Parliamentary Debates (Dáil and Seanad) 2001
The Web site contains the text of the Parliamentary Debates  - unrevised as published on daily basis in 2002. Please note that the full text of the Parliamentary Debates - revised (including paquestions) for 1919 --- is now available on-line at: historical-debates.oireachtas.ie. The text of the current parliamentary debates 2004 --- is available at debates.oireachtas.ie. The main Oireachtas site is www.oireachtas.ie.

We are now in the PC or politically correct era. Other speakers have referred to this. It has affected the churches, the teaching profession, An Garda Síochána and various people in State and semi-State bodies. The politically correct era is a new and interesting one. Its judgments can be harsh but its preliminary judgments can be even harsher. There is, therefore, a necessity to ensure that in all such cases justice is done. Justice must be done and the law must be complied with but it is equally true that natural justice must prevail. Due process must be followed. If it is not followed, there will inevitably be situations in the future where the guilty may go free and the innocent may find themselves facing various strictures.

Conflicts of interest are becoming increasingly difficult to police. This is particularly so in the case of those appointed to public office and ministerial posts. It must be difficult to police because if the person was previously involved in a business and divested themselves of the responsibilities of that business, how can one be certain that the person does not have an ongoing interest? Let us ask ourselves an honest question. If one has spent one's life as a director of a company or in some other capacity and then become a Minister, is it not natural that one will inquire about the company afterwards? However, if it should happen that the company falls to be considered for a contract or a particular devolved responsibility, I presume the individual concerned is expected in all cases to recognise that a conflict could arise.

The problem is that it is not for the individual to judge whether a conflict arises; it will be judged by somebody else, with the benefit of hindsight. Hindsight is an extremely exact science but, as we all know, there is no such thing. All decisions are made without the benefit of hindsight. A person's judgment, therefore, must be correct and stand the test of hindsight. I am always amazed when people say "With the benefit of hindsight, I believe" such and such. That sounds fine but it is rubbish. There is no such thing as having the benefit of hindsight when one is making a decision.

I hope that in the course of the next few years, following implementation of this legislation, we will see on the part of those participating in public life a recognition of the fact that certain procedures must be complied with, that they must act within the guidelines and that there are no exceptions. We must also accept that in the event of a breach occurring, there is little use talking about it. The procedures must fall into place and whatever should happen, must happen. It is sad but that is the way it is. There can be no getting around it.

By the same token, the fact that a number of people in public life are deemed not to have been compliant with the regulations does not mean everybody is guilty. If a member of a profession is found to be in breach of ethics, rules or guidelines, that does not mean that every member of that profession is guilty. That is important. There are people outside this House, fuelled by the speculation that is part of the era in which we live, who have come to the conclusion that everybody in this House is a crook or a potential crook. We must be extremely careful because we could do irreparable damage if we allow ourselves to be corralled under that category. We could also do irreparable damage to the institutions of State.

It might well be fun when public representatives are involved but it will be another group tomorrow and another group the next day and other groups will follow. That is not an attempt to take away from the fact that we must have the highest possible standards. It is simply a recognition of reality. Some time ago I gave a talk to a group of sixth years in a school in my constituency. There was an interesting line of questions. There was a clear impression among the sixth years that if all politicians were not crooks, they were either on the road to it or had it in their sights. That is sad. They were shocked when I turned the question round to them and asked if they believed all students were crooks or that all sixth years were potentially negligent in complying with school regulations or that all teachers had the same problem.

It is only when that happens that members of the general public begin to recognise that life is full of knots and bends in the road, that it is not as smooth as they might think. I remember having a discussion with a guy in a pub about the merits and demerits of people in public office and public life. He suggested that guidelines, like the guidelines in this Bill, should be laid down so the public would know these people were compliant with them when they sought public office. How would anybody know that the person had been compliant in the first place? How would the person make a confession beforehand and inform the public that they had been compliant with the guidelines? I asked the guy if he would comply. "Absolutely", he said.

Mr. McGahon: Is he not doing nixers?

Mr. Durkan: He said: "I have no doubt that I would comply". I shook hands with him and congratulated him. "You must be nearly perfect", I said. "I am", he replied. He spoke honestly and truthfully. He honestly and sincerely said what he thought. I told him I was delighted to meet him but I reminded him: "That is your judgment of you. You should try to find out what other people's judgment of you might be".

Mr. McGahon: My colleague and friend, Deputy Durkan, is getting more philosophical about human nature and the problems connected with it as he grows older. Like most Members of this House, I feel a sense of sadness about the revelations which have appeared in recent years. If I had been asked my opinion on it 15 years ago, I would have felt it was impossible but sadly the realities of what has happened are staring us in the face. The body politic has been seriously weakened as a result of the loss of trust in politicians felt by the people of Ireland who generalise in that regard.

Unfortunately the recent revelations about political impropriety have done the same to the world of politics. We need to do something positive to lift the profile of politics in Irish life because the young people are getting more cynical by the week. Some time ago I spoke to a group of 16 year old students in a college in Dundalk and I was shocked at their political ignorance. These were girls who in two years would perhaps be going to universities in different parts of Ireland. Politically they were as ignorant as they could be. Only four out of 16 knew who were the four Deputies for County Louth, two knew who was the county manager, and very few could differentiate between the urban council and the county council.

Although I am on my way out of politics, I feel strongly-----

Mr. Howlin: I thought the Deputy was going to declare again.

Mr. McGahon: I did not get an approach from his party of ideology yet but I am open to offers.

Mr. Howlin: The day is young.

Mr. McGahon: I just feel sad at the ignorance in this country about why politics are necessary. So many people are not tuned in and do not have a clue why politics are necessary. Many see politics as being there to penalise them. They do not understand it, and that is the reality. How can people who, in their tens of thousands, watch fantasy soaps such as "Glenroe", "Coronation Street" and "Fair City" relate to political manifestos. They just cannot do so. They are living in a fog. That is part of the problem - they fail to appreciate why politics are necessary and what politics have done for this country.

We in the political system, even those of us on the backbenchers, can take pride in what we have created in this country. We are only 80 years masters of our own destiny and today we have a country which is on a par with America. We have given the citizens of Ireland an economic living which nobody could have envisaged 20, 30 or 40 years ago. That did not happen overnight. It had to be created by progressive and forward thinking by all parties which constitute the political system.

One of the main bugbears which we in the political world must face is the cynical attitude of the gents who are not in the Press Gallery today. I do not know whether some of them would be in the bar. I am referring to the media. These cynics - I must confess that for a short period of my life I was in their midst - are under-valuing politics on a continuous basis and denigrating the efforts of the political system. No matter who is in power, they want to pull the system down. They want to pander to the ignorant beliefs of the lesser educated people in our midst. They want to suggest that there is malpractice everywhere. I feel a deep regret that the media, who constitute educated people with a responsible stake in the country, should be so cynical about casting aspersions on the political world. They should be encouraging the people of Ireland to appreciate what has been created in this country and they should encourage people to have more respect for the political system, but they are not going to change because that is what sells newspapers. I am glad to see my friend, John Drennan, emerging, perhaps from the cupboard not the bar.

The media are not above reproach and I have no difficulty standing over what I have said. Notwithstanding that, there is a deep concern out there about what has been revealed in Irish life and I support this commission which will look at various aspects of people's suitability. As Deputy Durkan alluded to, I do not know how they will evaluate it, but I do feel that if there is a serious question over any political figure, it is not a matter for a commission or, indeed, tribunals but for the Garda fraud squad. While the recent tribunals, the proceedings of which seem to go on forever, have been worthwhile because they have opened a window in Irish life and, indeed, a cesspool, the existence of which, as I said earlier, 15 years ago I would have refused to accept, I must ask what will come ultimately from all of these tribunals? Will anybody be held responsible? Will anybody be charged? I doubt it because this is an Irish solution to an Irish problem.

Every would be candidate should be screened by his party and if there is any suggestion of impropriety in his or her background, the person should not be nominated, whether he or she is a football star, a hurling or camogie star or an ordinary person. Political parties should be conscious of the image they are trying to portray to the Irish public, and the first step should be taken by the political parties and, after that, there should be an independent body to assess them. Every suggestion of impropriety should be examined and if there is a case to be answered, it should be answered in a court of law.

