final volume 2 tourism · and attractions, robin broke, director, the association of leading...

HC 133-II [incorporating HC 983-i, Session 2006–07]

Published on 10 July 2008 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited

£0.00

House of Commons

Culture, Media and Sport Committee

Tourism

Eighth Report of Session 2007–08

Volume II

Oral and written evidence

Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 24 June 2008

The Culture, Media and Sport Committee

The Culture, Media and Sport Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and its associated public bodies.

Current membership

Mr John Whittingdale MP (Conservative, Maldon and East Chelmsford) [Chairman] Janet Anderson MP (Labour, Rossendale and Darwen) Mr Philip Davies MP (Conservative, Shipley) Mr Nigel Evans MP (Conservative, Ribble Valley) Paul Farrelly MP (Labour, Newcastle-under-Lyme) Mr Mike Hall MP (Labour, Weaver Vale) Alan Keen MP (Labour, Feltham and Heston) Rosemary McKenna MP (Labour, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East) Adam Price MP (Plaid Cymru, Carmarthen East and Dinefwr) Mr Adrian Sanders MP (Liberal Democrat, Torbay) Helen Southworth MP (Labour, Warrington South)

Powers

The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk.

Publications

The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/culture__media_and_sport.cfm

Committee staff

The current staff of the Committee are Kenneth Fox (Clerk), Martin Gaunt (Second Clerk), Anna Watkins/Lisa Wrobel (Committee Assistants), Rowena Macdonald (Secretary), Jim Hudson (Senior Office Clerk) and Laura Humble (Media Officer).

Contacts

All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 6188; fax 020 7219 2031; the Committee’s email address is [email protected]

Witnesses

Tuesday 23 October 2007 Page

Colin Dawson, Chief Executive, British Association of Leisure Parks, Piers and Attractions, Robin Broke, Director, the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions, Gregor Hutcheon, Assistant Director for Policy and Campaigns, National Trust, and Dr Simon Thurley, Chief Executive, English Heritage

Ev 13

Peter Hampson, Director, British Resorts and Destinations Association, Suzanne Malcolm, Tourism Officer, Oxford City Council, Steve Vinson, Head of Economic and Community Services, Caradon District Council and Steve Weaver, Chief Executive, Blackpool Council

Ev 42

Tuesday 27 November 2007

Ros Pritchard, Chairman, Kurt Janson, Policy Director, Tony Millns, Board Member, and Brigid Simmonds, Board Member, Tourism Alliance

Ev 59

Juliet Williams, Chairman, South West Regional Development Agency, Jeff Alexander, Director of Global Enterprise, South East England Development Agency, James Berresford, Director of Tourism, North West Regional Development Agency

Ev 82

Thursday 18 December 2007

Martin Singfield, Finance Director, Visit London and Craig Beaumont, Public Affairs Manager, Visit London

Ev 95

Rhodri Glyn Thomas, Assembly Member, Welsh Assembly Minister for Heritage, Jonathan Jones, Director of Tourism and Marketing, VisitWales, Peter Lederer CBE, Chairman, VisitScotland and Chris Maguire, Corporate Affairs Manager, VisitScotland

Ev 118

Tuesday 8 January 2008

Bob Cotton, Chief Executive, British Hospitality Association, Rob Hayward, Chief Executive, British Beer and Pub Association, and Brian Wisdom, Chief Executive, People 1st

Ev 130

Stephen Dowd, Chief Executive, UKinbound Ev 143

Tuesday 29 January 2008

Grant Hearn, Chief Executive, and Greg Dawson, Director of Communications, Travelodge

Ev 150

Professor John Fletcher, Head of the International Centre for Tourism and Hospitality Research, Bournemouth University, and Professor Victor Middleton OBE, former member of the DCMS Steering Group for the Allnutt Review of Tourism Statistics

Ev 159

Tuesday 5 February 2008

Christopher Rodrigues CBE, Chairman, Tom Wright CBE, Chief Executive, and Bernard Donoghue, Head of Public and Government Affairs, VisitBritain, and Hugh Taylor, Chairman, VisitEngland

Ev 181

Thursday 28 February 2008

Rt Hon Margaret Hodge MP MBE, Minister of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport

Ev 210

Wednesday 12 March 2008

Aviva Pearson, Director of Tourism, Torbay Council, Alan Robinson, Strategic Director (Community), South Hams District Council, and Malcolm Bell, Chief Executive, Southwest Tourism

Ev 224

Lynne Hookings, Chairman, Torbay Tourism Forum, John Milne Home, Secretary, Tamar Valley Tourism Association and Moray Bowater, General Manager, Helpful Holidays

Ev 241

List of written evidence Page

1 British Association of Leisure Parks, Piers and Attractions (BALPPA) Ev 1 2 Association of Leading Visitor Attractions (ALVA) Ev 4 3 National Trust Ev 6 4 English Heritage Ev 11 5 British Resorts and Destinations Association (BRADA) Ev 24 6 Oxford City Council Ev 33 7 Caradon District Council Ev 35 8 Blackpool Council Ev 39 9 Tourism Alliance Ev 52 10 Regional Development Agency Tourism Leads Group Ev 70 11 Northwest Regional Development Agency Ev 76 12 Visit London Ev 90; Ev 103 13 Mayor of London and the London Development Agency (LDA) Ev 93 14 Department of Heritage, Welsh Assembly Government Ev 104 15 VisitScotland Ev 107 16 British Hospitality Association Ev 126 17 British Beer and Pub Association (BBPA) Ev 128; Ev 142 18 Travelodge Ev 148 19 Professors John E Fletcher and Victor TC Middleton Ev 157; Ev 161; Ev 162 20 Professor Victor T C Middleton Ev 161 21 VisitBritain and the England Marketing Advisory Board Ev 163

