Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1987 > Committee on Public Expenditure > Report No. 23 - Review of Public Expenditure on Tourism

Foreword

The Committee had already met tourism aspects of various public expenditure programmes in its earlier reviews and more recently in its reviews of Fisheries & SFADCo it identified serious lack of coordination and focus in public expenditure on tourism. It was against this background that the Committee requested its Business Advisory Panel to establish a small expert group to consider public expenditure on tourism and to brief the Committee.

The Committee’s Orders of Reference require it to examine public expenditure programmes and to comment on whether they are justified and cost-effective. This public expenditure programme is put at £32m. or about 0.3% of total public expenditure (which amounts to over 90% of national income.) Tourism on the other hand represents over 7% of national income and is a fast growing international business which is job intensive and in which Ireland has both special advantages and needs.

In all the circumstances the Committee considered that more public expenditure was the means in this case to more cost effective public expenditure. This is not to say that the Committee gave undue consideration to the various tourism interests which submitted evidence but rather that it saw the national interest better served by Ireland achieving what they considered the feasible prospect of increasing its share of the growing tourism industry and that despite the extent of the problem of public sector spending it was necessary and appropriate to increase public spending in this particular instance.

This report sets out why, how and where public expenditure on tourism should be increased and how greater cohesion of purpose and effort could be achieved by greater coordination of all public expenditure and taxation and regulations impinging on what we have to offer to tourists.

Chapter 1 - Committee’s Approach

The Committee in the course of 1986 reviewed the SFADCo budget. In the course of that review which was generally positive the Committee expressed concern about the lack of coordination and the possibility of duplication and conflict arising between the £2.1m allocated to SFADCo under the tourism heading in 1985 and the £29.9m. tourism budget allocated to Bord Fáilte and made specific proposals to resolve the matter.

Immediately following this review the Committee prepared a report on public expenditure on Fisheries and again met areas of overlap in which it appeared that the full extent of the commercial value of having adequate salmon in our rivers from the point of view of tourism was not accommodated within the overall fisheries public expenditure programme.

The Committee then went on to report on the confusion and duplication arising from the system of coordinating road excavations by utilities and in the course of that review recognised many issues within the remit of the Department of the Environment impinging on tourism.

The Committee also examined a number of capital projects and derived from that an insight into the working of the Office of Public Works which also impinges significantly on tourism.

As a result of these various and random exposures to aspects of public expenditure impinging on tourism the Committee requested the Business Advisory Panel, which is a panel of business personnel who have agreed to brief the Committee on various issues as they arise, to prepare a briefing report on tourism. This is reproduced in full in Appendix 1 of this report.

Having considered this report, and in light of the job intensity of tourism and the national priority given to job creation, the Committee decided to undertake an examination of the tourism public expenditure programme.

This involved a series of public meetings with officials of the Department of Tourism, Bord Fáilte, Aer Lingus, the Central Fisheries Board and included one meeting to which the representative organisations involved in tourism were invited.

This was followed by correspondence involving a series of written questions which led in turn to informal consultations between the key agencies involved in public expenditure on tourism.

The Committee then formulated its own analysis of the tourist industry and the performance and relevance of public expenditure on tourism and prepared a short memorandum based on this setting out a summary of its conclusions and recommendations. This memorandum, once it was agreed as representing the consensus views and analysis of the Committee, was put to the Business Advisory Panel, the Department of Tourism and to Bord Fáilte inviting comment, criticism and, if necessary, correction.

This report is based on the outcome of that process. It has not had the advantage of the major consultancy assignment commissioned by the Government on tourism which is still underway. But it has had the benefit of an extensive range and volume of commissioned reports on various aspects of tourism and of the 1985 White Paper on Tourism which it took as a benchmark. It also had the benefit of formal and informal consultations with those most directly involved in the tourist industry and in managing the public expenditure programme allocated to tourism.

It is not designed as a comprehensive review of the tourism industry but rather as an analysis of the industry to determine the justification of the present public expenditure programme. When the programme was found to be inadequate and the fiscal environment to be inconducive to realisation of the significant growth potential, the Committee had then to consider, whether within the tradition of its reports and its terms of reference, it could go any further.

Chapter 2 - Analysis of Tourism

Tourism is among the fastest growing industries in the world and, as with any internationally traded service industry, price and quality competitiveness is a key determinant in the capacity of any country to share in that growth. International media perception, cultural links and location are also key factors.

