Dáil debates

Thursday, 22 September 2011

National Tourism Development Authority (Amendment) Bill 2011: Second Stage

 

2:00 pm

Photo of Catherine MurphyCatherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)

This is a very short Bill but which is the subject of a very long debate. It is intended to further develop the tourism industry, which is to be welcomed.

As I listen to the debate, it is clear that we are all referring to our own areas. However, the collection of the proposals shows the range of what is available nationally. Sometimes the local becomes the national when everything is knitted together. I have heard some really good ideas and I am sure the Minister of State will have a difficulty in confining them to the amount of money available.

While we are doing well from a tourism point of view, I would like to highlight some things we could do better. One of our biggest tourism destinations is the Cliffs of Moher where the visitors' centre is absolutely beautiful and knits well into the landscape. However, there was a massive overspend when the centre was developed and the prices have now been pitched to recoup that overspend rather than at the pockets of visitors. While the staff are great, one of the biggest let-downs is the Atlantic Edge Exhibition. An animated bird flies around which could represent anywhere in the world. However, the visual landscape has a real wow factor. Why can a helicopter not go up and show people what the cliffs look like from a distance? I do not think the exhibition is what the tourist expects to see. It certainly was a let-down for me, and I think the same is true for others. We can do better. We need to take stock of the lack of engagement with tourists and the lack of responsiveness. At the Cliffs of Moher visitors are charged according to the number of people in a car, not per car. When added to the cost of food, this is prohibitive. While this is a great destination, we seem to be telling people they should go there, while warning them that it is costly. We might, thereby, be eliminating some repeat business. We must pay attention to this.

Those tourists who come to Ireland now spend less than in previous years and they choose cheaper options. The bus tour sector has been holding its own. We spent years developing Kilkenny Castle and the lovely walkway in front of it. However, it is very difficult to park a bus there. The development was not designed with buses in mind, yet the buses are bringing people to spend time there. Let us be a little more thoughtful.

There appears to be an old boys' network with regard to who is asked for ideas. Some recent entrants to the tourism market need to be included. The cost of inclusion in Fáilte Ireland brochures is prohibitive for smaller companies which want to get a foothold. A tourist will expect to receive impartial advice in a tourist office, but the brochures may only contain information on the products that can afford to be included. We do not allow the new generation to come through. We are doing well, but we could do better. The same could be said of OPW sites. The same operators continue to be facilitated. New operators could be brought to these wonderful sites which have been developed using public money.

Arthur's Day could become our second St. Patrick's Day. As today is Arthur's Day, let us not scoff at the idea. The House must pardon me if I refer to a local connection. Arthur Guinness was born in Celbridge, brewed his first pint in Leixlip and is buried in Ardclough, which are all in my constituency. We have some claim to him. The Guinness Storehouse is a huge tourist attraction, but we do not take it that stage further.

We could do things that do not compete with each other but are complementary. In my constituency Carton House, Castletown House and Leixlip Castle are all marketed separately. We do not look at these attractions from the point of view of a tourist who wants to have things packaged. We need to make connections.

I have a difficulty with the term "product development". Visitors come to Ireland for the friendliness of the people, the landscape and the culture. These are much more than products.

We often take a fragmented approach to doing things. One of my biggest hobbies is researching family history. I have been doing this for years and constantly find new bits and pieces to add to the richness of my family history. Everybody has this richness. I have almost completed writing a guidebook to family history and hope to do so when I get time. I noted today that the website ancestry.co.uk has introduced 40 million records onto the site. Why are we not doing some of these things ourselves? I have a long Dublin family background. The last of my family to settle in Dublin arrived in the 1870s, but I have found linkages in Limerick, Westmeath, Belfast, Omagh and Laois. I know at first hand the importance of finding these origins. I have gone back to those places on numerous occasions and bought every guidebook and history book I could find about them. I have spent money in these locations and will be a repeat tourist in them. I think I am the prototype for others to do the same thing. We are punching above our weight in this regard. David McWilliams put it together when he talked about the Irish Diaspora and Ireland being the mother ship. Genealogy could be the way to introduce people to a much richer engagement with Ireland and provide for repeat tourism.