22 VisitBritain Ev 194 23 Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) Ev 195 24 Torbay Council Ev 220 25 South Hams District Council Ev 222 26 Tamar Valley Tourism Association (TAVATA) Ev 235 27 Helpful Holidays Ltd Ev 236 28 Destination Performance UK (DP UK) Ev 250 29 Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) Ev 252 30 British Tourism Partnership Ev 255 31 Margaret Blake Ev 258 32 Business In Sport and Leisure Ltd (BISL) Ev 259 33 Guild of Registered Tourist Guides Ev 261 34 Local Government Association (LGA) Ev 265 35 Capital Region Tourism (CRT) Ev 268 36 Tourism Management Institute (TMI) Ev 271 37 Confederation of Passenger Transport (CPT) Ev 275 38 Rt Revd Colin Fletcher OBE, Acting Bishop of Oxford Ev 276 39 Association of Tourism in Higher Education (ATHE) Ev 276 40 United Kingdom National Commission for UNESCO Ev 281 41 Country Land and Business Association Ev 283 42 English Association of Self Catering Operators (EASCO) Ev 286 43 Church Heritage Forum Ev 288 44 Tourism South East (TSE) Ev 291 45 Ramblers’ Association Ev 293 46 Institute of Tourist Guiding Ev 295 47 Pilgrims’ Association Ev 298 48 Museums, Libraries and Archives Council Ev 299 49 Churches Regional Council, Yorkshire and the Humber (CRCYH) Ev 305 50 Museums Association Ev 309 51 Tourism Society Ev 310 52 Tourism West Midlands/Advantage West Midlands Ev 315 53 Derwent Valley Mills Partnership (DVMP) Ev 323 54 Association of English Cathedrals (AEC) Ev 325 55 Northern Ireland Tourist Board (NITB) Ev 327 56 Wales Tourism Alliance/ Tourism Society Wales Ev 330 57 Tussauds Group Ev 336 58 Civic Trust Ev 337 59 British Amusement Catering Trades Association (BACTA) Ev 339; Ev 418 60 MSc Students in Tourism Management, Leeds Metropolitan University Ev 342 61 Scottish Chambers of Commerce and Northern Ireland Chamber of Commerce and

Industry Ev 344

62 Tourism Tyne and Wear Area Ev 347 63 Shakespeare Country, South Warwickshire Tourism Ltd Ev 349 64 Bournemouth Tourism Management Board Ev 353 65 Sacred Britain Tourism Partnership Ev 356

66 City of York Council Ev 359 67 Tate Ev 361 68 Historic Houses Association Ev 362 69 Natural England Ev 370 70 English National Park Authorities Association Ev 373 71 Welsh Assembly Government Ev 377 72 National Museum Directors’ Conference (NMDC) Ev 380 73 West Dorset District Council Ev 381 74 Pembrokeshire County Council Ev 382 75 Penwith District Council Ev 384 76 Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council Ev 385 77 Highland Council Ev 388 78 East Lindsey District Council Ev 391 79 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Ev 393 80 Bath and North East Somerset Council Ev 396 81 Suffolk Coastal District Council Ev 403 82 Thanet District Council Ev 405 83 Hilton Ev 407 84 City of Edinburgh Council Ev 410 85 Glasgow City Council Ev 416 86 Noble Organisation Ev 417 87 Burnham Pavilion Ltd Ev 420 88 Barry Cole Ev 421 89 Torbay Development Agency Ev 422

List of unprinted written evidence

The following memoranda have been reported to the House, but to save printing costs they have not been printed and copies have been placed in the House of Commons Library, where they may be inspected by Members. Other copies are in the Parliamentary Archives, and are available to the public for inspection. Requests for inspection should be addressed to The Parliamentary Archives, Houses of Parliament, London SW1A 0PW (tel. 020 7219 3074). Opening hours are from 9.30 am to 5.00 pm on Mondays to Fridays.

Donald Insall

Independent Turner Society

South West Regional Assembly

Business Tourism Partnership Annex 1

Old Gaffers Association

Eurostar Group Ltd

Northamptonshire Blue Badge Tourist Guide Association

Association of Tourism in Higher Education Annex 1

INIS Independent Inspections

Tourism West Midlands/Advantage West Midlands Annex 1

Derwent Valley Mills Partnership

National Caravan Council

Ampersand

Roger Gale MP

David E Cam

Powys County Council

UKinbound

TUI Travel Plc

Professor Victor TC Middleton OBE, FTS

Garry and Deborah Midmer, The Shirley Hotel, Torquay

British Association of Leisure Parks, Piers and Attractions

Gilbert Archdale

Anne Spencer

You and Yours

Arthur Rank Centre

Processed: 04-07-2008 20:16:16 Page Layout: COENEW [SO] PPSysB Job: 385582 Unit: PAG1

Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence Ev 1

Oral evidence

Taken before the Culture, Media and Sport Committee

on Tuesday 23 October 2007

Members present

Mr John Whittingdale, in the Chair

Janet Anderson Alan KeenMr Nigel Evans Mr Adrian SandersMr Mike Hall Helen Southworth

Memorandum submitted by BALPPA

Introduction

1. BALPPA is the leading trade association representing the UK’s commercial piers, theme/amusementparks, attractions and zoos sector. We speak for some 300 members across the tourism industry and includeleading UK attractions like Blackpool Pleasure Beach, Alton Towers, British Airways London Eye, Butlins,Colchester Zoo, Madame Tussauds, Thorpe Park and Woburn Safari Park among our members.

2. The BALPPA membership covers a wide range of leisure attractions across the UK. Whilst somemembers are large attractions, many of our members are small and often family run businesses that haveoperated for generations. No matter what the size, location or focus of individual BALPPA memberoperations, all have a keen interest in promoting UK tourism and ensuring the long-term sustainability ofthe industry in the UK.

3. BALPPA welcomes this inquiry and its objectives in the hope that its work will contribute to thecontinued success of the UK tourism industry and consider improvements that could make it even moresuccessful. Our submission addresses the position occupied by our Members in the UK VisitorAttractions Sector.

4. We submit the following six points, each of which will be clarified later in the submission:

(1) The development and implementation of a UK tourism strategy spearheaded by the Departmentfor Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) and VisitBritain encompassing cross-government support.

(2) A refocus of the work carried out by the DCMS on behalf of the tourism industry to promote theindustry as a strong and serious contributor to the UK economy.

(3) The appointment of a Tourism Minister at a level of responsibility which ensures the tourismindustry is always suitably represented when issues likely to impact on the sector are considered.

(4) A review of a variety of taxation and financial support measures that are having or are likely tohave a negative impact on UK tourism, particularly the private sector.

(5) Improved funding for tourism statistics that will provide a more accurate picture of the state ofthe industry for analysis and action.

