Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 37: To ask the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the position regarding his recent announcement that three new super-regions are to be created from existing rural tourism authorities to promote rural tourism; the efforts he is making to encourage more tourism to the regions; the amount of money to be allocated to fund new tourism initiatives in each of the new super-regions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8180/06]

Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 41: To ask the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism his plans for the creation and funding of three new super-regions for tourism in this country; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8242/06]

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 61: To ask the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the position regarding the new €1 million innovation fund to support new developments and stimulate investment across the three new super-regions that have been created out of the existing rural tourism authorities; the precise schemes this money will be used to fund; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8185/06]

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 37, 41 and 61 together.

Having good levels of tourism growth throughout the regions has become an increasing challenge for tourism policy. As a result, Fáilte Ireland and Tourism Ireland have incorporated a strong regional focus in their current strategies. In this year's Estimates, I obtained substantial additional funding to help the agencies address this challenge. Last week, I attended the launch by Tourism Ireland and Fáilte Ireland of a number of marketing initiatives — the super-regions initiative, the opportunities fund and the local area marketing fund — which are designed to help improve tourism growth throughout the regions.

The operation of these programmes is a day-to-day matter for the tourism agencies and the regional tourism authorities. Details on the local area fund are available on www.failteireland.ie and fuller information on the other programmes will emerge as the final details are agreed between the agencies, the regional tourism authorities and regional industry.

In case there is any confusion, let me be absolutely clear about last week's announcement in regard to the super-regions initiative. A super-region is a marketing concept, not an administrative structure. Therefore, the super-regions initiative is not about creating new structures at a regional level. It is purely a marketing initiative created by the tourism agencies and designed to present Ireland's regions more coherently to overseas consumers. I addressed the current state of play with regard to the restructuring of the regional tourism authorities in my earlier reply. The super-regions initiative will not impact on these structures.

At present, the country is divided into seven regional tourism structures for administrative purposes. These administrative divisions may not be optimum for marketing purposes overseas. Concepts like "Ireland west", "Ireland south" and "Ireland east" may have a greater chance of resonating with the foreign consumer than, for example, "Ireland south-east" or "midlands and east coast tourism". Basically, it is about making the marketing of regions simpler and, it is to be hoped, more effective.

From a policy perspective, I have long held the view that there is considerable scope for the existing tourism regions to work more closely together and to pool some of their marketing resources. The pooling of resources allows for campaigns with greater impact and also improves the chances of leveraging more funds from the industry, which is always desirable from an Exchequer perspective. Shannon, Ireland west and the north-west region could be said to have pioneered this concept last year when they came together to undertake a special strategic marketing initiative. The exposure and impact achieved by these three regions through pooling their funds and other resources far exceeded the sum of what they could have achieved individually.

It is important, however, that this initiative is not viewed in isolation but rather as one element of a much larger regional strategy being pursued by Tourism Ireland and Fáilte Ireland, several elements of which are designed to heighten the regional impact of Ireland's marketing activities both nationally and overseas. From the extra funding secured for tourism marketing, the agencies will maintain an opportunities fund of €1 million to allow them to respond to regional opportunities which may arise during the course of the year and which are not anticipated in current programmes. Fáilte Ireland is also introducing a new €1 million local area marketing fund to support the industry in generating additional business in 2006 and 2007. Full details of this fund, with application forms, are to be found on the Fáilte Ireland website.

Fáilte Ireland has an innovation fund of approximately €1 million, the immediate priority of which is to encourage innovation and investment across a range of new products with a strong emphasis on products designed to attract and hold visitors outside the mature urban tourism areas. Full details of this fund, with guidelinesand application forms, are to be found atwww.failteireland.ie.

Apart from providing a policy impetus in addressing the regional issue, I have no role in the administration of the funds and initiatives, and neither I nor my Department decide on applications to be supported or the detailed content of relevant marketing programmes. On the basis that activities and attractions — things to do and see — are central to increasing visitor spend, Fáilte Ireland will continue to assist in product development, including developing and promoting looped walks, angling, festivals, cycling routes and equestrian, golfing and water-based activities.

As I stated in response to an earlier question, these initiatives are being taken against a backdrop of a restructuring and refocusing of the delivery of tourism at regional level that will effectively lead to the provision of a one-stop-shop for the tourism industry in the regions, with strong regional representation.

Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree with the idea of centralising, for want of a better description, the different regions. However, I cannot understand how Ireland east can include Dublin with the other counties. From a marketing perspective, if an overseas visitor receives a listing in regard to Dublin, the midlands, the east and counties Cavan and Monaghan, that visitor will focus on Dublin. We will not break down the barriers that have existed for the short-term visitor who believes Dublin is the place to visit, and counties such as Kildare and Wicklow will lose out given the proposed format.

I cannot believe that Dublin was not given a separate identity to the east region. If that were the case, we would have a level playing pitch for the east region. The midlands is suffering at present. Visitors know of the south and the west and simply travel through the midlands. Particular efforts to draw in visitors have been made in Kildare with regard to race meetings at Naas, the Curragh, the Punchestown festival and elsewhere. I agree with the new initiative because it reduces the number of tourism areas from eight but I cannot understand the logic of including Dublin with the rest of the eastern region. Dublin will be the central focus, which will reduce the impact of other areas in Leinster and counties Cavan and Monaghan in Ulster. Dublin should have been removed and an Ireland east region should have been created, separate from Dublin, to accompany Ireland west and Ireland south.

The current proposal will do nothing for the other counties in the eastern region. Given that only €1 million is to be provided and given the impetus of the Dublin area with regard to tourism, little funding will be left for the other areas, which include all of Leinster and Cavan and Monaghan. It does not seem logical to break down that amount of funding over such a large area. The focus of tourism seems to be on Dublin and the south and west. The midlands and the east coast counties of Wexford, Wicklow, Meath and Louth suffer accordingly.

The Minister said that the initiative is only a marketing concept and that the input of his Department is to provide funding to Fáilte Ireland. Does he not agree that the structure will do nothing to improve the focus on attracting tourists to the midlands, east coast and counties Cavan and Monaghan? Given the wide area involved, Dublin attracts most of the tourists at present. It has been said repeatedly in the House that we have not been able to draw tourists away from Dublin to the regions, which is why bed and breakfast accommodation providers are suffering. However, we are now placing them first in this regard. We put Dublin, the midlands, the east and Cavan and Monaghan after them. We did not even put them last, which might have given some context to the other areas. Can anything be done in this regard? Does the Minister agree Dublin should have been taken out of the super regions, leaving the other three regions to be funded accordingly?

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy and I will need to agree to disagree. If I had taken Dublin out of the eastern region, I would have needed to ensure Dublin was marketed on its own. The market has completely changed. We now have cash-rich and time-poor visitors coming to Ireland. People are booking at shorter notice and coming for shorter breaks. I will deal specifically with the eastern region as requested by Deputy Wall. Dublin is the third most popular capital in terms of visitors. We have indications that it is becoming even more popular among visitors from the European Union and even beyond. I hope it will soon have a new conference centre resulting in additional visitors to Dublin.

Dublin is marketed with the east to ensure those interested in coming to Dublin are aware of an entire hinterland extending far beyond Dublin, which is of equal if not greater interest to a potential visitor depending on his or her preference. We are marketing not just Dublin, but the entire eastern region. To this extent the eastern region outside Dublin will have the advantage of benefiting from the attractiveness of Dublin. Equally visitors who may prefer to be predominantly in the countryside can decide to visit Dublin also, thereby benefiting Dublin. Dublin and the eastern region are marketed together to ensure they can gain a mutual benefit. People understand that they can compare and contrast and will have alternatives by coming to the eastern region. They can have an urban or rural experience or can have both.

It makes sense to promote the area as a region. In an international context we are seen as a very small dot on the periphery of Europe. Dividing the country into three super regions such as these makes perfect sense from a marketing perspective. Introducing super regions is not the only initiative. Fáilte Ireland is investing €60 million in promoting regional tourism in 2006. I believe this will be a record year for Irish tourism, all things being equal. I am interested in seeing a greater degree of equivalence between the regions and the sectors. In other words I want to see less disparity between the larger urban centres and the rural regions, which is best achieved by marketing each of the super regions individually to provide the contrast.