For a combination of reasons, not all to do with the quality or price competitiveness of the Irish tourism product, Ireland’s share in the growing tourism industry has been declining over the past decade.

The quality of the tourism product in Ireland has inevitably suffered from the slowdown in growth as profits and reinvestment levels were naturally eroded by the shift from leading the world rate of tourism growth to lagging behind it.

Price competitiveness has also suffered over that period because of the very high rates of inflation which applied in Ireland during the ’70’s without compensatory currency adjustments. This phenomenon of declining price competitiveness was also felt by the export manufacturing sector but in the case of tourism they had the extra cost of the rising Irish tax burden from which manufactured exports were largely exempt.

When, in these circumstances, Ireland was able to hold its own in the absolute value in real prices of tourism earnings even against a significant decline in U.K. tourism earnings, it suggests that the inherent growth in demand for what Ireland can offer the tourist is substantial if it can be offered competively as to price and quality.

The Irish tourist industry had the initial advantage of a long emigrant tradition which built up very substantial cultural heritage and family links in the U.K. and U.S. markets. Such links were also developed by the same means in Australia but have not up to now been tapped for tourism.

The White Paper correctly points out that this advantage has now peaked and, even despite renewed emigration, the yield of tourist traffic arising from emigrants is in decline.

This points to the fact that even the existing level of tourism is under imminent and as yet largely unchallenged threat. So, despite the stabilisation of tourism revenue and the declining share of the tourism market it represents, we cannot assume that even this can be held indefinitely without fundamental change in strategy.

The Business Advisory Panel informed the Committee on the basis of Bord Fáilte’s estimates that, if the present level of out of state tourism simply evaporated, the Exchequer would be at a loss of some £400m.. The N.E.S.C. in its report on tourism policy (No. 52) states that between full-time and seasonal employment there are 46,000 jobs in tourism. Bord Fáilte estimates indicate that there are in excess of 80,000 full-time jobs when the job equivalents created indirectly through tourism are included.

So the impact of the tourism sector being incapable of holding its own would be quite dramatic and extensive in Ireland. But the pattern is that a tourism industry without growth does not allow the room or the margins for additional investment in maintaining relative quality and changing the product and market mix. In this it is distinct from farming or manufacturing industry where quotas and other forms of protectionism may be applied. The Committee is, therefore, convinced that a no growth tourism sector - which is what we have had for over a decade now - is not a sustainable option. In fact all the signs are there that without a new strategy dramatic decline is imminent.

It is not sustainable simply because the necessary investment in product adaptation and quality improvement can only take place in a climate of overall sectoral growth.

Therefore, as in any changing industry - and few are changing faster than the tourist industry - growth is an essential element of viability. It is not provided for in Ireland and the Committee considers that it cannot be provided for without significant changes in a wide range of areas of taxation, public expenditure and public sector procedures impinging on tourism.

No public expenditure programme whose task it is to create the climate for viability for an industrial sector can be justified much less cost effective, if the basic preconditions for sustainable viability cannot be met.

The Committee, therefore, considers it essential to cost-effectiveness that the public expenditure programme on tourism pursues a strategy which would result in these preconditions being met. The first and foremost is growth sustainable at a level which will facilitate the attraction of the necessary investment in adapting, extending and improving the quality of the tourist product.

Of course, this in turn will not succeed if Ireland cannot be a price competitive tourist location.

Ireland is a secondary location from the point of view of the major tourist markets in the world. Convenience of access is, therefore, all the more important. This includes the terms of forward transit from other U.K. and European locations from other continents, the frequency of service and the quality and efficiency of airport and seaport terminals in Ireland.

The Government acknowledged the importance of these factors in the White Paper published in 1985 and recognises the constraint they impose on the realisation of the full potential of tourism. Yet little has been done since the publication of the White Paper.

But even more critical is the question of price. Policy on this issue is complicated by the fact that so many tourists come to Ireland through the services of B & I or Aer Lingus, both State-sponsored bodies, whose task it is inter-alia to become self-financing and profitable businesses. Nevertheless, the dramatic decline in the cost of air traffic to London resulting directly from competition would suggest that there is a viable alternative access pricing policy to high prices and low traffic. Though this alternative has been publicly advocated in recent times by the Minister for Communications, Aer Lingus executives, in evidence to the Committee and in subsequent written submissions, take the case as proven that high access cost does not limit tourism development by the fact that despite a dramatic fall in air travel prices from U.K., air traffic increased but total tourist numbers did not.