(6) An introduction in the UK of Single/Double British Summer Time.

The Development of a Tourism Strategy

5. The reality of making the most of UK tourism and reaching the 2010 target of £100 billion has beenjeopardised by a number of factors. Primarily, there is a lack of support and direction from the DCMS. TheDepartment has been unable to keep up with developments in the UK tourism industry and help the industryto reposition itself in the changing political landscape. Despite two tourism strategies and twice restructuringVisitBritain, the Department has failed to develop a tourism structure that takes account of the devolutionof the responsibility for tourism to the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Parliament, as well as the regionaldevelopment agencies within England.

6. A strategy which recognises the current lack of coordination between RDA’s and RDP’s and providesclear guidance on maximising tourism opportunities will receive support across all sectors of tourism.

Processed: 04-07-2008 20:16:16 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 385582 Unit: PAG1

Ev 2 Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Evidence

Refocus the Role of DCMS in Tourism

7. The DCMS tends to focus its activity with regards to tourism on the social and cultural aspects of theUK tourism industry, and whilst these are important aspects of tourism, the industry should also be viewedas a business activity that makes a serious contribution to the UK economy. Part of the problem is that thereare resource issues within the tourism directorate of the Department. Current staYng levels do not reflectthe important role the DCMS should be playing in coordinating the contribution of Tourism to UK plc.Only 18 full time staV, many of whom are allocated to duties not directly related to tourism, are expectedto maintain eVective liaison, support, direct and positively influence the eVorts of the industry.

8. The DCMS appears to carry less weight within government than some of the other departments andtherefore seems unable to spearhead joined up thinking across government, for example with the DCLG orDWP for issues relating to tourism and has failed to keep up with the challenging environment in which UKtourism is operating.

9. The combination of poor understanding of the industry (due to insuYcient resource within DCMS)and across government as a whole, along with an increasingly devolved approach to tourism means that asignificant central resource to implementing UK wide tourism strategies has not been allocated in recentyears but is essential to maintaining a healthy UK tourism industry. The devolution of responsibility andresources for tourism to the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly alongside regional responsibility fortourism in England to the RDAs has changed the face of tourism in the UK. This has led to overlaps andcompetition between the various organisations, with little coordination between them on nationalprogrammes and initiatives that will impact the UK industry as a whole. This theme is repeated when onelooks at the role and funding for VisitBritain alongside Visit Wales and Visit Scotland.

10. Despite the limited financial resources available to it, VisitBritain has continued to promote the UKto inbound tourists and England to domestic tourists very well. With a budget which in real terms is circa17% less than that allocated nine years ago, it has performed reasonably well under severe diYculties.Expecting such performance to continue without suitably increased financial support is likely to result inthe loss of influence and talent.

11. BALPPA is concerned that the current spending round will result in a further reduction of financialresource when what is required is an attempt to close the ever increasing gap between resources allocatedto Tourism and those allocated to Art, Sport and Culture.

Appointment of a Tourism Minister

12. The industry considers itself under represented within government with the consequences ofinadequate funding, a low profile in Parliament and insuYcient representation on issues which whilst notdirectly related to tourism, could and frequently do have a negative eVect on the industry.

13. The appointment of a dedicated Minister for Tourism at senior level will address these issues andensure that Tourism receives the support deserving of a £84 billion industry.

Effect of Current Tax Regime and Proposals for Local Government Funding on Tourism IndustryCompetitiveness

14. BALPPA believes that the tourism industry is under-resourced and that there are an increasingnumber of financial constraints that are causing problems for the private attractions sector in particular. Ifthere is no change in the situation, the privately operated tourism sector will continue to suVer. Outlinedbelow are a number of areas where BALPPA has concerns about the eVects of the current tax regime andfuture proposals for local government funding in the UK on tourism industry competitiveness, but also anumber of areas that BALPPA has identified where government could provide assistance to the industry.

15. (a) A key BALPPA concern is that the UK tourist attractions continue to operate on an unlevelplaying field compared with many of their European counterparts. We believe that the UK tourism marketis not given enough support to compete with our European neighbours, in particular France and Spain,which are seen as prominent European tourism destinations. In order to strengthen the UK market andmake it more competitive, a reduction in VAT on admission income to 5.5% would allow greater pricingflexibility. As clearly illustrated in the BTA Study on VAT (1995) such a shift would be tax positive as itwould result in increased visitor numbers.

16. (b) BALPPA also has concerns regarding the introduction of wider road user charging schemes,whether regional or national. Visitors to many of the UK’s attractions journey by car. Firstly, visitors areoften in family or friendship groups that fully utilise car capacity and an equivalent trip by public transportwould be prohibited by cost. Secondly, the public transport network in the UK, outside of London, is notsuYcient to allow visitors to make a reliable journey that will take them directly to their destination.BALPPA is concerned that any scheme introduced without providing adequate increased public transportprovision or that will penalise visitors to attractions despite their cars being used to full capacity will detervisitors from attractions—another potential blow for UK tourism.

Processed: 04-07-2008 20:16:16 Page Layout: COENEW [O] PPSysB Job: 385582 Unit: PAG1


17. (c) A further imbalance is created for the private sector when one considers that National Lotterygrants and subsidies are available to publicly and charitably funded attractions but in essence not to privatesector organisations such as our members. BALPPA would like privately run attractions that are importantto the UK’s heritage or are of environmental or education value to be able to successfully apply for fundingthat can support their schemes. At the current time, whilst our members are able to apply for funding underthe allocated criteria, none have been successful in securing monies and many have been discouraged fromeven applying.

18. BALPPA is keen to highlight that all attractions, whether privately or publicly funded, areexperiencing a tough operating environment. Much public money has been wasted on public attractions ofeducational and conservational nature that have now closed because they were poorly thought out in thefirst place, and which would not have passed the stage of initial study in the private sector. BALPPA believesthat all those who act as custodians of the nation’s heritage or whose attractions have environmental andeducational value deserve equal access to funding, irrespective of which sector they operate.