The other point I want to make about standards in public life is that we must accept and acknowledge that Members amongst us have transgressed. The most deplorable thing I can imagine is that a senior politician or any politician would take a bribe. To accept a bribe on the scale of what we are being told is surely anathema to the people of this country. It turns me off and disillusions me about politics notwithstanding that I believe the Irish political system has provided the Irish nation with a tremendous standard of living which no one thought possible 40 years ago. The sins revealed are crying out to be redressed. Political parties should not be ambivalent to those members of their party who have fallen by the wayside. The political system is better off without them.

While we can be proud of what we have created over the past 80 years, the people have, sadly, relegated us to the level of conmen. The political system is viewed as a confidence trick. We must redress that view. We can only do so by introducing transparency. Perhaps along with that transparency, we might have a little more responsibility from the press.

Mr. Howlin: I am glad to have the opportunity to speak on what I regard as one of the more important Bills currently before this House. It is part of a family of legislation which addresses one of the most difficult things for Members of this House to address, the restoration of public confidence in the way we do public business. That confidence has been sorely damaged by the ongoing out-pouring of revelations in recent years.

The genesis of this Bill is the report of the tribunal of inquiry into the Dunnes Stores payments, better known as the McCracken report. We were all shocked by that report. Some would say this report goes back to the doings of a distinguished businessman in a hotel in Florida. That deed, over a particular holiday break, set in train a process the extent of which few could have envisaged. The Dunnes Stores payments process, the first serious tribunal of inquiry into potential corruption to discover where senior politicians in this land were kept people, has had an ongoing effect. It has been the back-drop in front of which all of us have carried on public business for years.

On behalf of my party, I handled the passing of the terms of reference of the Moriarty Tribunal through this House. I remember, during the course of that debate, seeking to extend the terms of reference to include Ansbacher payments which had come to light at that time. That proposal, made on 11 September 1997, was voted down by the current Administration. It gave no coherent reason Ansbacher payments should not be encompassed within the terms of reference of the new tribunal then being established. We were told, behind the scenes, by Deputy McCreevy who took the debate on behalf of the Government, that there was a fear of a flight of capital out of the country if the Ansbacher accounts were included in the terms of reference of the Moriarty tribunal. No person from the Government or Central Bank was willing to back-up this exaggerated and totally over-blown claim. Like so many other things, it is probably an issue which the Government would prefer to pretend did not exist.

We need to get things right. The previous Administration, in which I had the honour to serve as Cabinet Minister, began that process. My party fought the 1992 election on two fundamental bases: ethics in Government and justice in the economy. We were lambasted and pilloried on foot of the first commitment we made regarding ethics - many people thought we were setting ourselves up as great paragons of virtue, which we have not done or have no intention of doing because there is no monopoly of wisdom or virtue in this regard on any side of the House. We need to set standards which we can all try to live up to.

We put through both Houses, with huge difficulties, three Bills; the Ethics in Public Office Act, taken through by my colleague Deputy Eithne Fitzgerald who received enormous personal vilification when doing so. There was huge resistance to it; the Freedom of Information Act, one of the most important, open, democratising Bills enacted in modern times in this State which is impacting on all public administration and bringing the light of public scrutiny into crevices which are not used to having that light shone on them and we are often not comfortable with it. I hope - I say this as an aside - that the media will make more fruitful use of that legislation. It is not the major coup of the Freedom of Information Act to find out the travel expenses of any Member of this House. There are more relevant things about which investigative journalists should ensure accountability through that system. I had the privilege of bringing through this House the third Bill enacted by the previous Administration, the Electoral Act which set disclosure limits for contributions to individual Members of this House or to political parties and for the first time set caps on electoral spending. That was an extremely complex Bill to draft; it took me some time. It was fought tooth and nail by the parties then in Opposition. My clearest memory is of the then spokesperson of the Progressive Democrats, now the Attorney General - I hope his legal advice has improved - telling me the Electoral Act was unconstitutional, so bad it could not be amended and so he satisfied himself fighting it line by line. Not only has that legislation stood the test of time but I was interested to read recently on the Fianna Fáil website - I occasionally log into it to find out what they have to say - that the current Administration is claiming it as legislation enacted by it. Legislation which was so bad and incapable of being amended is now claimed as its creation. That is a neat trick if one could get away with it. It is part of the bedrock of the changing face of public administration at local and national level. We have a long way to go.

The Labour Party has published a number of new Bills in recent years. We introduced legislation to ban corporate funding for politics. One of the most important, critical issues with which we in this House and this country must finally come to terms is how politics and public affairs are to be funded. We need to resolve that issue. There is enormous public antipathy to the interface of business and politics which is destroying confidence in our political systems and eroding our democracy.

We introduced whistleblower legislation to allow those working in public affairs at some level to blow the whistle and call in the legal authorities to investigate a scam or an abuse without fear of damage or harm to themselves. The Government did not have the guts to vote it down and sought instead to kill it in committee where it has languished for months on end. The Taoiseach repeatedly promised that such legislation would be part of the Government's comprehensive regime of legislation. We still await it's proposals.

The Register of Lobbyists Bill was another brought forward by our Seanad colleagues and, again, was not allowed passage by the Administration. As spokesperson on justice, I produced an anti-corruption Bill. The Government produced its own Bill a year ago which was finally allowed to proceed to Committee Stage yesterday. I hope it will proceed to enactment because it deals with very important issues. One of the most difficult matters for the public to understand is that seemingly corruption is not recognised, even when there is a clear discernment of a wad of money being given to somebody in authority and that person doing something advantageous for the donor. Under the old 1906 Corruption Act there was a change in the law from the older Victorian statute of the 1890s whereby in cases where a contract was involved, money was donated to the giver of the contract and the donor subsequently won the contract, there was a presumption of corruption. It is now hoped the presumption of corruption will be extended to other areas such as the giving of licences and other valuable commodities by public administrators, including grants of zoning of land, where a substantial contribution is paid to the person who does the favour or the person who decides on a licence.

We are moving slowly to put in place a comprehensive framework of legislative measures in which the Bill is an important milestone. What it seeks to do is update and consolidate the Ethics in Public Office Act of 1995. It strengthens and changes the role of the commission which is to be welcomed.

I wish to deal with another issue which is extremely important in the whole process of building confidence in public administration and public life. The House is often allowed to be a cipher, a rubber stamp for the Executive. Nominally we have a parliamentary democracy whereby the will of the people is reflected in the membership of the House which makes laws, determines the tax base and all the other matters that govern the life of the nation. Often the people who make the least impact are the Members of the House. Lobby groups, the social partners, IBEC, the Congress of Trades Unions, the farmers' organisations all have a greater impact in shaping our social norms, the tax base, the standards of our health and education services than non-Executive Members of the House. It is time for us to reclaim a parliamentary role. I say this very strongly in the context of the whole debate on the Nice Treaty.

When I served in office I had the privilege of being a member of the Council of Ministers but was not scrutinised on the positions I took as a representative of Ireland at the Council. That level of parliamentary scrutiny was not provided for. In Denmark, for instance, Ministers as a matter of routine receive instructions from Parliament as to what the position of the country should be on important issues. When people talk about the democratic deficit at the heart of Europe the democratic deficit is not in Brussels but here in these Houses because we have not asserted ourselves. The process of reasserting the primacy of parliament and the role of parliamentarians must begin by fulfilling the advice given in the final report on the DIRT inquiry that a parliamentary commission be established.

We need independence from the Department of Finance in our affairs. I say this with some pleasure in the presence of officials from and the Minister of State at that Department. It is wrong that committees of the House which want to engage in public work and public scrutiny are vetted by civil servants who determine the extent of the scope of the inquiry. They decide whether resources are made available to employ researchers and on the level of backup members may have. Members have pitiful backup resources compared to modern European parliaments. Those of us who try to be Front Bench spokespersons in opposition have an impossible job. We must scrutinise and respond to complicated legislation and table meaningful amendments. This is an enormous job of work which is becoming farcical.

I mentioned yesterday on Committee Stage of the corruption Bill that the Minister's amendments were only published in the morning. During the course of the debate the Minister gleefully informed us that they were complicated and had taken months to negotiate with the Attorney General but we were supposed not only to digest them but also to seek to amend them in a matter of hours with no backup available. This is because there is a mindset in the Executive, particularly in some Departments, that we are really here to rubber-stamp its decisions, not to engage in meaningful scrutiny of public administration. We have allowed this to happen, that perception to become a reality, because we have not demanded our rights.