Paul Gogarty (Dublin Mid West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Like Deputy Wall, I have major concerns about marketing the eastern region together with Dublin. Given the Minister has agreed to disagree on that matter, I wish to place more emphasis on the midlands, an area of lakes, plains, rivers, mountains and bogs, which comes last in terms of tourism revenue and promotion even though it is one of the last remaining unspoilt regions in the country. All of a sudden the midlands have been swallowed into nothingness. In this context, how does the Minister plan to promote the midlands as opposed to the coastal region, if the midlands per se are not to be promoted?

Internationally it might make sense to spend €1 million changing the website and having nice glossy leaflets printed focusing on the southern region and referring to Wexford, Waterford, Cork and Kerry. While it might be acceptable for an American flying into Shannon Airport to think Gorey and Cahirciveen are twinned in some kind of cultural heritage, what about Irish people who remain a significant part of the tourism market? Will there be separate marketing of regions for Irish people or will we need to put up with the globalised system that throws in Wexford with Kerry, when as every Dub who goes to Courtown knows, there is a big difference between that area and Cork or Kerry? They should not necessarily be included in the same region.

The Minister mentioned the cash-rich and time-poor visitor. Without a proper public transport infrastructure, how is one supposed to get from Wexford to Kerry in any regional context? Given the location of Shannon Airport, it would make more sense to link Kerry with Limerick and Clare. As no rail network of any substance links the areas, people need to drive and it takes a long time to drive from Wexford town to Tralee. The Minister should ask his colleagues in Government to focus more on the product being delivered.

I had the privilege of going to Tralee for a Green Party national council meeting last Saturday. Owing to various delays, it took five hours to get down and the return journey took four and a half hours. To try to save time for everyone, I asked to be served eight slices of toast. The Irish person behind the counter said: "Get out of it. I'm too busy." He gave me half the amount. I gave him a €50 note and he looked at me. When I asked him what side of the bed he got out of, he said: "What's wrong with you? I'm doing you a favour". Meanwhile the Lithuanian or Latvian person serving from the trolley was the epitome of politeness and courtesy. While much remains to be done in upgrading our network so visitors can get to the regions, much needs to be done in educating and training our staff so the traditional Irish welcome, which is part of what we are, can be maintained. Otherwise we will have nothing to market.

Would the Minister agree that while it is all very well to apply the bells and whistles and introduce new globalised southern and eastern regions, if the core product no longer remains it is not worth a damn?

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The core product very much remains. Last night I presented the CIE Tours International awards and I could not believe the satisfaction ratings, with up to 96% of people saying they were either satisfied or very satisfied with their holiday in Ireland and that they would recommend Ireland to a friend. We have probably the best product in the world.

Regarding the regions and rural tourism, the object of the exercise is to get more people into the regions. We are involved in an aggressive marketing campaign of the regions concerned, emphasising their respective advantages and attractions.

Paul Gogarty (Dublin Mid West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is this campaign also aimed at Irish people?

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A very serious marketing campaign is ongoing in Ireland, which we are not ignoring. While foreign revenue generated as a result of tourism stands at €4.3 billion, revenue from Ireland was at its highest level last year at between €1.3 billion and €1.5 billion, which represents a very significant market. The significance of the Irish market is not lost on me. The Irish tourist, more than any other, tends to go to rural areas, which is why we are making sure we market Ireland within Ireland.

On the other measures that we are taking to ensure that such places as the midlands benefit from the record numbers of visitors, we asked PricewaterhouseCoopers, through Fáilte Ireland, to examine our structures. It did so and reported to us that the seven regional authorities were fine as administrative entities but that it would be necessary for them to become much more involved than at present. It explained that it was necessary for them to engage in product development, enterprise support and, crucially, targeted marketing. We intend to implement the PricewaterhouseCoopers recommendations and, in that context, Mr. Fergus Flood has been asked to chair an implementation group, which he is doing quite successfully.

Those recommendations should start to be acted on this summer. I am not saying that all the work will be completed this summer, but they should start to get rolled out then and be tangible so that the original tourism structures will be able to deliver what had been delivered mainly by Fáilte Ireland centrally. In short, we are doing everything possible to ensure that there is less disparity between the greater conurbations and the regions and less disparity within sectors, for example, the hotel and bed and breakfast sector.