19. (d) A key sector of the UK tourism industry and of the BALPPA membership operates andmaintains the UK’s seaside piers. These unique and important features of our traditional seaside towns arenotoriously diYcult and expensive structures to maintain, and BALPPA is seeking assistance in preservingand securing a sustainable future for these historic and important buildings. Given that our members whoown piers do not have access to Lottery Funding, BALPPA is urging government to assist the piers byreviewing their liability to pay business rates. We have undertaken research to show the cost of exemptingpiers from business rates would come to only £1.7 million per year. Whilst such a figure would not evenregister in the Treasury Balance Sheet, it would prove considerably beneficial in assisting in the maintenanceof our Piers.

20. Piers, along with many other coastal amusement businesses are facing considerable increase in thecost of operating licensed family entertainment centres as a consequence of the Gambling Act 2005. We arehopeful that the existing experience of the Local Authorities in relation to the responsible manner in whichour Members operate their businesses will be reflected in their consideration and cost of Premises Licenceapplications required under the new Act.

21. (e) BALPPA is seeking for the Government to grant capital allowances on a wider range of categoriesthat would apply to tourist attractions. For example, at the current time, there is an allowance for plant &machinery that will involve rides at theme parks but it is the wider range of buildings and infrastructurewhich provide essential visitor facilities that are necessary to run a tourism attraction that can costthousands of pounds but where no allowance is made for the depreciation over time and the likelihood ofrenewal or maintenance in the future.

22. (f) On a local level, whilst we are still awaiting the publication of the Lyon’s Review into localgovernment funding, BALPPA and the wider UK tourism industry is nervous of the suggestion that theremay be an optional “bed tax” for local authorities to adopt if they wish and we would like to convey theserious impact that this any such tax would have on the industry, with no guarantee that funds raised wouldbe ring-fenced and used by local government to assist tourism in the local authority area.

Tourism Data to inform Government Policy

23. Current government statistics are not suYcient given the size and economic contribution of thetourism industry in the UK. Once again, this approach leads BALPPA to believe that the industry is nottaken seriously by government. The continued lack of funding for tourism allocated by the DCMS is aconcern; however there is also insuYcient funding in other government departments that represent tourisminterests including the OYce for National Statistics. Improvements here would allow the ONS to gather thekey statistics required to monitor, analyse and improve the industry by creating solutions based on a moreup to date and informed view.

The Practicality of Promoting more Environmentally Friendly Forms of Tourism

24. BALPPA has been a long time supporter of the introduction of Double British Summer Time whichwould see our clocks moved forward by two hours (GMT !2) in the Summer months and one hour (GMT!1) in the Winter months, thereby allowing extra hours of usable daylight. The last two parliamentarysessions have seen private Members Bills to introduce a change sponsored by Lord Tanlaw, David KidneyMP and most recently Tim Yeo MP. A strong coalition of organisations, from across a range of policy areas,has formed to support at the least an experimental period. The coalition includes BALPPA, NAHT, AA,PACTS, RoSPA, the Tourism Alliance and LARSOA.

25. There are strong benefits to be gained from the adoption of DBST, which include:

— A huge boost for tourism worth up to £2 billion per annum.

— Energy savings—170,000 tonnes of carbon emissions would be cut.

— Safer roads—safety surveys calculate fatalities would drop by more than 100 and other casualtiesby more than 400. A fact not disputed by the Transport Minister, Dr Stephen Ladyman MP.



— Longer hours of outdoor play for children, potentially reducing child obesity.

— Safer streets—most street crime occurs when it is dark.

— Extra time to train for and enjoy the Olympic Games in 2012.

A UK Tourism Strategy and London 2012 Games

26. On the back of the Welcome(Legacy consultation concluded by the DCMS recently, a nationaltourism strategy should be developed that will allow the opportunity presented by the Olympics in 2012 tobe fully utilised by not only London tourist attractions, but attractions around the UK. Any such strategyshould by adequately financed and have a clear owner and leader to coordinate activity at a national,regional and local tourism level. This will create the right situation for tourism to thrive in the modern social,economic and political environment.

BALPPA would welcome the opportunity to present verbal evidence in support of this submission.

March 2007

Memorandum submitted by the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions (ALVA)

The Association of Leading Visitor Attractions (ALVA) currently has 41 members who manage some1,586 of the 6,000 odd sites throughout Britain. ALVA’s members collectively receive over 100,000,000visitors a year. They are an interesting mix: some are public, others are in the private sector; some chargefor admission others do not; some operate seasonally, others all the year round. Their disciplines are alsovery diVerent: cultural, heritage, history, conservation, commerce and divinity! From experience, thisdiversity is a positive strength rather than a weakness. Arguably these iconic sites represent the “Jewels inthe Crown” of Britain’s tourism industry.

ALVA held its inaugural meeting on 10 July 1989 and was incorporated as a Company Limited ByGuarantee on 2 April 1990. In October that year the former Tourism Minister, John Lee (now Lord Lee ofTraVord) was appointed as Chairman. In 1999 His Royal Highness The Duke of York became Presidentof ALVA. In 2001 ALVA played the lead role in facilitating the formation of the Tourism Alliance and isrepresented on its Board. In 2003 ALVA set in motion the planning for the First National Conference ofVisitor Attractions which was held in October 2004.

“ALVA seeks to represent to government, the tourism industry, the media and the public, theviews and achievements of this country’s foremost visitor Attractions in matters which concernthe eVectiveness of UK tourism and the interests of the Association, whilst promoting co-operation and high standards of visitor management among members”.

Specific Topics for Oral Evidence Session

ALVA wishes to see the Tourism cake grow larger so that each slice may be more generously proportionedand the balance of trade deficit for tourism stabilized at minus £17 billion and then reduced. For this tohappen it is necessary for the Government to Take Tourism Seriously and place it far higher up its list ofpriorities. This would be a good thing to do on many counts, but not least because this nation is dangerouslyreliant on the income produced by the financial sector, which is currently some 25% of the total GDP. Insupport of these aims, ALVA submits the following eight topics:

1. Investment in VisitBritain

The Grant-in-Aid to VisitBritain has not increased for the past eleven years, which means, of course, ayear-on-year cut in real terms. In addition, in April 2003 VisitBritain assumed responsibility for thedevelopment and marketing of England to the British. The evidence generated by the Million VisitorCampaign and the results of the England Marketing initiatives to date demonstrate convincingly thatinvestment in tourism marketing is eVective and brings a direct return to the Treasury. ALVA looks to theGovernment to re-invest taxpayers money in the institutions it has created and to recognise that backingwinners, such as tourism, is a wise decision. ALVA will work with and support VisitBritain and it looks tothe Government to do the same.