A parliamentary commission is required. We also need to have an independent Vote for the Houses of the Oireachtas, negotiated by the Leader of the House, on the same basis as, for example, any individual Minister negotiates with the Department of Finance in terms of the Vote for their Department. It is ludicrous that there is no advocate for the Houses of the Oireachtas, in terms of the Oireachtas Vote, to explain our demands, what an effective parliament must do and that we will not settle for less. That affects all Members because membership of the Executive is a temporary position. There is a cross-flow at every election across the House. The primacy of the decision-making of the House is something in which we all have a vested interest, not just those who. for whatever reason, are temporarily or permanently on this side. It is a point of principle for every Member.

The ability of committees of the House to carry on investigations is new. We are testing the waters in that regard.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy has 50 seconds remaining.

Mr. Howlin: I have not even got on to the Bill.

Mr.Cullen: I had noticed.

Mr. Howlin: I am coming to it. Another thing we have agreed to is truncated debates. Twenty minutes on a Bill such as this is not enough.

Mr. Cullen: When we came in 1997 we could talk for hours.

Mr. Howlin: That was much better when one could speak for at least a half an hour. More time should be allowed on some Bills. It is important to restate the primacy of the House, and that meaningful support, backup and resources are provided so that the House can be a real investigator and watchdog on behalf of the public. That whole process paralleled with the array of legislation to which I have referred together with the Bill before the House will give back confidence to the Irish people in our ability to conduct their affairs fairly and without favour or bias and certainly without any hint or suggestion of corruption.

I look forward to the Committee Stage debate.

Mr. Enright: This is an important Bill and one which I and my party support. Regrettably legislation of this nature is necessary. In the past this type of legislation would not have been necessary. Many years ago I recall speaking to the late Michael McInerney, political correspondent of The Irish Times, and the late Ned Murphy, political editor of the Sunday Independent who wrote also for the Irish Independent.We discussed the relationship of members of the Houses of the Oireachtas, civil servants and the discharge of duties. One of the points discussed was instructions given by a Minister to a civil servant. The civil servant felt duty bound to carry out the instruction of his Minister. In the event of him being of the opinion that there was something wrong with the instruction, after he had carried it out, he would report to the Taoiseach of the day that he was unhappy with the instruction he had been obliged to carry out. That was at a time when there was trust and confidence in the Taoiseach of the day.. I speak of the late 1960s. Sadly, the whole scenario changed in that the Fianna Fáil Party allowed somebody who was unfit to become Taoiseach and those who associated with him were unfit to be members of a Government or of the House. It changed the face and character of politics and it has caused damage that will last for many a long day.

In regard to the heave against Charles Haughes, the then leader of the Opposition, an instruction was given by a Mr. Moore of the PMPA to Deputy David Andrews to do the right thing. At the time Deputy Andrews had the courage to stand by his convictions. As it transpired he lost business because he did not do as he was told. Deputy Andrews was a Member and also a barrister and had the financial capacity to withstand that type of instruction. How many others in Ireland were told to do the right thing and support the then Leader of Fianna Fáil? It worries me because I am certain that a considerable number of people were intimidated into supporting the then leadership of Fianna Fáil. Regrettably, the other members of the party did not have the courage to stand up to him. In fact, I saw the late Deputy Jim Gibbons being struck in the courtyard of the House. It was a sad and appalling incident. As far as I can recollect he did not return to the House afterwards. A political party allowed that to happen.

The standards in public office at that time were so low and so dangerous that as a country we were lucky to survive. This is what has given rise to this necessary legislation. We have found ourselves in a situation where legislation had to be enacted requiring public representatives, TDs and Senators and some senior civil servants to make disclosures of personal possessions, property and so on. This is not conducive to entering public life, rather it can be a barrier and prevent some people from entering public life. That is regrettable. This was caused by a political party which did not have the courage to ensure it had a Taoiseach who would uphold the standards and dignity entrusted in him by the House.

Political parties have lost a considerable amount of the voluntary effort and support enjoyed in the past. All political parties have difficulty in retaining and getting young people into the ranks. That is a serious matter and one that will not change in the foreseeable future. Young people are not joining political parties. Some who have had a long involvement in political parties have faded away from the political scene. That is a pity. Because of events in the past, people have become disillusioned. That is sad because in political life there is a need for people to be involved and actively supporting the various political organisations to which they have a loyalty.

There is a major problem facing political parties. At present they are required to respond instantaneously to questions put to them by the press. While the press has considerable research facilities and resources at its disposal political parties are restricted as they do not have half those resources available to them.

Debate adjourned.

CEISTEANNA - QUESTIONS.

PRIORITY QUESTIONS.

Tourism Promotion.

1. Mr. Higgins (Mayo) asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if he gave consideration to or if any approach was made to former US President Bill Clinton to carry out a major tourism drive in the United States to counteract the misleading and damaging effects of the foot and mouth disease; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16149/01]

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): As the Deputy is aware, a major tourism marketing reassurance campaign to help counter the adverse impact of the foot and mouth crisis, is already under way in our key source markets, including the United States. The campaign, with a total budget of £10 million, has been designed by Bord Fáilte in consultation with the tourism industry. I was particularly pleased that the Government at its meeting in Killarney earlier this week gave approval for the final Exchequer contribution of £2 million towards the cost of this campaign. These actions are, of course, incremental to the 2001 budget previously approved for tourism marketing which represented the largest ever level of State funding for tourism marketing and brings the total Exchequer provision now for tourism marketing and promotion in 2001 to £67 million.

The reassurance marketing campaign consists of special media advertising, trade reassurance measures and special promotional visits, including my own recent visit to the US. In the course of that visit, I undertook 30 interviews with television, radio and print media; I attended trade and media events in four cities and had three industry meetings.

As regards the use of personalities to endorse the marketing campaign, I am pleased to say that, following a request from the Government, the rock band U2 are highlighting the attractions of holidaying in Ireland to fans at their US concerts and have included favourable material on their website. In addition, the movie star, Martin Sheen, who is currently starring as President Bartlet in the hit television series "The West Wing", has been used in special new television and radio advertising in the US.

I understand from Bord Fáilte that former President Bill Clinton's recent visit to Ireland did generate some useful publicity in the US and this, of course, is to be welcomed.

Mr. Higgins (Mayo): With all due respect to the Minister and Martin Sheen, even with Bord Fáilte spending £10 million on marketing, the Minister must acknowledge that a golden opportunity was missed. President Clinton was the most pro-Irish US President since President Kennedy. His vision and determination were singularly responsible for silencing the IRA guns in the North and ending the killing. His impact would have been instant and enormous and he could have dispelled the myth that foot and mouth disease is an animal rather than a human condition. He could have shown that the crisis was not widespread but was isolated to one outbreak in County Louth. Why did the Minister or someone in Bord Fáilte not have the vision to see that President Clinton was available to be a willing accomplice to the Irish cause as he always has been? He could have done considerably more for the country than we will get out of the £10 million, the Minister's visit to the United States and the advertising by Martin Sheen and others. Why did the Minister not grab this opportunity?

Dr. McDaid: The United States is a democracy just as this country is. Two weeks before his visit, I wrote to President Clinton asking him if he could assist us and, in particular, if he would be grand marshal of our St. Patrick's Day parade. He has his own opinion and he had his own agenda for his visit here. I can show the Deputy the two page letter I wrote. Unfortunately, President Clinton was unable to be of assistance on this occasion.

Mr. Higgins (Mayo): It took a long hard slog to get tourism infrastructure to its high standard. By virtue of the fact that Bord Fáilte has said it will take years to rebuild that infrastructure, will the Minister consider asking President Clinton to adopt an ambassadorial role to sell Ireland in a most positive light abroad? He is available for promotional work. He was here last week and made himself available for lectures. Knowing President Clinton, he would probably be willing to do it for nothing.

Dr. McDaid: President Clinton has been a terrific ambassador for Ireland through the years. He continues to act as an unpaid ambassador and his visit here, playing golf in Ballybunion and travelling to the four corners of the country, was hugely beneficial. I do not think any other former President would have undertaken that amount of work.

Sports Capital Programme.