The Committee considers that it will take more than one half season of lower fares to change the perception in the UK market of the value and acceptability of an Irish holiday.

Though an important part of price competitiveness and a significant slice of the total holiday budget for most tourists, access cost is not the only element in price competitiveness. The cost of car hire, bus tours and all hotel and catering services including food, drink and entertainment are all critical ingredients in price competition.

While it can be shown that the Irish tourism product has been losing price competitiveness it can also be shown that profits generally and particularly in the hotel sector are hardly adequate to maintain investment much less to attract capital into improved facilities. But tourism is a volume sensitive business and prices could be much more competitive if a higher proportion of capacity could be sold by extending the season.

Such a programme requires the successful selling of a complimentary tourist product range. This in turn will require price competitiveness in these markets.

Objective consideration of the facts leads inevitably to the conclusion that, despite V.A.T. refund on exports and V.A.T. reductions on meals, the level of taxation in Ireland is the single largest factor militating against price competitiveness.

Indeed, successive Governments have acknowledged this on the one hand by providing, in effect, a tax-free regime for exports and on the other by the agreement of all parties in Ireland that present tax levels are too high.

If tax levels are too high, how can we expect to encourage price sensitive tourists to share our tax regime even for a few weeks? If firms engaged in the manufacture of goods for exports require special fiscal considerations to maintain international competitiveness how can we expect tourism to maintain its position in exporting services by attracting foreigners to Ireland without some alleviation of taxation?

But, even apart from these considerations there has been up to recent years a dramatic growth in the number of Irish people who, on the basis of cost, chose to fly to continental Europe for holidays over the type of holiday in Ireland being sold to foreigners who would have the added inconvenience and cost of getting here. The Committee concludes that price competitiveness is critical to growth and growth is critical to price competitiveness and product quality improvement and that the breakthrough in growth is only possible after further improvements in access cost and the taxation issue.

On this basis the Committee concludes that increased public expenditure on marketing and infrastructure is the best route to a more cost-effective tourism public expenditure programme.

But this will not be successful without being incorporated into a wider sectoral development programme designed to add a new tourism emphasis to all public works and programmes impinging on tourism and involving the direct participation of the tourist industry in these new marketing and infrastructured investments.

The Committee considers that prudent cost-effective measures introduced in these areas will dramatically change the investment climate and the price competitiveness of Irish tourism and, in turn, lead to Ireland being in a position to increase its share in this fast-growing job intensive international service business.

This, after all, can be the only purpose of a Public Expenditure Programme on Tourism. This, the Committee is convinced, cannot be achieved without additional measures. Thus the Committee considers itself obliged under its remit to recommend greater public expenditure in this case as the means to cost effectiveness.

Chapter 4 - Issues and Concerns Arising

Through its examination of the agencies involved, having heard the organisations representative of tourism interests and considered the published material, including, of course, the Annual Reports and Accounts of the State-sponsored bodies involved in tourism and the White Paper, and having consulted with the Sectoral Development Committee in relation to work it is undertaking impinging on tourism, the Committee identified the following issues which give rise to concern and seem to impinge on the cost-effectiveness of the public expenditure programme on tourism:-

1. Though the public expenditure programmes published by the Department of Finance state that over £2m. of the tourism budget is allocated to SFADCo, the Department of Tourism has no role in this slice of the tourism budget. This is not to say that it is not cost-effectively spent but certainly it gives rise to concern as to the risk of the lack of co-ordination.

The Committee, in its earlier report on SFADCo, has already suggested that the full tourism marketing and development budget be allocated to Bord Fáilte and that SFADCo and other agencies involved in its expenditure engage in agency agreements with Bord Fáilte. Such an arrangement is undertaken voluntarily by other State-sponsored Bodies with Bord Fáilte in relation to international advertising and marketing programmes. This arrangement already applies between SFADCo and IDA. Because of the separation of the Department of Tourism from the Department of Industry and Commerce to which SFADCo reports, it is all the more important that the necessary arrangements be made to co-ordinate the significant SFADCo expenditure in tourism. The alternative is to dissociate this expenditure from tourism since the Department of Tourism has no role or authority in relation to it. This, however, is hardly in accordance with the facts on the ground where SFADCo has a significant tourism role.