2. Social Infrastructure

The social environment in which tourism operates is of increasing concern. Public services in general havebecome noticeably inadequate. Both citizens and visitors have a right to expect and enjoy a safe and cleanenvironment.

Central and local government need to ensure that adequate resources are allocated to these core, essentialservices. Local authorities play a key strategic and operational role in maintaining a high quality physicalenvironment. They need to be adequately resourced to ensure that this responsibility is rigorously executed.The quality of the public realm is an important issue that must be addressed.

Yet with so many competing priorities, it is often the public space and amenities so important to touriststhat are the first to face the cuts. Local tourism businesses are right to protest when yet another PublicConvenience is closed through lack of will or public funding.

Furthermore, ALVA supports additional funding for the work of the Homelessness Directorate toaddress social and environmental blights of begging, vagrancy and homeless street sleepers. Tourists cometo this country for an enjoyable holiday rather than to be confronted by our welfare challenges. This battlehas not yet been won.

3. Daylight Hours

ALVA welcomes all proposals to advance time in England and Wales by one hour throughout the year(GMT ! 1 hour in winter; GMT ! 2 hours in summer) This measure would have a major impact on roadsafety, produce worthwhile energy savings and should have a beneficial eVect on child obesity. The extrahour of “accessible” daylight in the spring and autumn months would also have the helpful eVect ofextending the tourist season. It is estimated that this could bring up to £2 billion additional revenue totourism.

4. VAT

ALVA remains concerned that the fall in the UK’s market share is partly attributable to a fall in its pricecompetitiveness relative to other countries. This we contend is to some degree due to the high levels oftaxation. We support the Government’s overall stance that taxation where possible should be imposed onthe end-user rather than through direct central taxation. However, we note that the impact of the VATregime, combined with rising employment costs, further adds to the distortion and competitive pressures onthe industry.

The EC 6th VAT Directive sets down as one of its goals the harmonisation of VAT rates across theEuropean Union. When achieved this will decrease distortions within the EU’s tourism markets and shouldencourage fairer competition. However, this goal will take time to achieve. In the meantime, the majorityof member state governments have chosen to apply diVering rates to tourism services.

The VAT rate on tourism services is higher in the UK than in all but one of the other member states.Reports by VisitBritain in 1996, and other organisations subsequently, have found that European stateswith higher rates of VAT on visitor accommodation experience significantly slower growth in theirinternational tourism receipts than those that levy a lower rate.

The UK’s high rate disadvantages its tourism businesses relative to most of our EU competitors. ALVAcalls for a VAT reduction on, in the first instance, tourist accommodation to help boost pricecompetitiveness (assuming no changes in other EU destinations).

5. VAT on Property Repairs—Heritage Buildings

Another area of concern relates to the issue of VAT on property refurbishment in general and on repairsto historic properties in particular. We support the idea of reducing the rate to 5% to decrease the diVerentialbetween the refurbishment of older properties and new buildings, and between VAT registered andunregistered businesses.

We also see an opportunity to reduce the rate of VAT on listed building repairs to provide an incentivefor their maintenance. Two-thirds of Britain’s heritage is in private ownership; these sites contribute £1.2billion to the national economy, but currently there is a £490 million backlog of repairs to privately ownedand National Trust historic buildings (data from “Valuing our Heritage”, published in 2007). As well asVAT reform, the provision of fiscal relief for the maintenance of historic properties that provide publicaccess would help stimulate much needed investment and preserve the heritage tourism resource. It isinteresting to note that 66% of visitors from China and 72% from Russia cite our historic castles, housesand gardens as a top priority for choosing to visit the UK.



6. Gateway London

London has a clear “gateway” role for England—stipulated in the Greater London Act. It also has a“gateway marketing and packaging” relationship with Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. For such keyreasons, London needs adequate resourcing through strong investment in the necessary infrastructures asthe capital destination.

The capital is overwhelmingly the starting point for many tourism routes that link London to the UKRegions and Nations. The relationship that London has with the regions must be reciprocal with investmentflowing out to the regions as well as back to the capital. This relationship needs to be developed further, andkept under constant review. The overall London economy has been growing faster than the rest of the UKfor most of the past 17 years. The result is that London currently makes a net contribution to the Exchequerof at least £20 billion per annum.

Particularly where tourism is concerned, London is a national asset and a “flagship” product of the UK.As such its economy, infrastructure, environment, societal well-being and cultural life are all inter linkedand relevant to the overall tourism experience of its visitors. Increasingly “traditional” tourism blurs intoleisure; both are essential in maintaining the city’s vibrancy.

7. Free Entry to National Museums

If the National Museums are to remain free, then the Government must fund them fully so they remaintop class and attract visitors to this country. The costs of running Museums rise more quickly than simpleinflation. The cost of new acquisitions climbs ever faster. The demands for state-of-the-art visitor facilitiesincrease annually. If the grants-in-aid do not keep up, in due course our great Museums will cease to be trulyfirst X1. This will impact on the whole tourist industry.

8. Transport

ALVA recognises that the UK’s heritage and countryside are a vital resource for the wellbeing andcultural identity of the nation whilst also being the major attraction for international visitors. ALVA furtherrecognises that the car is at its most eYcient when used by a family for an educational/leisure day out in thecountryside, accepts that public transport cannot provide the solution outside urban areas and hopes thatothers, regardless of their individual agendas, will be honest enough to acknowledge this reality whilstworking towards a sustainable future.

October 2007

Memorandum submitted by the National Trust

Introduction and Summary

1. We welcome the opportunity to respond to the House of Commons Culture, Media and SportCommittee Inquiry into tourism policy. This comes at a critical time for the tourism sector with the approachof the 2012 Olympics, the forthcoming Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review and the ongoingdebates about the impacts of expansion of the aviation industry and the contribution air travel makes toclimate change.

2. The Committee’s inquiry is, therefore, well placed to reinforce the contribution tourism makes to theUK’s economy, and in particular its value for the economy of rural areas; assert the need to protect and carefor the assets which attract visitors, namely a high quality environment and a rich cultural heritage; and tounderstand what resources are required to help the tourism sector deliver a more sustainable product. Thisshould follow up on the Government Prospectus for Tourism and the work of the Tourism ReformImplementation Group (TRIG).