Because of the loss of records, particularly what remained of 19th century census records, in the destruction of the Public Record Office of Ireland in 1922, there is a perception that it is very difficult to trace Irish family histories. There is, in fact, a huge source of information, if one looks for it. Much of it has been put together through State investment and voluntarism and we are giving this away. I acknowledge the approach taken by the former Government and the motivation of the current Minister in making the genealogical records freely available on-line. The 1901 and 1911 census returns have been very well used.

Let me give some examples of things we have done which we could have done better. We spent €10 million digitising the register of births, marriages and deaths in the General Register Office in Roscommon. Most of these records commenced in 1864. I recently asked, in a parliamentary question, why I was able to search the index, on which we spent the €10 million, on-line through the website of the Church of Latter-Day Saints but could not do it on the website of the General Register Office. The GRO website does not even mention the possibility of searching the records on-line through the website of the Church of Latter-Day Saints. I have no problem with the church having the records because it has been a terrific resource worldwide. The GRO website tells one it is necessary to queue up in the research room of the office, search the indexes manually in the big books and then request the record. That could be done much more effectively as we are not making use of that resource. I have no problem with charging people for searching some of the records, but we charge €6 to do a particular search. When I started it cost €2, then it was raised to €4 and now it costs €6. That is fine if someone is not trying to research a common name like Mary Murphy or Patrick Byrne, where one would have to do 20 searches to get the right record. Twenty searches costs €120 and that is prohibitive. Let us be careful about how we charge for these services.

Digitising these records is very labour intensive, but it may well be an initiative that is worth the investment. We could do it through something like a FÁS scheme to advance the process. I was also told that there could be privacy and fraud issues when making these records available online. Why were these not issues when we were putting the census records online? The same range of information is being provided. We may have to limit the years back to a certain date, say 1930, in order that we are providing privacy, but anyone can walk off the street and get those records if they want them; therefore, there is no privacy issue in that instance. We are not being sensible about this. Griffith's Valuation is available on a free to view basis, but other records like the Cancelled Valuation Books could be digitised.

I commend the staff of the National Archives for their work, but the National Archives building is too small. I have had the pleasure of going to Kew on several occasions and searching in the British Public Record Office, and it is a huge tourism attraction. We do not have that kind of interface here. We have a fragmented approach. There is a genealogical service in the National Library which is really about pointing people in the right direction. Instead of our service being a one-stop-shop, we give people a map and tell them to go here, there and everywhere. We are not really putting our best foot forward.

There seems to be some dispute on whether www.ancestry.co.uk has a legal entitlement to put the church records on-line, but those records are already on-line in most cases, and I know Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú had an involvement in the Family History Foundation. Much of the money that goes through its pay per view goes back to developing the records. We need that money to develop the rest of the records, but I am not sure we are giving ourselves the opportunity to do this.

I was lucky with my own family history in that there was a Guinness archive that I could search, and I am sure there are other industries which could add to that source. If we had the records office to do that, it would be possible. I wonder if we have a NAMA building that could hold a bigger and better National Archives. Boland's Mill will be an embarrassment in 2016. Are there some things down there that could be used for archives that have a historical connection? Everyone is thinking outside the box on this issue.

There are many records, such as the railway records and the Garda records that go back to Royal Irish Constabulary and Dublin Metropolitan Police records, to which we are not paying attention. If we really cared about the Diaspora, wanted them to be connected and saw them as a resource, we would have to be looking at doing something to take the lead in co-ordinating some of the efforts that are being made in this area. Much of it is happening with volunteers. It may well be that a small amount of effort in assisting those volunteers could produce serious returns.

I am a bit obsessive about this, but there are great opportunities in it. I would like us to take those opportunities rather than them being easily taken away by a site that has the resources required, such as that which I described. We could do more with it ourselves.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.