2. The Committee views with some concern the fact that the Regional Tourism Development Organisations have not evolved in the manner originally envisaged when they were established and, indeed, that they have a too high dependency for funding on the Bord Fáilte grant.

The Committee considers it essential to cost effective public expenditure that the Regional Tourism Organisations are operated and funded to an increasing extent by the tourism interests with the region.

It may well be that local government and political involvement at local level has militated against this involvement. If it has it has militated against the development of an element in the tourism organisational structure which the Committee considers to be an essential prerequisite to effective coordination between public and private investment in tourism.

3. The Central Fisheries Board and its regional councils also have a vital role to play in tourism development and together with other wildlife and environmental development agencies should be encouraged to participate directly in the regional tourism organisations. The Committee is concerned that the importance of protecting the rivers and their stocks is not appreciated and that these organisations are not seen for what they are - vitally important elements in a growing part of a tourism package.

4. The Committee welcomes the appointment of the consultants, Messrs Price Waterhouse to undertake on behalf of the Government a review of Public Expenditure and Policy on Tourism. The Committee is concerned lest the work of these consultants be limited to looking at the tourism product as the issue is rather what it might be in light of changes in access which open up the U.K., Canadian and Australian markets and are likely within the next few years to open up the European market. If Ireland’s tourist profile were more dispersed throughout the year and throughout the country, built mainly on its unique fishing, forest, wildlife, peatlands and water amenities and its distinctive culture and quality of life, then the type of development strategy indicated would be very different from a simple incremental improvement to the status quo. It is for this reason the Committee is concerned to ensure that the consultant’s brief is considered and undertaken in the widest possible context.

5. The Committee is concerned that the credibility of the tourism industry has been considerably undermined by the extent of debate and argument about the statistical base in which the case for the industry is made.

This matter was referred to in the White Paper on Tourism Policy and, in fact, was the subject of a Government decision that the Central Statistics Office, Bord Fáilte and the relevant agencies would participate in a Committee with a view to determining an agreed basis in which tourism statistics should be compiled. The Committee’s concern is compounded by the fact that this group, in the 15 months since the publication of the White Paper, has not met.

In the circumstances, the Committee considers that the consultants should be commissioned to determine the best objective method of compiling and updating the statistical profile of the tourism industry and that all publications by State organisations should use data based on these figures, in future.

6. The Committee has a number of specific concerns arising from the format of the Annual Report and Accounts of Bord Fáilte relating primarily to the issues of clarity, consistency and compliance with the Standard Statements of Accounting Practice.

In fact, the Committee understands that Bord Fáilte have themselves suggested an alternative presentation of their accounts. This matter now awaits the approval of the Department.

7. The Committee is concerned that there is at least a possibility of duplication of role and effort between Bord Fáilte and the Department of Tourism. This was adverted to in the report of the Business Advisory Panel and subsequently, when the Director-General of Bord Fáilte indicated the large volume of correspondence between Bord Fáilte and various Government Departments.

In its new structure it is hoped that the Department of Tourism, Fisheries & Forestry can maintain its effective liaison with Bord Fáilte on the basis that the Department has prime responsibility for coordinating other relevant public expenditure and determining policy on tourism and that it supervises Bord Fáilte as its executive arm in the implementation of tourism policy, and its agent in registration and grant matters.

8. The Committee is concerned that, while the rationalisation of the manpower training agencies is undertaken on the lines recommended in an earlier report of the Committee, there may be some diminution of the role of CERT in meeting the training needs of the hotel and catering industry. CERT has the distinction of matching supply of its trainees with demand. It is hoped that suitable institutional arrangements will be made to ensure that, while the benefit of manpower training rationalisation can accrue, this will not be done at the expense of an effective training programme within the tourism industry.

9. The Committee acknowledges the very considerable progress made by Bord Fáilte within the last five years in reorganising its own resources with a view to reducing its overhead cost and increasing its effectiveness as a marketing organisation capable of selling the Irish tourism product. In fact, the Committee was informed that Bord Fáilte has surpassed its own budget in terms of reducing its manpower related expenses. Nevertheless, the Committee is concerned lest, within the range of public expenditure committed to consultancy assignments on behalf of the industry and on behalf of individual hotels and other grant applicants, some expenditures are incurred which might be avoidable without reducing the effectiveness of the organisation or of public expenditure on tourism.