3. We refer the Committee to the written and oral evidence the National Trust submitted to the previousCommittee Inquiry Tourism After September 11th in 2002. Our contribution to the recent Committeeinquiry into heritage Protecting and Preserving our heritage also provides evidence of the role of the historicenvironment for tourism and the specific challenges the heritage sector is currently facing

4. Tourism is expected to continue to grow as an economic sector for the foreseeable future and theGovernment’s Tourism Prospectus—Tomorrow’s Tourism—established a target to grow the UK market to£100 billion by 2010. However, the tourism sector faces a number of challenges that without action thistarget will be undermined—namely the investment and resources required to care for the assets of a highquality natural and historic environment, the ever increasing tourism deficit and the eVects of the rise invisitor car based travel.



5. Our key points and recommendations are:

— to recognise the significant contribution domestic tourism makes to the UK economy and thatrealising the growth already occurring in this market— by concentrating on further developmentand promotion of domestic tourism—will address the tourism deficit much more eYciently thanby greater investment into increasing the number of overseas visitors;

— that a secondary benefit of improving and growing the domestic tourism market is that it can tacklethe need to provide greater air travel capacity and so diminish the demand for detrimental airportexpansion;

— that tourism is particularly well placed to deliver public policy objectives for rural regeneration;

— that tourism has a wider importance and significance beyond the purely economic, such as the roleit plays in providing local identity and wellbeing;

— that despite these benefits tourism, particularly on the domestic scale, remains under-recognisedwithin current debates in the policy agenda such as sustainable regeneration or climate change,and that the contribution and impacts tourism can make needs to be integrated into wider planningand policy development;

— to recognise the need to reduce the environmental impact from leisure related travel throughgreater funding for public transport and requiring the use of visitor travel plans; and

— that the Government need to recognise, support, protect and enhance the high qualityenvironmental assets ( natural and cultural) on which tourism depends including by examining therole of visitor pay back schemes

Role of the National Trust

6. The Trust’s contribution to the inquiry draws on our role as owner, manager and landlord of anextensive portfolio of properties and landholdings across England, Wales and Northern Ireland withextensive public access. We seek to integrate our conservation responsibilities with the management of amajor tourism business turning over £300 million each year. We annually welcome some 13 million visits toour-pay-for-entry properties and an estimated 100 million visits to our coast and countryside properties. Wealso undertake a vast range of tourism-related activity to support these visits. This includes:

— operating the Europe’s largest collection of holiday cottages—with over 350 cottages across thecountry and an annual turnover in excess of £6 million;

— oVering over 400 working holidays a year where people volunteer to work on conservation projectsat our properties;

— hosting over 80 tenants oVering bed and breakfast accommodation, 50 camping and caravanningsites on our land and accommodating 21 YHA hostels;

— running 135 restaurants, cafes and tea rooms with a collective turnover of £17.5 million—thenation’s largest network;

— promoting and investing in regional and local produce and crafts—including 25 local vineyards,32 local cheese makers and 20 local ice cream makers; and

— investing significantly in domestic advertising and promotions—including events, press and othermedia activity and as a partner with VisitBritain.

7. We are members of a large number of Destination Management Partnerships throughout England andsit on the board of several Regional Tourism Bodies. We work closely with relevant organisations such asthe Association of Leading Visitor Attractions (ALVA) and Tourism Alliance and contributed our expertiseand experience to the work of the Department of Culture, Media and Sports Tourism ReformImplementation Group (TRIG).

Tourism and the Benefits it Delivers

8. Tourism is one of the largest industries in the UK, worth approximately £75 billion in 2003 andemploying some 2.2 million people, 8% of the working population. We believe that many tourism businessesare of the future—in an increasingly competitive world the raw materials for UK plc will increasingly bebased on knowledge, skills, sense of place, quality and a clean environment. We are investing over £160million in the nation’s environmental infrastructure, often in places bypassed by market forces. In manyways, the Trust is like a development agency—investing for ever in the economic resources of the future.Trust activities alone in the North East, Wales, Cumbria and the South West generate between five and nineadditional full time jobs for every person (Full Time Equivalent) directly employed by the Trust. In total,the high quality of the natural and built environment generates just over 137,000 full time jobs (FTEs) inthese areas.

9. As well as being a hugely important economic driver, we believe tourism has much to oVer wider socialand environmental objectives. This includes providing opportunities for education and lifelong learning(through visits to properties but also through active engagement and volunteering to help look after these



properties), underpinning the viability of a huge range of rural (often small) businesses, promoting a senseof positive local identity and social cohesion from a shared local history/culture and the resources that itoVers and providing attractive places where businesses and communities can thrive.

10. Given its importance in rural areas, the aforementioned targeted growth of tourism by theGovernment also has the potential to contribute to the Government’s rural regeneration targets to raiseeconomic productivity within the least well performing rural wards. For example, in Cornwall, the poorestcounty in the country, tourism is a key driver of the local economy. The sector contributes up to 24% ofCornwall’s GDP, including retail spend—a figure five times the national average—and one in five people inCornwall gain an income from the tourist industry.

11. However, whilst the impacts of the 2001 Foot and Mouth outbreak, which saw tourism losses at £3.3billion, illustrated just how important tourism is to rural economies, this experience and the lessons learnthave not yet been fully appreciated. As a result, the Trust believes the wider role of tourism is still notproperly recognised in either current debates about tourism or the public policy framework which supportsit. All too often the focus of much of the tourism debate remains on large scale visitor attractions,infrastructure and the international market which needs to move to one that emphasises the potentialcontribution of tourism to sustainable regeneration and development in both urban and rural areas and itsdependence on a high quality environment and the competitive advantage of local and regional characterin building sustainable and successful businesses.