2. Mr. O'Shea asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if the Government, or any agents acting on its behalf, will enter into contracts in relation to Sports Campus Ireland pending the passage into law of the promised Stadium Ireland Bill; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16387/01]

Dr McDaid: It is not intended that contracts for the designing, building, financing, operating and maintaining of facilities for Stadium and Sports Campus Ireland, other than that with the preferred bidder for the aquatic and leisure centre, will be signed in advance of the independent overview of the costs of the project. Following consideration of the consultants' report the Government will decide on the way forward.

Campus and Stadium Ireland Development - CSID - the company which was established last year to oversee the planning and development of Sports Campus Ireland has already signed a contract relating to the provision of executive services and entered a commitment, leading to contracts, in relation to the architectural and environmental framework plan and other related services. The process for the appointment of project managers, currently under way, is also expected to be finalised in the near future.

Accordingly, given the time frame for the legislation, it is likely that contracts may be signed in advance of the Bill being enacted. There will, of course, be provisions for transitional arrangements in the Bill to ensure the continuity of activities initiated before its enactment.

Mr. O'Shea: From what the Minister has said, I understand that until the independent audit has been completed no further contracts will be signed. It had been envisaged that the Stadium and Sports Campus Ireland Bill would be published mid-year. That has now been put back to the end of the year. The fact that full contractual statutory powers are not available to the company must inhibit the progress of the project. If a totally negative independent audit result comes back, will the Government review the whole project against that background?

Dr. McDaid: There seems to be a continual move to dampen down the magnificent scheme of Stadium and Sports Campus Ireland. I gave a commitment to the House that the heads of the Bill would be circulated before the end of May. If that is not already done, it is in the process of being done today.

With regard to the second part of the Deputy's question, it will not hold up the process. There has been nothing other than negative comments from the other side of the House on this sports campus project. I am delighted to have the overview because all the positive aspects of the project will also be highlighted. I look forward to receiving that report.

Mr. O'Shea: It is not worth responding to the Minister throwing negative darts at this side of the House. There is no substance to that. The Government has agreed to review the project, so there must be doubts within Government as to its viability. I hope a proper audit will be carried out which should include items like the add ons, as Paddy Teahon calls them. These include the cost of the land, the relocation of the laboratories of the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development and the Marine Institute. Is the Minister satisfied that an 80,000 seat stadium is appropriate for the project? Is there a national requirement for a second 80,000 seat stadium?

Dr. McDaid: I do believe we need another 80,000 seat stadium. We certainly need another stadium. It has been clearly pointed out that we cannot possibly use Croke Park as a national stadium. It is impossible to play soccer, rugby and Gaelic games there so we certainly need another stadium. Soccer has no home of its own at the moment. The IRFU cannot possibly manage all its rugby games. For the match against Portugal on Saturday, we could fill a stadium for 70,000 people, if we had it, and that is only a qualifying match for the world cup. Negotiations are also in progress with Scotland with regard to the European championship in 2008. Many things are possible if we have the infrastructure, but if we do not provide that now when times are prosperous, we will never do it.

With regard to other part of the Deputy's question, I will deal with that when I come to answer another question later.

Mr. O'Shea: The figure the Minister used in relation to the soccer match at the weekend is like various other figures which have been used by the Government in relation to this project.

Dr. McDaid: The whole country wants to be involved.

An Ceann Comhairle: The time is up. We have to move on to Question No. 3.

Tourism Development Grants.

3. Mr. Naughten asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the reasons for the delay in announcing the details of the tourism development grants as outlined in the national development plan; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16288/01]

Dr. McDaid: The new tourism product investment scheme will be implemented by Bord Fáilte, in line with sub-measures 1 to 3 of the tourism measure within the regional operational programmes. The overall objective of the scheme is to develop the tourism product in a sustainable way that widens the spatial spread of tourism, diverts pressure from the highly developed areas and increases the under-performing regions’ share of overseas tourism revenue.

Tourism sub-measures 1 and 2 are to be co-funded by the European Regional Development Fund and their operation must, according to the Community Support Framework document (paragraph 2.5.1), for Ireland be fully compliant with the provisions of the Treaty establishing the European Community, all instruments adopted under it, and with Community policies and actions, including the rules on competition.

Detailed guidelines for project promoters have been drafted by Bord Fáilte in consultation with my Department. They will be finalised once state aids clearance of the scheme, by the Competition Directorate of the European Commission, is secured. While this is the "third round" of ERDF and Exchequer capital investment in the tourism sector, it is the first occasion on which formal state aids notification and clearance has been required for each individual measure before the scheme can be launched. Under the new state aid arrangements, Ireland changes from being a single "A" region to being composed of one "A" region - the BMW Region - with aid limits of 40%, plus 15% for small and medium enterprises, in the 2000-06 period, and five "C" regions -in the S&E region - where, by 2004, the maximum aid limits will range from 17.5% to 20%, plus 10% for small and medium enterprises.

In terms of the time scale of developments to date, and with due regard for the European Commission's guide to the Community rules on state aid, my Department has contributed to the development of the regional operational programmes - approved by the European Commission last December - the programme complements, that is, the documents setting out the detailed elements at sub-measure level which are currently being finalised by the regional assemblies, who are the managing authorities for the 2000-06 period, and the detailed operational guidelines referred to earlier, which are being drawn up by Bord Fáilte for project promoters.

Meanwhile, the tourism product investment scheme is still being examined, under the state aids rules, by DG Competition of the European Commission, to whom the scheme was formally notified as required by the relevant regulation in October 2000. A meeting at official level is scheduled for next Wednesday, 6 June, and I am hopeful that these discussions will enable the Commission to give the necessary clearances to allow for early publication and implementation of this scheme.

Mr. Naughten: The Minister may need to clarify what he said. I understand that the measures in question are now applicable from 2002 to 2006 rather than from 2000. Can the Minister explain why, some 18 months after the announcement of sub-measures 1, 2 and 3 in the national development plan, funding has not yet been allocated for those measures and cannot be drawn down to date? Does he agree that the development of major attractions, the special interests pursuits and the tourism environmental management programmes are of fundamental importance to the development of tourism in this country? In view of the damaging impact of the foot and mouth crisis on the tourism sector, does he agree that these three sub-measures should now be expedited and funding made available as soon as possible? When will the funding be made available and why has it taken so long? Other Departments have got approval from the EU in relation to other measures in the NDP. Why is there such a delay on the tourism measures?

Dr. McDaid: I agree with the Deputy. I would like to see those measures brought forward and implemented as soon as possible. There is a meeting on 6 June which may, hopefully, clarify some of the matters to which the Deputy has referred. In order to get these measures up and running, particularly the large measures, developers need an adequate time frame to draw down funding and put plans in place. On the state aids issue, it is a matter for the EU to make inquiries with regard to the specific details. For example, I have been trying to have a provision included for grant aiding small family run hotels. The Commission has a period of two months within which to reply but if, in the interim, we submit additional information, or they request further details which we have to forward to them, the two months period then runs from the date of that new communication. Correspondence, or perhaps red tape, can therefore delay the process. That is how it is set out in EU law, which I can read out if the Deputy wishes. I hope I have explained some of the reasons for the delay. At the meeting on 6 June, I am hopeful that we will come close to finalising the entire package.

Mr. Naughten: How has it taken 18 months to get this matter resolved with the EU? It is now 18 months since the decision was taken to provide the funding for these much needed projects. May I also ask the Minister what is the status of the agri-tourism and marine tourism budgets which are of fundamental importance to certain sectors?

Dr. McDaid: The last operational programme in 1994 also took 15 months to become operational and the state aids issue had not arisen then. Also, in the last budget, we brought in a measure whereby hotels which were grant aided could not have the double capital loans arrangement. All those matters had to be discussed in great detail. I am as anxious as the Deputy to get the programme up and running. Funding for the tourism sector is partly under ERDF funding and we have to abide by that set of regulations also.

An Ceann Comhairle: Question No. 4 cannot be taken, as the Member concerned is not in the House.

Mr. Stanton: In relation to Ceist a 4, Deputy Deenihan wishes to apologise to the House for his unavoidable absence.

Sports Capital Programme.

5. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the plans he has to increase the funding for the sports capital programme in 2001; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16430/01]

Dr. McDaid: The national lottery funded sports capital programme, which is administered by my Department, provides funding to voluntary sporting and community organisations at local, regional and national levels throughout the country towards the provision of sport and recreational facilities. Under the 2001 sport capital programme I have received 1,467 applications and these are currently being evaluated against the programme's assessment criteria, which are outlined in the guidelines for the programme. As soon as the assessment of the projects has been completed, I will be in a position to finalise the overall budget for this year's allocation.

In the past three years, 1998 to 2000, this Government has allocated grants to the value of approximately £62 million to more than 1,300 projects. Compared with the three year total of £18 million in allocations by the previous Government in the period 1995 to 1997, the commitment of this Government to the provision of funding for sport and recreation facilities nationwide is clear.

Mr. Stanton: Does the Minister agree that the amount he proposes to make available this year leaves a shortfall of almost £200 million? Could the Minister confirm that the amount he proposes to make available this year is short of last year's amount? Will he provide the figures for both?

Dr. McDaid: In my colleague, Deputy Ryan's area, £46 million was spent on young people from the youth and facilities fund. As I pointed out to the Deputy, since we came into office, the amount of money going to sport is phenomenal. The average grant in 2000 was £52,700 compared to between £10,000 and £12,000 when the Deputy's party was in Government. Under the sports capital programme from 1998 to 2002, the number of projects funded increased by 176% from 246 to 679. The amount of money allocated to these capital programmes increased 500% and the average grant by 118%.

These included major indoor facilities. We put £4.8 million into Santry stadium. We put athletic facilities in Cork, Galway, Castleisland, Navan and Ringsend. We contributed £1.3 million to the national boxing stadium and £500,000 to the national rowing centre in County Cork. In the Eircom soccer league, nine clubs got support. Shamrock Rovers were given £500,000, while Dalymount and Tolka Park got £550,000 each. Out of the 26 county grounds, 15 received support during my term in office. In 2000, the GAA received £10.82 million, soccer £5.45 million and rugby £706,000. Under this Government, £20 million went to Croke Park. We put £45 million into the swimming pool programme, to which the Deputy's Government gave £3 million a year. We financed a 50 metre national swimming pool in Limerick by £6 million and £85 million is earmarked in the national development plan.

Mr. E. Ryan: That was not a good question.

Mr. Stanton: Wait until the supplementary.

Dr. McDaid: The Deputy's leader says that he would spend £0.5 billion on small facilities. We are half way there already. As I pointed out to the Deputy, it is all right to promise these things but there are not enough developers and construction people to build these facilities. Projects, which some regard as little, of £200,000 or £300,000 are a drop in the ocean compared to the type the developments developers are involved in today because the economy is such that they make millions building houses and other projects. It is difficult to get them. One can promise all one wants, but at the end of the year, I still must hand back funding. I intend to announce shortly this year's allocation of the national lottery funds. We will continue to do approximately 500 to 700 more projects this year.

Mr. Stanton: I compliment the Minister on dodging the question I asked. It is a simple question and maybe he will give me a simple answer. How much money will he make available this year in the sports capital grant? Is it virtually half of what he made available last year? Is it true what he told Deputy Owen, that he will make it £19 million this year and gave £36 million last year? Is it also true that on those figures, we will be approximately £200 million short of applications nationally? There is a huge demand for our infrastructure to be upgraded. Why is he halving the amount of money of the sports capital grant? The Minister had this question in plenty of time. Why is he dodging a reply? It is a written question that was in his Department long enough. Will he reply to the question asked?

Dr. McDaid: Of course I will. In the responding to Deputy Owen, we worked off the Estimates, as the Deputy's colleagues can inform him. The answer to Deputy Owen of £19 million was worked out from the Estimates for last year. This has been explained. We estimated £19 million and because of all the extra applications that came in, I explained to my colleague, Deputy McCreevy, that we need more money. We increased it to £36 million. The same will happen this year. There are requests in every year for over £200 million. They exist on paper. There are some very poor applications and some counties' applications dropped this year. In previous years we gave out £10,000 and £15,000 like snuff at a wake. We gave 10% or 20% of a grant and asked the community or club to get the rest. I changed that around and now I ask them to raise a minimum of 20%. Unfortunately, many clubs have no planning permission or funding. Many wrote in willy-nilly seeking to build little Wemblies. Some of the applications do not stand up. It is easy to say that we are looking for £220 million but at least £120 million is pie in the sky because there is nothing to back it up. That is the problem.

OTHER QUESTIONS.

Bord Fáilte.

6. Mr Deasy asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if there are any proposals to provide a structure other than Bord Fáilte and the regional tourist boards which would be more dynamic in promoting tourism here and in attracting tourists from Britain, mainland Europe and other European Union countries. [16290/01]

Dr. McDaid: I believe that the implementation of national tourism marketing and promotion policies is best undertaken by a dedicated executive body working in concert with the tourism industry. Bord Fáilte serves the interests of the country well in this regard. Since I took office, visitor numbers have increased by an average growth of 8% from 5.2 million in 1997 to 6.4 million in 2000 more than twice the European average growth rate over the same period.

A number of developments have taken place over the past year or so which will further refine our overall effort in tourism marketing. Tourism Ireland Limited, established under the North-South Ministerial Council, is expected to be fully operational for the 2002 season and will have responsibility for all island international tourism marketing. This development, involving enhanced North-South co-operation, will bring significant, tangible benefits to our international tourism promotion effort. The new body will work closely with Bord Fáilte and the Northern Ireland Tourist Board, which will continue to have responsibility for promoting and developing tourism products and regions. The establishment last year of the tourism marketing partnership involving Bord Fáilte and the Irish tourism industry, was designed to bring about a greater level of synergy between industry and the board in international tourism marketing, planning and implementation. It is a good example of co-operation and partnership between the State sector and the private commercial arm of the tourism industry which is contributing to a more dynamic approach to promoting Ireland abroad. It is envisaged that similar partnership arrangements will operate under the aegis of Tourism Ireland Limited.

Mr. Higgins (Mayo): Does the Minister accept that Government policy on the regions is based on three planks - industrial jobs, decentralisation and tourism. The policy on industrial jobs is not working. There are 57,000 in the east and 10,000 in the west. Decentralisation has been abandoned because so many ministerial snouts were in the trough that they could not reconcile them. The regional tourist boards are not doing the business.

An Ceann Comhairle: Please leave the answers to the Minister. Will the Deputy confine himself to the question?

Mr. Higgins (Mayo): This Minister needs prompting. It is relatively easy to sell Ireland. It has huge potential, clean air, good food, the best golf and superb angling. Is it not time to do a detailed assessment of Bord Failte's role and track record and the regional tourist boards?

Dr. McDaid: I pointed out before that this Government was the first to give regional tourist authorities a budget. Previously they relied on local businesses. I am delighted to see them now out in Berlin, Milan and elsewhere marketing their regions. Decentralisation is a policy of this Government and it will go ahead.

Mr. Higgins (Mayo): After the election?

Dr. McDaid: We are continuing to work on decentralisation. As the Deputy is well aware, a spatial strategy will not be introduced before the end of the year. The two should go hand in hand and run parallel rather than jump in and make a mess of it. The two are easily explained. In every other OECD country there is same type of operation. Practically every other country in Europe continues to have a national tourism organisation funded by the State. We are no different from any other European country. I understand RTAs have a limited role in overseas marketing but I am glad to see they have a budget. They are delighted with the budget they have been given and I will continue to support them.

Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin: Does the Minister agree that there is more than one body selling this country? My own county, for example, is split in two. Shannon Development sells the northern side, while Bord Fáilte sells the south. This is not satisfactory. The Minister may not have it but I would appreciate it if he would forward me information on the number of offices Bord Fáilte has abroad and the cost of maintaining them in terms of rent, salaries, etc.

Mr. Naughten: Four or five regional tourism boards promote the River Shannon. Does the Minister believe that this is satisfactory? In the west counties Roscommon, Mayo and Galway are in the one region. In terms of the type of product on offer there is a complete contrast between what County Roscommon and the other two counties are offering. Does the Minister think there is potential to reorganise the tourism boards in order to package products better?

Mr. Stanton: What progress, if any, has the Minister made in rationalising the many bodies and groups promoting tourism, very often in conflict and competition with each other and with duplication of resources?