10. The Committee is concerned that, despite the evidence of international growth in car hire and car ferry as part of the holiday package, the Irish product is seriously out of line largely as a result of excise duty and VAT levels. This, together with the very different fiscal climate for investment in tourism compared to other internationally traded goods and services, seems to the Committee to be a key constraint on growth prospects.

Chapter 5 - Recommendations

Given the national importance of job creation and the relatively small expenditure on tourism, the Committee was left with no option but to conclude, despite the already too great burden on the Exchequer, that there was no alternative to pursuing substantial expansion in this industry, even though the Committee recognised this as requiring both increased public expenditure and adjustments to the taxation environment for tourism.

The Committee considers that, without restoring the prospect of significant and sustained growth in tourism, existing public expenditure can not be cost effective for very long. The fact that tourism in common with other indigenous industries has a considerable multiplier effect in the economy and that it is both regionally dispersed, job intensive and involving a large number of small firms marks it out as an industry warranting in our present economic social circumstances, a special investment in its development and growth if that can be shown to be feasible. It is against this background that the following recommendations are made:-

1. That an additional £5m. market development fund be provided for Bord Fáilte on condition that they can, between internal economies and industry contribution, add an additional investment of £1m. to this special market development fund.

Industry contribution and particupation might be taken to include market development costs undertaken by the industry in liaison with Bord Fáilte and Bord Fáilte internal contribution might include savings made on its consultancy and survey budgets, its publication and publicity budget and its contributions to the Regional Tourism Organisations.

2. It is recommended that the Government give a special mandate to the Department of Tourism to make recommendations to any Government Department or State agency involved in the expenditure programme impinging on tourism and that the spending Department should have responsibility for responding to the Department of Tourism recommendations within 30 days, showing good reason if they cannot comply with the recommendation of that Department by adjustments to their existing expenditure programme. Public expenditure programmes of special importance under this heading are:-

the Office of Public Works

the Local authorities and Department of the Environment

the Department of Forestry & Fisheries and the State-sponsored Bodies involved in that area.

the Departments dealing with Culture & Sports

the Department of Communications as it relates to the management of air and sea ports and access policy.

3. In light of the present proposal to amend the legislation governing Bord Fáilte an addendum is recommended giving Bord Failte freedom to appoint public auditors to audit their annual accounts, assigning to the Comptroller & Auditor General the right to undertake the audit at any time with the obligation to do so every five years.

It is further recommended that, in common with all other State-sponsored bodies funded by the Exchequer, Bord Fáilte be required to have its accounts published and laid before the Dáil for the previous full year 90 days before a budget providing additional is considered by the Dáil.

5. Every effort should be made to speed up the process of licensing and approving airline access to Ireland, particularly from markets with a significant tourism potential, and Government policy on access costs which has been stated clearly to favour tourism should not be obviated by commercial State-sponsored Bodies directly involved in access transport. It is understood that this matter is at present being examined by the Sectoral Development Committee established within the Department of the Taoiseach. The Committee, while welcoming this development, regrets the need for it in light of recent Government policy statements on the matter.

6. In light of some of the criticisms of Bord Fáilte heard from interests in the tourism industry, the Committee recommends that Bord Fáilte be seen to serve the interests of all aspects of the tourism industry and, in particular, that it actively encourages the location of major international hotels and related amenities in Ireland, and, in particular, that it takes a lead role in formulating a consortium with a view to establishing a major international convention centre in Ireland.

7. That the necessary investment be undertaken, particularly at seaport terminals, to ensure that the quality of service offered to tourists on arrival in Ireland compares favourably with that offered by the major tourist markets.

8. That, as an additional facility at major seaport terminals and airports, duty-free petrol be offered at the point of entry and exit. This facility could be closed during the peak season and thereby used as a means of encouraging off-peak motor ferry access and to encourage the use of hired vehicles.

9. As an additional inducement to tourists and as a means of removing some part of the differential between road traffic costs in Ireland and elsewhere that excise duty on vehicles used by car hire firms and tour operators for bona fide tourist purposes be free of excise duty to the point and value of sale of cars and buses used for this purpose.

This would have the effect of reducing the cost of cars and buses used for tourist purposes and thereby reducing the rental charges to tourists.

The combination of proposals 8 and 9 is designed to bring road transport in Ireland into line with that of the home countries of tourists as far as possible without fundamentally changing the tax base in Ireland.