Domestic Tourism

12. The role which domestic tourism has to play in driving forward the sector is, in particular,underplayed by current tourism policy and investment from national and regional Government. There is atpresent an £18 billion balance of payments deficit at the expense of the domestic tourism industry. As theDCMS Tourism Prospectus recognises the domestic market in England accounts for 86% of the tourismrevenue and there is the potential for further significant growth in short break and rural and cultural tourismmarkets. The recent domestic marketing campaigns run by VisitBritain and EMAB have been extremelywelcome and we look forward to continuing to work with them and the various regional partners in futuredomestic campaigns. We are disappointed, however, that despite the overriding importance and futurepotential of the domestic market, government tourism policy overall continues to place significant emphasison international markets and the pursuit of growth per se. This is despite the fact that even small changesin the trends in domestic tourism would outstrip even significant changes in the much smallerinternational market.

13. VisitBritain is given £35.5 million to spend on international marketing, but only £13.3 million toinvest on marketing England to the domestic tourist in 2005–06. However, in terms of tourism revenue, thedomestic market far out-strips the international market with UK residents contributing over £60 billion ayear compared to just under £12 billion from international visitors. As the graph below shows, a 10% risein domestic tourism would generate £6 billion in additional revenue, whilst the same rise in internationalwould result in just £1.2 billion.

domestic

international

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Increase in tourism

£bn

in to

uris

m re

venu

e ge

nera

ted

Graph: OYce of National Statistics

14. Moreover the benefits and burdens of domestic tourism are more widely spread over the UK, giventhe focus of international tourists on relatively few locations. This is especially important in rural areaswhere, for example, in the south-west of England domestic visits account for 14 times the number of thosefrom overseas. The Trust believes more emphasis needs to be placed on persuading people to take short



breaks and holidays in this country. This would bring a range of benefits including helping to reduce thegrowing balance of tourism payments deficit, bring welcome tourism revenue to rural (and urban)communities and reduce the risks to the sector of the continued volatility in international tourism and travel.

15. Encouraging the domestic market can also potentially reduce the need for further significantexpansion in an environmentally damaging aviation sector. It is currently cheaper to fly from London tosouthwest France for the weekend than it is to take the train to Bath. We believe such cheap flights, wherethe price of the ticket does not factor in the true cost of either fuel or the environmental impact of air travel,are actively encouraging people to holiday overseas. This has in turn led to the aforementioned £18 billionbalance of payments deficit. We are deeply concerned that this deficit can only worsen should the policy togreatly expand airports coming out from the Government’s Aviation White Paper (2003) be fully realised.We believed the resulting Aviation White Paper was greatly flawed, with it findings based on unrealisticgrowth forecasts based on a continuation of current trends for increased air travel. However, this growthrelies on anomalies within the tax system and does include environmental and social costs. Such forecastsrepresent derived demand, and are not a response to need. We believe that the expansion of airports andthe current situation of cheap flights have caused much damage to domestic tourism.

16. Such impacts are not included in the economic case made for airport expansion. It is estimated thatin East of England this deficit equates to £2 billion, dwarfing the £400 million contribution that BAAStansted makes to the regional economy. In proposing locations for new airport capacity, Government alsofailed to take account of impacts on natural and historic environment beyond the loss of listed buildings. Itis threatening many beautiful and historic properties owned by the National Trust such as the eVect of noiseand pollution on Hatfield Forest near Stansted, damage from vibrations on Speke Hall on the edge ofLiverpool and the loss of tranquillity on the North Downs and Hadrians Wall.

17. The Trust takes an active involvement in aviation and related issues. This has included makingrepresentations at public inquiries into airport expansion at Manchester and Stansted and publishingresearch Blue Skies into the impact of the expansion of aviation on domestic tourism. We made detailedcomments on each of the regional reports that made up the Government’s aviation green paper. We areparticularly concerned by the insidious expansion of smaller regional airports and have actively lobbiedagainst the plans of Wolverhampton Airport and Robin Hood Airport. We would like to see a governmenttarget to reduce the current deficit by placing a greater emphasis on the domestic market, especially inmarketing and promotion lessening the pressure for further significant expansion of an environmentallydamaging aviation sector.

Visitor Travel

18. Another key concern of the National Trust, amongst others, is the high dependency of the tourismsector, particularly in rural areas, of visitors by car and the impacts these visits have on the quality of theexperience, the state of the assets the industry is based upon and the wider economic, social andenvironmental costs of growing visitor and rural traYc.

19. Over the last decade, the National Travel Survey has recorded an increase of 5% in leisure travel (asmeasured by passenger km). The average distance travelled for each trip has increased by around 11% toan average of 6.8 miles in 1999–2001. Current figures show that more than seven out of ten tourism day tripsand nearly eight out of 10 holiday visits are made by car. In some of the most popular but alsoenvironmentally sensitive areas, such as National Parks, this rises to more than nine out of 10 visits. Ruralleisure trips have become one of the fastest growing sources of traYc, a rise which threatens to underminethe very assets visitors come to see and experience in the countryside—causing visual blight, noise and airpollution and visitor dissatisfaction as well as creating problems of congestion in particular hotspots. As aconservation charity and major tourism business heavily dependant on visitors who enjoy the convenienceof the car, the National Trust faces some real dilemmas in meeting the needs of our visitors while seekingnew and less damaging alternatives.

20. Visitor Travel—Policy from Practice showcases some ways in which the Trust is seeking to encouragegreater choice in leisure travel and the benefits which come from doing this. Examples include the popularDevils Dyke bus in the South Downs and the Shropshire Hills Shuttles, which have both shown that suchschemes can also deliver wider regeneration benefits to local economies, enhance access for both visitors andlocal communities and improve the quality of the visitor experience.

21. Our report also highlights, however, that whilst the Trust has provided financial support for transportschemes this can only ever touch the surface of what is needed to tackle the issue seriously. A stronger senseof direction on leisure traYc is needed from Government. We believe, for example, that DCMS has animportant role in championing the importance of sustainable tourism, accessible both for visitors and theworkforce, to Regional Development Agencies as part of their regional economic strategies. This isespecially important now they have lead responsibility for funding such schemes following the demise of theCountryside Agency’s projects.

22. The most urgent need is to secure long term funding following the end of the successful CountrysideAgency Rural Transport Partnership Scheme and the Government’s Rural Bus Challenge Fund. Their losshas left many existing and highly valued transport schemes on a financial knife-edge or scrapped. More



widely we believe there is a need for visitor travel planning to be given the same emphasis and promotionon workplace and school travel plans and that this might be developed in taking forward the work ofTourism Reform Implementation Group.