Dr. McDaid: I do not have the figure for the number of Bord Fáilte offices. There is a large number overseas and if the Deputy tables a question for written answer, I will get the information for her. Bord Fáilte has been a tremendous success. Deputy Higgins is correct, it is very popular to be Irish in the world today. Australia, a large continent in the Antipodes, only attracts approximately four million visitors. Although it is a long distance away, it has the huge population of Asia on its doorstep. As a small island in the north Atlantic, we attract 6.4 million visitors. Therefore Bord Fáilte must be doing something right. The figures for 1997-98 were up 10.5%. In 1998-99 they were up 7.4% and in 1999-2000, 8%. Those are phenomenal figures.

There is a question, of which I am fully aware between Cork and Kerry Tourism, Kerry Tourism and Shannon Development which, as the Deputy indicated, are trying to redraw the boundaries. I am not for redrawing the boundaries in order that a single tourism board would be responsible for each county. The regions can be best developed under the regional tourism authorities. To have, as Deputy Naughten pointed out, five bodies marketing the Shannon is quite a number. Differentiating between counties Roscommon, Mayo and Galway would also be a problem. The rationalisation problem will continue. There is undoubtedly overlap and a lot of money is spent on flashy and glossy brochures. Recent research points out that 80% of brochures end up in the bin while other research indicates that there are enough brochures in the country to fill------

Mr. Naughten: Stadium Ireland.

I imagine with the advent of Tourism Ireland Limited that the regional tourism authorities will probably have to take on board the drawing of different boundaries, in other words, certain counties would be better off attached to other areas. This should be part of the remit of TIL. As we are taking in Northern Ireland, we will have to think about redrawing the boundaries of the regional tourism authorities.

Foot and Mouth Disease.

7. Mr. Higgins (Mayo) asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the number of visitors from North America who to date have cancelled their holiday arrangements here due to the foot and mouth disease scare; the number of bed nights lost; the estimated loss of revenue to the economy; the cost to date of the marketing campaign to counter negative publicity; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16132/01]

8. Mr. Farrelly asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the number of British visitors who, to date, have cancelled their holiday arrangements here due to the foot and mouth situation; the number of bed nights lost; the estimated loss to the economy; the cost to date of the marketing campaign to counter the negative effects; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16099/01]

9. Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if he has met with his counterpart in Northern Ireland since the outbreak of the foot and mouth disease in order to agree an all-island approach; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16064/01]

13. Ms Clune asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the impact of foot and mouth restrictions and the negative impact of adverse publicity on employment has had in the tourist sector; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16112/01]

14. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if his attention has been drawn to the package of measures introduced by the Northern Ireland Executive under the help for businesses scheme to assist tourism and other sectors which lost out financially as a result of the foot and mouth scare; if he has any plans for a similar programme of support here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16210/01]

17. Mr. McGrath asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if he has met with representatives of ferry companies in relation to numbers of tourists; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16085/01]

22. Mr. Bradford asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the package of measures and reliefs which he has put in place to ease the financial difficulties being experienced by the different sectors in the tourism industry arising from the negative effects of the foot and mouth situation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16107/01]

51. Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation his estimate of the total revenue lost to date in 2001 to the tourism sector arising from the foot and mouth disease scare at the latest date for which figures are available; the specific measures which have been put in place to assist the tourism sector to recover from these losses; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16204/01]

54. Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the latest information available to his Department on the estimated visitor numbers for 2001; his views on Bord Fáilte's estimates that the numbers are likely to be down in 2001 for the first time in ten years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16208/01]

148. Mr. Higgins (Mayo) asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the number of visitors from North America who have cancelled their holiday arrangements here due to the foot and mouth disease scare; the number of bed nights lost; the estimated loss of revenue to the economy; the cost to date of the marketing campaign to counter negative publicity; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16150/01]

156. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if he has given any instructions with the objective of assisting the tourism industry in the wake of the foot and mouth epidemic; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16435/01]

164. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the extent to which he is assisting on an international promotional exercise and or recovery programme regarding the revival of the tourism industry in the aftermath of the incidence of the foot and mouth disease; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16443/01]

Dr. McDaid: I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 to 9, inclusive, 13, 14, 17, 22, 51, 54, 148, 156 and 164 together. Official CSO figures are not yet available for overseas visitor numbers and revenue earnings in 2001, nor are there any reliable figures available on the number of cancellations or bed nights lost due to the foot and mouth crisis. Bord Fáilte originally estimated a potential loss this year of 14% in the number of overseas visitors on the basis of initial assessments of the possible impact of foot and mouth restrictions on tourism, when compared to the 2000 outcome of 6.4 million, equivalent to a reduction in revenue of 13%. It will be some time before the board will be in a position to confirm those estimates and the impact on them of Ireland being able to announce that it was fully open for business well in advance of the peak season.

More recent reports from the industry and through a survey commissioned by CERT suggest that while there has been an improvement in business and forward bookings in recent weeks after the lifting of the internal foot and mouth disease control measures, business could still be down this year on 2000. The CERT survey showed that the majority of establishments indicated no change in numbers employed, with operators preferring to reduce the number of hours worked by staff rather than letting them go. Bord Fáilte's projections of industry losses may well prove to be pessimistic as they do not take into account the impact of the incremental marketing activities being undertaken and the extent to which business may rebound later this year.

Since the onset of the foot and mouth emergency I have taken a range of measures together with my Department and Bord Fáilte to help offset the adverse impact on the tourism industry. In the interests of time I will not go through the measures which I have stated previously. The measures proved successful and the country has now returned to normality in terms of its attraction to visitors. All the State's cultural and heritage sites have reopened and there is an open welcome to visitors from home and overseas, subject to appropriate precautionary measures being taken to prevent the spread of foot and mouth disease.

A major tourism marketing reassurance campaign, with a total budget of £10 million, has been designed by Bord Fáilte in consultation with the industry and is under way in key markets. The campaign consists of special media advertising, trade reassurance measures and special promotional visits, including my own recent visit to the United State. Details of the campaign and the actions envisaged in key source markets are available directly from Bord Fáilte.

The reassurance campaign has been put together with the assistance of an additional special Exchequer contribution of £7 million. These actions are incremental to the 2001 budget previously approved for Bord Fáilte which represented the largest ever level of State funding for tourism marketing and brings the total 2001 Exchequer provision for tourism marketing and promotion to £67 million. When the reassurance campaign is taken into account the tourism marketing budget in 2001 represents an increase of approximately £17 million on last years' budget.

At the last North-South Ministerial Council in tourism sectoral format held in Letterkenny on 30 March, I and my northern counterpart, Sir Reg Empey, Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Investment, had a discussion on the implications of the FMD emergency for the tourism industry, North and South. We agreed to keep the situation under review and to consider the possibility of joint marketing promotions in the future.

I am aware of the measures announced in Northern Ireland on 21 May, from which certain tourism operators adversely affected by the foot and mouth disease crisis, could benefit. While there have been some calls for similar relief measures here, the main focus of industry attention has been to secure extra Exchequer marketing funds and the removal of the more damaging foot and mouth disease advice-control measures. My appeal to the banks drew a welcome response from the Irish Bankers' Federation on 30 March indicating their commitment to give careful and sympathetic consideration to requests for support from those business customers who encounter financial difficulties. The Department of Finance has also confirmed that in so far as particular cash flow problems arise for individual businesses, the Revenue Commissioners, as part of normal arrangements, will look sympathetically at payment arrangements on a case by case basis.

I will keep the overall market under close review with the objective of ensuring that no unnecessary medium to long-term damage is done to the tourism industry, which is now so important in economic terms. The tourism industry has dealt successfully with crises in the past and is a resilient industry. With the help of the actions I have taken and through the industry's efforts, we can overcome this temporary setback and return to a growth pattern again next year.

Mr. Higgins (Mayo): Is the Minister living in the real world? I ask him to walk down Nassau Street when he leaves here. The left half side of that street as one walks towards Merrion Square would be normally chock-a-block at this time of the year with buses carrying Americans who would go into Kilkenny Design and the other shops that sell ethnic goods along that street. There are no buses there except the odd one that has brought people up from rural Ireland.

Is the Minister disputing the figure given by Bord Fáilte reported this week in The Irish Times? Bord Fáilte estimates that at this stage about £250 million has been lost to the economy by way of tourism revenue.

