visited the cliffs of Moher—and they are certainly worth visiting—will recollect that he had difficulty in finding the place at which to cross the fields to see them, in the first instance, and then had to walk across fields which were used for grazing cattle, which left the usual residue behind them, and that altogether it was somewhat of an adventure to reach the cliffs of Moher and O'Brien's Castle in the vicinity, and inspect them. The idea is that proper footpaths will be put down, proper stiles erected over the walls, proper directional posts erected, and that generally it will be made possible for people to visit places of that kind without getting their feet dirty.
The second function is in connection with the sign-posting of roads. At present the position regarding sign-posting is that it is done by a voluntary organisation. The actual signs have to be approved by the Department of Local Government and their erection is left to the county council, but the signs are provided by this voluntary organisation which spends a fair amount of money on them, but not nearly enough, in my view. If there is to be a proper development of our tourist trade it seems desirable that there should be a far more extensive sign-posting of our roads, and that not merely should the sign-posting be more extensive but that it should be more informative, as is done in most other countries, and it is proposed that the board will have funds available for that purpose. Again it is intended that the design of the signs will be subject to the approval of the Minister for Local Government and their erection will be entrusted to the local authorities. The cost of providing the signs and their erection will fall upon An Bord Fáilte. It is contemplated that, in addition to the ordinary sign-posting which any traveller would expect to find, there will be a special sign-posting of roads of exceptional tourist interest.
The third additional function of An Bord Fáilte is that of staff training. That is, in my view, one of the most important functions of the board—the provision of staff training schemes. It is intended, I understand, to set up a staff training centre and to co-operate with local vocational education authorities and private hotel interests in the extension of staff training facilities generally and particularly training on the job, which is by far the most effective of all.
The aspect of this Bill that aroused most discussion in the Dáil was the establishment of Fógra Fáilte to manage all tourist publicity activity. When the 1939 Act was passed, it was intended that tourist development work would be divided into two parts, the hotel grading, resort development and all associated work of that character being undertaken by the Tourist Board and tourist publicity being reserved to the Irish Tourist Association.
That seemed a practicable system in 1939 and involved the least departure from existing arrangements under which the Tourist Association was was doing tourist publicity and nothing else. In 1939, however, we had very modest ideas as to the amount that should be spent upon tourist publicity, and as the revenue of the Tourist Association did not expand with the deterioration in the value of money, its power to do publicity work was very substantially curtailed in the circumstances of the post-war years. In fact, it early became realised that the total amount which the association might make available for tourist publicity was altogether inadequate, and for some time past its funds have been increased by grants from the Tourist Board.
That was the situation in which I found it, under which the tourist publicity was done by the Tourist Association, the cost of it being borne in increasing degree by the Tourist Board rather than by the association's own funds, and the total amount of all its activities being substantially less than I considered to be necessary, the Tourist Board doing all the other work involved in tourist development. I considered that situation. I considered it in the knowledge that both my predecessors got themselves into trouble in trying to cope with it. Quite early, I met the representatives of the Tourist Association, the board of directors of that association, which consists in part of the nominees of local authorities and in part of voluntary members elected by the general body of the association. I discussed the situation with them. They were not at all reconciled to the idea of disappearing out of the picture and urged strongly that, even though the funds at their disposal were inadequate and even though a very substantial expansion in expenditure was justified, the task should be entrusted to them.
I felt that that was impracticable. I felt that if expenditure on tourist publicity was to be expanded at the expense of the State from something around £15,000 or £16,000 a year to possibly £250,000 a year, the Oireachtas would be slow to agree to make that money available for expenditure by a voluntary organisation of that character. I felt that every consideration required that the State should take steps to ensure that the money was properly expended and was expended solely for the purpose for which it was provided. To get that result, it would have appeared practicable to have confined the money to the Tourist Board and leave the whole task of directing tourist publicity to the Tourist Board. I felt, however, that the Tourist Association still had a part to play—and an important part—in the tourist development programme. Personally, I have been very much impressed by the vehement assertion of Mr. Christenberry and his colleagues that, if the country is to make progress in this field, it is conditional entirely on the Irish people being awakened to its importance. I felt that that was a task which could be given to the Tourist Association and for which it was particularly fitted because of its contacts with the local authorities.
There was, therefore, a suggestion put forward initially by the Tourist Association that, instead of handing over all the tourist publicity work to the Tourist Board as circumstances might appear to dictate, and in view of my objection to leaving it all with the Tourist Association, there should be a joint body established for the purpose. Eventually that proposal was accepted by the Government. That is what the Bill proposes. Tourist publicity is now being handled by a joint body consisting of three directors of the Tourist Association and three members of the Tourist Board. That joint body has been called Fógra Fáilte, and the purpose of this Bill is to establish it on a statutory basis. To Fógra Fáilte is made available the funds voted by the Oireachtas for tourist publicity work and also the funds provided by local authorities and by voluntary contributors to the association. In practice, the main work of the association involving expenditure was the management of the bureaux which are established in various towns. By an agreement with Fógra Fáilte, the Tourist Association is continuing to manage these bureaux—that is, the bureaux in Ireland. The bureaux which are in existence outside Ireland or which it is proposed to establish outside Ireland will be managed direct by Fógra Fáilte.
