Sean Barrett (Independent)

I welcome the Minister of State. His energy and enthusiasm are always admirable. In fact, people need to look out in Leinster House when he is approaching as he moves at such speed.

My concern with regard to this Bill is whether there is anything else in it that is new. Tourism is a business where revenues are down 31% from their peak, the number of tourists is down 24% and the number of jobs lost is 40,000. The figure of 180,000 employed in the industry mentioned by the Minister of State once stood at 220,000. The statements from the agencies show far too much complacency. Irish tourism is in an emergency situation. My concern with regard to the Bill is that it seeks an extra €85 million. Beginning with the words "An Act to amend", in 85 words it looks for an extra €85 million. In a situation where we must borrow money from the IMF and others, we must ask if this is good value for money and why the tourism sector is failing so badly.

Looking at the numbers provided by Oireachtas researchers, we see that when revenue was collapsing by 31% and numbers by 24%, the two agencies, Fáilte Ireland and Tourism Ireland, spent nearly €500 million on themselves, 63% of which was on general operating expenses. As a former director of Bord Fáilte, this strikes me as significant. That organisation was tremendously obsessed with increasing its budget and engaging in PR on its own behalf and seemed to be divorced from the industry it was supposed to be serving. I would be worried about any agency that was spending such a significant amount on operating expenses and suggest the Minister of State should consider getting a good slice of that money and investing it in projects to back up his proposals.

I have also always had concerns with regard to marketing spend as approximately one third of the budget goes on that. A question was asked as to why, if when somebody stays in a hotel and the hotel gets the money, there is an onus on the Government to spend a budget of more than €150 million over three years marketing those people's products. Does this produce a dependency culture in Irish tourism so that instead of putting money into the Exchequer where it is so badly needed, these organisations are always looking for grants? As the Minister of State knows well, some of the marketing trips abroad attract adverse criticism.

The Department needs to radicalise Fáilte Ireland and Tourism Ireland as they have been too complacent in the face of what is, by any standards, a drastic decline in employment in the sector. They have a large budget which does not seem to be giving us any results and it is for that reason I have submitted an amendment to the Bill. Given the record of these two bodies in spending a large amount of money, almost €500 million in a three-year period, I am concerned that we could be throwing good money after bad since this spend has resulted in 31% less revenue in the sector. These bodies must prove to the Department, to the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform and to the IMF that this is a useful way to spend the money and that the industry can revive. Mistakes have been made and people have mentioned the NAMA hotels and that the National Convention Centre will involve an annual loss. It is all right to mention it as a vital part of infrastructure, but it imposes a burden on the Exchequer. It will be interesting to see what the loss will be.

Everybody is concerned by whether tourists see Ireland as good value for money. In 2000, some 23% did, but by 2009 this number was down to 3%. The number of tourists who thought it was poor, fair or very poor value for money rose from 39% to 71%. There is a lot that needs to happen in this regard and I admire the Minister of State's energy to make it happen. There are a lot of complacent people in offices close to the Minister of State's which need a very big shake up. That applies to this sector also. It is okay to say the tourism industry has great potential, but it has performed abysmally since the middle part of the last decade. Cranking it up again might require radical action and all the energy the Minister of State embodies. Is that urgency matched in the industry, the Department and the promotional bodies? They strike me as being in denial about the extent of the decline and do not exhibit the same energy as the Minister of State in seeking to reverse the decline.