In terms of where we go from here, does the Minister accept that irretrievable damage has been done? I welcome marketing in the sector, but at this stage people have made up their minds whether they will come here, go to other parts of Europe or stay at home. Will the Minister accept that what we are involved in at this stage is a salvage mission and that what is required is long-term rather than short-term investment? Will he also accept the figures for this year will not be far more optimistic than the pessimistic ones given by Bord Fáilte, that they could well be catastrophic and many enterprises will go to the wall because the Minister and the Government did not put in place any salvage measures in terms of supports to assist people in the industry who have borrowed to keep their businesses up and running?

Dr. McDaid: I accept certain sectors, such as the coach sector, have been damaged by the foot and mouth disease crisis, but I cannot imagine what the Deputy is suggesting. Is he suggesting I take a fleet of ships to the United States and fill them with buses full of Americans? Could he possibly have done anything more than I have done already? I went on a reassurance campaign to the United States, from where most of the coach business would normally come. Is the Deputy suggesting I should go over there and drag people by the scruff of the neck over here to line the streets of Dublin?

I am not as pessimistic as the Deputy. If I were to say to him there is nothing happening in Letterkenny or elsewhere in County Donegal having heard that elsewhere, I would not be inclined to go there. I cannot understand where being pessimistic about all this can possibly lead us. As a matter of fact, Donegal is alive. The night life in Letterkenny, Donegal town and Buncrana has been fantastic in recent weeks. There has been perfect sunshine there-----

Mr. Naugthen: Is the Minister taking credit for that?

Dr. McDaid: -----and it has been a marvellous place to be. If the Deputy spread that type of message about Donegal, people would be more inclined to say, "yes, I think we should go there."

I note from a recent programme on the West that more than 1,000 boats were out on the Corrib for the mayfly.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The minute allocated for the Minister's reply has concluded.

Dr. McDaid: I know of a large group of people, 70 or more, who want to stay in west Cork in September, but we cannot get a booking in a hotel for them. I consider the indicators are much more positive than Bord Fáilte figures, which are pessimistic.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Will the Minister conclude.

Dr. McDaid: I remind the Deputy that the figures produced by Bord Fáilte were a worst case scenario and do not taken into consideration the considerable effort made by the industry in the meantime.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I appeal to Ministers and Deputies to adhere to the one minute allocated for supplementary questions and replies to enable as many Members as possible to ask a supplementary question. The Chair has very little control over the Standing Order. The committee on Dáil reform should be approached if Members on either side of the House are not happy with the arrangements. I also ask Opposition members to ask questions rather than make statements.

Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin: It is not only Opposition members who are pessimistic about the figures, Bord Fáilte deals with people involved in the tourism industry and has heard from those in the industry that they are pessimistic about the numbers coming.

As the Minister is aware, a helpful business scheme has been set up in the North. Areas of this country, such as the Cooley Peninsula, have been devastated by this crisis. There is no proof in the books of the people involved in the tourism industry to whom I have spoken that the position will be good in the autumn. We all hope it will be. I ask the Minister not to close the door on providing assistance for people involved in the industry. I ask him to reconsider the position in September , because if the bookings are not in by September, they will not be there before the end of the year. Many businesses will need assistance, if the figures for the autumn are not as good as we hope they will be.

Dr. McDaid: I have spoken in the past regarding compensation, but I do not think that is what the Deputy was speaking about. Measures regarding rates review, VAT returns, etc., have been implemented in the UK, but the uptake of them has been unusually low. They do not seem to have worked.

With regard to the Cooley Peninsula, £250,000 has been put into that area alone and the people there were grateful for that extra cash from the Government. I am not saying figures will not be down, but Bord Fáilte's figures are a worst case scenario and have not taken into consideration the advertising campaign hotels and others in the industry have been running in local newspapers. Terrific value for accommodation is being advertised for June, July and August. No one knows what the summer will be like. There were many cancellations for the summer, particularly coach tours. Some Americans told me they wanted to be sure about the position and put off their visit until the autumn or next year. I expect figures for the autumn to be much higher than they were for last year and that figures for next year will make up for much of what we will have lost this year. The figures will be down for this year, but if we could only recover close to the last year's figures, I would be satisfied.

Mr. Stanton: Does the Minister accept that many entrepreneurs are in trouble? Why will the Government not put in place a package similar to what which was put in place in the North and in Wales? Has he had any discussions recently with the ferry companies to ascertain the level of their bookings? Will he make funding available to those companies to enable them to carry out marketing, given that the marketing they carried out earlier this year has been nullified by the foot and mouth disease epidemic?

Dr. McDaid: I expect some businesses will be in a bother, but I saw media coverage of farmhouses that were empty and women in tears and more recent coverage showed those places were bustling again. I am optimistic they can recover. Certain businesses will be affected. The measures that have been in place on a piecemeal basis in the UK and, more recently, in Northern Ireland have not been a success. They were not a success in the UK because it handled the matter completely different from how we handled it. We adopted a damage limiting approach and won that battle. Many people throughout the world admire the way the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development handled the foot and mouth disease threat and the tourism industry in general.

The ferry companies have been badly hit. I spoke to representatives of those companies recently and they estimate that their figures could be down 30%, which is not good news. I do not intend to give special funding to each of the ferry companies.

The ferry companies have indicated that it would be much better if I channelled more funding towards the UK market. This would also benefit rural Ireland because the car ferries transport people who travel throughout the country. I will be targeting the UK from now on.

Mr. Naughten: When the Minister met with Sir Reg Empey in Letterkenny, did he discuss the background to the assistance being provided by the Northern Ireland Executive? Does he feel the tour operators and tourism sector in this country had to first deal with the foot and mouth crisis and then with the challenge from competitors who are receiving assistance in Northern Ireland? Both Bord Fáilte and tourism operators throughout the country are extremely pessimistic at this time and there needs to be some positive development from the Minister in regard to assistance and ensuring the numbers of tourists coming to the country increase.

Does the Minister think that the best way to market tourism is to give companies such as Aer Lingus, Irish Ferries and so on a specific budget so that they can target specific elements of the market and encourage people to come to this country? These companies have a good record in that regard and they are the people with the expertise and experience.

Dr. McDaid: In regard to Aer Lingus and the other companies, last year we set up the tourism marketing partnership to bring the industry and State agencies together so that there would not be an overlap of marketing and there would be clearly defined areas of funding. There was a meeting recently with the tourism marketing partnership on which Aer Lingus and the ferry companies are represented. That aspect has not been asked for, nor do I believe it would work. I am optimistic that we can recover from this setback - Deputy Higgins used the word "salvage". I have always said this is a salvage operation. We are trying to get back to the £6.4 million figure of last year. I am not saying we will achieve this but we will make every effort to do so. This is just the end of May and we have already spent £17 million extra on marketing this year. In regard to our competitors in Northern Ireland, the whole area of rates and so on is different in the UK, and this has not worked.

Mr. Durkan: In view of the fact that we were very unlucky to be so geographically placed in regard to the serious foot and mouth outbreak in the UK and suffered the type of damage raised in the questions, does the Minister think that between now and the end of the year he will be able to take sufficient initiatives abroad - I am mindful of the points he already raised - so that they will percolate down through the various services here?

Dr. McDaid: We can take initiatives and the industry has taken many initiatives in terms of the value being given in local advertising campaigns. I am currently in the process of trying to work out a date for a visit to the UK, following which I will travel to Europe. Undoubtedly, we have taken a loss here. As the Deputies opposite have pointed out, people have made up their minds. We must decide whether throwing money at the problem at this stage is correct if people have made up their minds about this country or if it would be better to concentrate on next year. I am more inclined to go for the latter. We will continue with this initiative to which we are contributing £17 million. The Minister for Finance is aware that the tourism industry represents 5% of GDP while the agricultural industry represents 4% of GDP.

RAPID Programme.

10. Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the progress made to date regarding the implementation of the RAPID programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16213/01]

49. Mr. Spring asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation when it is expected that the second strand of the RAPID programme, for rural areas and provincial towns, will be operational; the total expected budget for this strand; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16214/01]

Minister of State at the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Mr. E. Ryan): I propose to take Questions Nos. 10 and 49 together.

The establishment of a framework for implementation of strand I of the RAPID programme, catering for urban centres with the greatest concentration of disadvantage, is well advanced. Initial work has been undertaken in each of the 25 areas designated under the programme to put the delivery structures in place. Recently, a national co-ordinator and liaison team of three were appointed following public competition. Local co-ordinators are being recruited by relevant local authorities at present. Once these co-ordinators are in place, area implementation teams already being established will formally commence work on the preparation and drawing together of area action plans which are expected to be completed before the end of the year.