10. Since tourism depends on international competitiveness in the same way as the export of goods manufactured in Ireland, it is recommended that a number of steps be taken now with a view to bringing tourism into alignment with other comparable firms by the following means:-

a)apply the manufacturing rate of tax to all tourist firms for a test period of three years;

b)extend the Business Expansion Scheme to include all bona fide tourism firms for a test period of three years;

c)apply the 120% capital allowance to approved expenditure on tourism projects for a test period of three years;

d)allow rates as an advance on income or Corporation Profits Tax for all registered farm guesthouses, guesthouses and caravan parks as a means of providing a positive inducement for registration.

Conditions of registration should require that registered facilities participate in the funding of the Regional Tourism Organisations and the appropriate trade organisation. In this way the concession in rates can be recovered in a saving of Bord Fáilte’s budget by reducing the requirements on it to fund the Regional Tourism Organisations.

11. That legislation be introduced to control signposting or otherwise publicly offering supplementary accommodation by requiring that all guesthouses advertising or displaying a notice comply with Bord Fáilte’s approved standards and contribute a prescribed annual registration fee to its Regional Tourism Organisation.

12. That the consultants, retained to review the tourism industry, be requested in addition:-

a)to determine the measures of tourism value, employment and output to be used by Bord Fáilte and all official agencies;

b)to examine the feasibility of the fiscal and investment proposals contained in this report;

c)to devise a suitable mechanism by which the Department of Tourism can effectively coordinate all public expenditures impinging on tourism.

13. That the Department of Foreign Affairs invite Bord Fáilte to prepare an annual briefing for each Irish Embassy overseas indicating how they can best respond to queries and avail of opportunities to promote Ireland’s tourism industry.

14. That an additional capital fund of £10m. be allocated to Bord Fáilte to be used by way of grant-in-aid for Regional Tourism Organisations and others willing to invest in interpretation centres, waterways, angling and sporting amenities, signposting, leisure centres.

15. If it proves necessary, following the adjustments provided for within these recommendations, to make some special arrangements to attract institutional investment in tourism, that this matter be given careful consideration and to include consideration of a special investment programme in the Border areas which might be in a position to draw on the “Special Border Areas Programme Fund”.

Acknowledgements

Many people have helped in advising the Committee and giving information, evidence and insights to make it possible for them to prepare this report on tourism.

The Committee wishes to acknowledge in particular the assistance of the Business Advisory Panel and of its special tourism group under the chairmanship of Mr. P.V.Doyle. The other members of that group which prepared a very useful briefing document which is contained in the Appendix were:-

Mr. Conor McCarthy of the Ryan Hotel Group,

Mr. Patrick Meade of Roma Food Products,

Mr. H. Sheridan of Cement-Roadstone Holdings and

Mr. Desmond Miller of Stokes Kennedy Crowley, who appeared before the Committee to discuss the briefing document.

The Committee also had the continuing cooperation of Mr. Michael McNulty, Director-General of Bord Fáilte and his staff together with the staff of Aer Lingus who made a special request to have their evidence heard in public session. The Committee also acknowledges the cooperation and support of Mr. Fionán Ó Muircheartaigh, Assistant Secretary with special responsibility for tourism and the staff in the Department of Tourism who were most helpful in responding both to formal and informal inquiries.

The Committee is especially pleased to note that a major consultancy assignment has been undertaken which will include a review of public expenditure on tourism and express the hope that its report, in complying with its role in reviewing public expenditure programmes as part of the parliamentary supervision process, will be seen as pointing to some of the key elements which require a substantially different approach to public expenditure geared towards stimulating the tourism industry.

The Committee is very conscious that our international image as a holiday haven has been seriously threatened for almost two decades now by the world media coverage of events in Northern Ireland and that as a by-product of those events and other factors the security of visitors on our streets may also have been affected.

It says something for the tourist industry and what we have to offer that it has held its own in real terms through that period. But there is now urgent need for new growth and new investment in the industry.

The international support for and media response to the Anglo-Irish Agreement and the dramatic drop in access cost from U.K. which we hope will soon be reflected in fares from Europe and Australia combine to create a new opportunity for 1987.

This report tells how, in the views of this Committee, public sector involvement in Tourism could be recast and expanded to respond cost-effectively to this challenge, so that it will be followed by private and institutional investment and jobs.

Finally, I wish to convey my thanks to the Members of the Committee who took a special interest in this review of tourism expenditure and worked through the various background papers, briefings and documentation before finally adopting this report.

Michael Keating T.D.,

Chairman

16 January, 1987.