The suggestion was made in the Dáil that this separate organisation for tourist publicity was an inefficient arrangement and likely to be unnecessarily costly. I would remind Senators, however, that it has not represented any departure from the arrangement that was contemplated in 1939— which involved, as I said, the direction of tourist publicity by the Tourist Association and the direction of other activities by the Tourist Board. The work of tourist publicity is large enough to require its immediate supervision by a board specially suitable for that purpose and with nothing else to do. Equally, the work of the Tourist Board in developing hotels and hotel resorts and carrying out the other functions to which I have referred, would justify the exclusive attention of a separate board. There is, in fact, little justification for the belief that this would involve any extra expense. Even if only one board were there, there would still be two organisations working under it, each organisation being comprised of specialists in one particular sphere, and there would be little contact between them because the qualifications which would secure for a person an appointment in the publicity organisation would not necessarily entitle them to a place in the organisation for hotel grading or work of that character. The prospect of conflict between the two boards was, of course, envisaged, and in order to remove that possibility and get the position clearly understood, the Bill provides that Fógra Fáilte will direct its activities in accordance with the policy of An Bord Fáilte. That is to say, An Bord Fáilte is the organisation established for the planning of general strategy and Fógra Fáilte is to carry through whatever policy it is operating.
Some criticism was expressed at the similarity of the names of the two organisations, and it was suggested that there might be confusion in the public mind about them. I think it can fairly be pointed out that there is not much greater similarity between the names of these organisations than exists at present between the Irish Tourist Board and the Irish Tourist Association. I do not think that the similarity is a disadvantage, as it indicates that the two boards are linked together, as they are, and are working in the same sphere. Again, may I say, however, that if someone can suggest a better title I am not adverse to considering it.
The next point to which I wish to refer is the need for effecting certain amendments in the liquor licensing laws. All the reports we got from the American experts and others who reported upon the possibilities of tourist development here unanimously recommended that there should be a relaxation of the licensing laws in favour of hotels. What is proposed here is that there should be an amendment of the existing law so as to provide for the predetermination of applications for hotel licences in certain circumstances. If somebody proposes to construct a new hotel—or where hotels which are at present in existence, whether licensed or not, are being extended—and it is desired to know in advance whether a licence will be granted for the new or extended premises, then the Bill provides that a person in that position can apply to the Circuit Court for a declaration that, on the basis of the plans submitted, premises would be fit and convenient to be licensed. Where that declaration is given, and where the court is satisfied that the premises have been constructed or altered in substantial accordance with the plans submitted, then the court will not subsequently entertain objection to the granting of a licence because of the unfitness of the premises or because of the number of previously licensed houses in the vicinity.
I should point out, however, that the licences to which that part of the Bill refers are hotel licences in the accepted meaning of the term, and that they will not be effective in enabling an hotel to operate a public bar. Any hotel desiring to have a public bar, must proceed under the existing licensing laws. The only licences to which this Bill relate are those which entitle an hotel to serve drink to residents in the hotel, or to persons having meals in the hotel, otherwise than at a bar. It is also proposed to give licences for the sale of liquor to holiday camps. A Private Members' Bill was introduced in the last Dáil for that purpose, but was defeated there. A combination of circumstances, not all of which were concerned with the Bill, was responsible for that result. It seems clear to me that there is need to make a provision of this kind; the existing position is unsatisfactory; it does not mean that a holiday camp cannot, in fact, get a licence to sell drink. It gets the authority to do so by means of an occasional licence granted by the courts.
The Bill provides that a holiday camp which is registered with the Tourist Board as such, having accommodation for at least 250 guests at the same time, having a rateable valuation of not less than £200, and having buildings which are wholly, or mainly, of a permanent character, can obtain a licence to sell drink through the normal procedure under the authority of this Bill. It is, perhaps, necessary to emphasise that the sale of drink to bona-fide travellers to a holiday camp will not be permitted.
These are the main provisions of the Bill. They represent, I feel, a fairly comprehensive scheme for the improvement of existing legislation, and thereby, the development of our holiday business. I have spoken throughout about the importance of the tourist trade as a source of national revenue and that I feel that fact cannot be too frequently emphasised.
We have, however, another interest in the development of hotel accommodation, holiday camp accommodation and the amenities of holiday resorts. That arises from the need to provide the opportunity of enjoyable and comfortable holidays in this country to our own people. It is inevitable that a very high proportion of the visitors at all our holiday resorts are Irish people spending their holidays in Ireland. It seems to me that it would be desirable to ensure that they are given ample opportunity for doing so. If we succeed in the development of our holiday resorts and hotel accommodation so as to attract people from abroad, then we will also know that we are making conditions attractive to our own people. Very considerable importance is attached by An Bord Fáilte and by everybody who is connected with this question of holiday resort development to the growth of the holiday habit amongst our own people.
I think it is generally recognised that owing to the development of holidays with pay, in trade and industry, and owing to the improvement in the standard of living which has taken place over the past number of years, the number of people who are prepared to leave home for holidays is increasing annually. That increase requires that there should be a corresponding expansion in the facilities available for them. If we were to think only of the accommodation for our own people in Ireland, we might be willing to confine ourselves to inspectorial arrangements and other measures designed to ensure that they were properly provided for and not exploited, but the justification for a substantial investment of State funds as is proposed here is the development of a trade which will have a consequentially beneficial effect upon our balance of payments position. The tourist industry is yielding us a net revenue of £30,000,000 per annum, and it is my belief that revenue can be considerably extended and, perhaps, even doubled.
I and everybody else recognise that exceptional conditions are helping us at present, and that these may not always persist. However, I have no doubt that we can avail of them to build up a trade of a permanent value. We are aware that the circumstances which have increased the number of holiday makers amongst our own people are developing elsewhere also and that the holiday habit is extending in every country. There is, therefore, a growing trade potential which we can tap. It is along the lines set out in this Bill that I believe we can be best helped to do so.
