ADMIN QUESTION OF THE WEEK 1

Is tourism worth saving and if so what would the Candidates do to save it?

No takers yet so I'll have go !
Yes, I believe tourism is definitely worth saving. It has a number of benefits,
a) It brings money into the island which we sorely need.
b)It provides a number of jobs with corresponding ETI and SI contributions.
c)It helps towards airport and harbour running costs and in theory helps to hold down travel costs to and from the Island (although one does wonder!)
d) It is an alterrnative economy to finance.
e)I believe it probably contributes quite well to the finances of museums etc which are probably not used so much by locals, it helps to keep these facilities open.
It faces three major problems, cost of getting here, decreasing bed numbers and lack of investment. The tourist board of yesteryear, in their infinite wisdom, sought to get rid of the low budget tourist, this had a knock on effect in numbers travelling and ergo travel costs and saw the closure of most Guest Houses and low budget hotels.
What can we do ? Keep up pressure on carriers to offer a good, frequent service at a reasonable price. I don't think open skies policy would work. We do not have the bed capacity to tempt other "low budget" airlines, if they did operate seasonally it would be a case of cherry picking and regular operators would suffer as would the service.
I'm not sure what tourism's budget it these days, maybe some of it could be redirected into offering development subsidies. I am guessing that with Zero-10 this may already be offering some incentive to plough back profits rather than distribute them.
Perhaps more leniency could be given on housing licences for management if none available locally.
The above are all off the top of the head ideas, to have a proper look at it would need access to all the figures and obviously input from the tourist industry.
Cheers,
Paul D

YES. FIX THE RUNWAY!

cheaper flights,cheaper sea travel.try and encourage the bucket and spade brigade back.guernsey tried to go up market with hotel accommodation and got rid of lots of the little guest houses. mind you everything that tourists thought were cheaper here no longer are.of course with a lot of the uk chains charging vat plus there is no advantage to spending money here as it will cost the same if not less in the uk.

I think we are probably all agreed on two things - tourism is well worth saving, and in recent years Guernsey has done too little to save it.

As for how to improve matters, I agree with much of Paul Domaille's post, although I would attach even more importance to the cost of getting here.

I would also wish to see the Ports Holding Account closed and the ports treated as strategic assets and funded from general revenue instead. This would require greater levels of public investment in the ports, but would likely help in trying to tempt more operators to run more routes at cheaper cost.

Commerce & Employment - which has responsibility for tourism - was keen on that reform.
Public Services - which operates the ports - was not.

I hope that can be resolved in C&E's favour, hopefully in the life of the next House, but if not asap thereafter.

I was not aware that Tourism was in need of saving.

Having admired recent investment at OGH, Fermain Valley, Moores Group, Fleur du Jardin, Bella Luce, Douvres, Barberie, Fregate and others, I feel certain that there is plenty of future - as long as it is in the right hands.

States members and departments must recognise that a thriving hospitality industry is essential for the well being of all islanders and particularly finance and retail.

In the immediate future the airport runway must be resurfaced, key hotel sites like Penninsula, Vazon Bay, Idlerocks, preserved, and States owned attractions and property (Cliffs and gardens) properly financed.

Finally, in order to ensure a prosperous industry, a co-operative publicity and marketing group combining all sectors of industry and state must be given the role and budget to promote our island.