The design of strand II of the programme, catering for rural areas and provincial towns is also under way. The identification and selection of disadvantaged areas in the provincial towns will proceed along lines similar to the process used for strand I and is currently being progressed by the Department of the Environment and Local Government. Funding for both strand I and strand II will be available under the national development plan, and will be front-loaded to the targeted areas before the end of 2003, according to the priority of needs identified in each of the areas.

In addition, the selection of disadvantaged rural areas, which will be targeted for special support, is being led by the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development.

Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin: At the outset, I welcome the programme, particularly the fact that it will be extended to rural Ireland. I would like to know the progress being made on strand II. I received a reply to a recent parliamentary question that stated that it was hoped the parameters would be set for rural areas by the end of the year. Will the Minister of State clarify when applications from the different areas should reach the Department? Given that a working group has been set up under the auspices of the Minister's Department, what progress has been made in this regard? What communication will the Department have with area partnerships, leaders, local authorities and so on in regard to rural areas?

Mr. E. Ryan: The rural areas will be covered by the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. That communication is ongoing and is reasonably well advanced in regard to how the programme will be structured. I will only deal with the 25 areas covered under the RAPID programme for urban areas. Given that there is one national body, perhaps a case could be made for it to look after both rural and urban areas. As far as my Department is concerned, we have not been told we will be dealing with rural areas. At the moment, we will only be dealing with urban areas.

Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin: There is confusion at local level in relation to the programme. Is the Minister of State saying the local authorities should deal with the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development if they want information on the programme?

Mr. E. Ryan: I can understand the confusion. There is also a certain amount of confusion in regard to the RAPID programme. That confusion will only be catered for when the local co-ordinators are in place and bring groups together to put a plan together. Once that happen, much of the confusion will disappear. However, until that happens, it will be difficult not to have confusion. In areas where I launch the programme, I find people are still a little bit confused. Once people understand the potential of the programme, they will realise that if everyone works together it can have a huge impact on exclusion, whether in urban or rural areas.

Mr. Naughten: Are there any plans to expand on the 25 locations after they are up and running? While no one disputes that the areas which have been targeted have been badly ravaged over the years, some of which are in the Minister of State's constituency, will he agree that additional areas should be included in the programme, otherwise he will have the same difficulty in 12 or 18 months or two years? It is a pity the Minister with responsibility for tackling the problem of disadvantage in this instance has no responsibility to rural areas. Is it the case that in order to keep Minister of State, Deputy Ó Cuív, happy this element of the budget was passed on to him? Will the Minister of State agree that one Department should have overall responsibility to answer questions rather than be divided between two Departments as it is at present?

Mr. E. Ryan: The idea of having 25 areas was to keep the whole programme focused. The general feeling is that if we increased it to 50 areas the focus would be watered down and that at the moment it should not be extended. In my own constituency there are areas that feel they should be included. If we do not keep it focused we will not really tackle the problem. Disadvantage is very concentrated and we have an opportunity to crack and break it with this programme. If we spread it out it will not have the effect we want.

Focus is a key part of it and the areas chosen are the ones that clearly emerged as the most disadvantaged. The selection was independent and there was no interference in it. As far as the rural areas are concerned, there are discussions going on and we should see some announcements in the not too distant future.

Mr. Naughten: Does the Minister agree that this programme, which is now split into two strands, should be under the responsibility of one Department where experience can be gathered, the programme can be co-ordinated and what has been learned in urban areas can be used to develop the project in rural areas? Is it the case that the reason this budget was given to the Department was to keep the former Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Deputy Ned O'Keefe, happy?

Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin: I support what my colleague has said. The Department of the Environment and Local Government is also involved. There will be more confusion as a result of this. If we put down parliamentary questions with regard to the RAPID programme we must table one question to the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, another to the Minister for the Environment and Local Government and another to the Minister here today. It will be very difficult for us to get information through parliamentary questions because we will not know to whom to address the questions. The programme should be under the auspices of one Department.

Mr. E. Ryan: The rural end of it will be under the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development but it will not be called RAPID. There is a difference between urban and rural exclusion. When we started this programme we decided just to look at the 25 worst areas regardless of whether they were urban or rural. It soon became clear that they would all be urban areas because we were using the Trutz-Haase deprivation index. That is why we decided we could not confine it to urban areas as there were rural areas with the problem. We decided then that it should be set up independently because -----

Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin: Why was the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development chosen?

Mr. E. Ryan: Because there is a lot of development within agriculture and rural areas.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I would prefer if questions by way of interruption were not answered.

Youth Services Funding.

11. Mr. Callely asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the moneys which have been allocated to date under the young people's facilities and services fund; the structures which are in place for the long-term management, maintenance and funding of such facilities; if there has been discussions with the local authorities on same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15368/01]

Mr. E. Ryan: As part of the Government's overall strategy to tackle drug misuse, the young people's facilities and services fund was established in 1998 to assist in the development of preventative measures in a targeted manner through the development of youth facilities, including sport and recreational facilities and services in disadvantaged areas where a significant drug problem existed or had the potential to develop. The aim of the fund is to attract "at risk" young people in disadvantaged areas into these facilities and divert them from the dangers of substance misuse. The national assessment committee for the fund is chaired by my Department and includes a representative of Dublin Corporation. To date, approximately £46 million has been allocated by Government to support over 340 facility and services projects under the fund.

An external evaluator was recently appointed to examine the overall impact of the fund at national, plan and project level against the targets, objectives and performance indicators agreed. The report of the evaluator, which is expected in September 2002, will identify models of best practice, which will inform the next phase of allocations under the fund.

Mr. Higgins (Mayo): I thank the Minister for his reply and commend him on the work he is doing. What is the current statistic in relation to the number of drug addicts, particularly heroin addicts, within the greater Dublin area? Two years ago it was estimated at something in the region of 14,000. The local task forces were extremely pessimistic in relation to their success in dealing with the issue on the ground. What is the current position in terms of the challenge?

Mr. E. Ryan: The figure is estimated at 13,500 heroin/opiate abusers in the Dublin area. Last year we set up the national advisory committee on drugs and one of their jobs is to try to give us a real assessment of what is happening. They have four sub-committees, one of which is investigating treatment. A number of people felt that the Comiskey figure of 13,500 included some numbers that should not be there. It is likely that it is in or around that figure but we expect to have a harder figure later this year.

Mr. Naughten: The Minister used the term "significant risk". What is the definition of substance abuse or drugs we are talking about? Does this include the use or abuse of aerosols which is a growing problem? Does the Minister not agree that there is a broader range of substances of abuse today than there was ten years ago and that the term needs to be broadened?

How many areas have already drawn down funding and where are those areas? I presume most of them are in Dublin, Cork and the major population centres. Has any work been done to review it in the regional centres where there are also significant substance abuse problems? Even a town such as Athlone has a problem with opiates and it is the same in many other places. Have those problems been addressed?

Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin: Deputy Naughten has asked my question. Has any assessment been done outside the areas where the task force works? There is a major problem. Does the Minister agree that an assessment of the problem needs to be done all over the country and particularly in the schools?

Mr. E. Ryan: When we did the review of the national drugs strategy which we launched recently we went all round the country. We had eight public fora, some 190 people wrote to us and we met about 34 groups from that. Aerosols did not emerge as a major issue although we had expected them to. They are extremely dangerous but they do not seem to be popular abuse substances. There is a broad range of substances abused, apart from opiates.

The reason attention comes back to opiates is that heroin is the drug that does most damage to the individual, the family and the community. The drug problem changes dramatically once heroin gets into a community. That is why it always comes back to opiates and why people ask what is happening with other drugs. The review showed clearly, especially in rural areas, that people were far more concerned about the abuse of alcohol and problems of under age drinking than they were about drugs. That was very clear.

The new regional structures we have set up will identify the problems in their own areas. They will then be able to tap in to the national advisory committee on drugs. That committee will become a very important part of the country's drug policy. It will work on four pillars, supply reduction, prevention, treatment and research. Members of this House and people in the media will, no doubt, make much use of the national advisory committee. It has undertaken a huge amount of research, much of which will stand the test of time and will be extremely important for Members of this House.

Sports Capital Programme.