Protecting the Assets—The Value of a High Quality Environment

23. From our experience on the ground, we know that tourism contributes much needed income to localeconomies across the country and that there is an important link between a high quality environment andthe future economic sustainability of communities. For example, our Valuing our Environment studies foundthat 40% of the jobs created through tourism rely directly on a high quality environment and that thisincreases to 60% to 70% in rural areas.

24. Many of these visits are attracted by the quality of the local environment—beautiful coast andcountryside, well-maintained footpaths, local foods and crafts, historic towns and villages with distinctivearchitecture or materials, or a lively cultural life. Significantly, the quality of the overall experience is asimportant as the quality of the assets themselves. For example, in a MORI poll and research commissionedby the National Trust over 80% of adults, felt that visiting the countryside is a vital counterbalance to thestresses of their daily life. Over half those polled are in search of “peace and quiet”.

25. We would like to see greater recognition of the role as an economic asset that a high qualityenvironment plays and a greater commitment to the duty to care for what is essentially a vulnerable andfragile commodity. Our experience across the English regions, Northern Ireland and Wales suggests thatwhilst many tourism strategies refer to the importance of natural, cultural and historic assets the need toprotect these assets is not recognised as a priority.

26. We also believe more could be done to consider the needs and value of tourism in other policy areas,such as land use planning policy, transport and regional economic development. For example, the costs ofcaring for our historic environment runs into the hundreds of millions, with the National Trust facing a £200million backlog in maintenance costs alone, and yet these sorts of costs and the impact they will have on thequality of the visitor experience and expectations if they are not met is not merited with enough importance.Other agendas such as museums and agri-environment schemes are also relevant to the success of thetourism sector.

27. This is not to say that the recognition of the need to ensure the quality of the visitor experience is notbeginning to be tackled. We support the new VisitBritain’s National Quality Assurance Schemes, a gradingscheme that is aiming to improve the quality of accommodation and services as an essential foundation todelivering a quality experience—including achieving a common grading standard that is readily understoodby the customer. Such a system, however, is not without its costs and we estimate it would require significantinvestment by the Trust to implement across all our holiday properties. When looking at self cateredaccommodation the particular nature of many holiday cottages will need to be taken into account as it isoften the character and setting of such accommodation rather than the range of facilities on oVer thatmatters most.

28. We welcome the recommendation in the recent Lyons Report that the Government explores the costsand benefits of a permissive power for local authorities to levy taxes on tourism. Whilst we do not supportproposals for a mandatory bed tax as we do not believe that these will deliver the kind of targeted ring fencedfunding which is required to help protect the assets, we are in favour of imaginative schemes that can helppromote sustainable tourism such as the The Tourism Conservation Partnership (TCP). This wasestablished in 1993 to create a partnership between business and conservation organisations in the LakeDistrict including the National Trust. The Partnership runs a “visitor payback” scheme which is optionaland directed at local conservation projects. Importantly it helps to raise awareness in people’s minds that“the countryside costs” and so it does an important job above and beyond the income it generates.

29. We would like to see the sector share lessons on investment schemes such as the North West’s highprofile regional programme called Natural Economy with its main objective to maximise the economicbenefit from projects to improve the natural environment. The North West has also established a RegionalHeritage Tourism OYcer. whose aim is to award funding for heritage attractions to carry out projects thatwould increase their commercial benefit—eg tea shops, visitor centres and so on.

30. However, in general, ensuring the availability and quality of such “services” often lies beyondimmediate tourism providers and therefore the sector needs to make these connections to those that do havean influence on the wider environment is critical. We believe that the DCMS can play a valuable role as achampion for tourism and that this should take in the responsibility for ensuring cross departmentalworking which identifies the current policy initiatives that may impact on tourism (such as DCLG’s landuse planning reforms, DEFRA’s work on climate change or DfT’s transport funding and infrastructurepolicies) and which DCMS and the sector should be seeking to influence.



Memorandum submitted by English Heritage

Introduction

1. This document represents English Heritage’s response to questions posed by the DCMS SelectCommittee as part of its inquiry into tourism in the UK. The response does not cover all the questions askedby the Committee, but concentrates on questions where there are particular issues for tourism and thehistoric environment. This response does not cover specific factors aVecting heritage tourism in Scotland,Wales or Northern Ireland.

Background

2. English Heritage is a non-departmental public body established under the National Heritage Act 1983to help protect the historic environment of England and promote awareness, understanding and enjoymentof it. The historic environment is all around us and encompasses the whole of our historic landscape andburied archaeology, not just visible buildings and scheduled monuments. It is our most accessible culturalresource and has a powerful influence on decisions made by foreign resident and domestic tourists toundertake holidays and day trips.

3. English Heritage has long experience in managing and marketing visitor attractions. English Heritagelooks after over 400 properties including some of the most iconic historic places in the country such asStonehenge, Whitby Abbey, Dover and Kenilworth Castles, Battle Abbey and Osborne House. These sitesare visited by people from all over the world as well as domestic holiday makers and day visitors. There are5 million visits a year to our pay sites and an estimated 6 million visits to our free sites. We currently havea major programme to invest in improving the quality of the facilities and the visitor experience at our sites.In addition the grant schemes operated by English Heritage have contributed to the upkeep of heritage assetsthat are part of England’s tourism oVer.

4. The importance of heritage related tourism in England can be demonstrated by the following key facts.

— At least 56.4 million visits to heritage visitor attraction sites in 2005.

— Recent trend of visits to heritage sites is broadly flat with small year to year changes. Within thisoverall trend, visits to sites with gardens have grown but visits to castles and forts have fallen.

— About 33,000 people work at heritage visitor attraction sites of which over 21,000 are unpaidvolunteers.

— Average adult admission charge at pay sites is £4.57.

— 69.9% of adults resident in England visited a heritage site at least once in the past 12 months.

— 50.7% of adults from black and minority ethnic backgrounds resident in England visited a heritagesite at least once in the past 12 months.

— 53% of those visiting heritage sites say that the main reason they do so is personal enjoyment andrelaxation.

— 3.39 million members of the National Trust and 630,000 members of English Heritage.

— More people go to an historic property at the weekend than attend a football match.

— A number of places rely on their heritage tourism for much of their economic activity, for exampleYork, Bath, Canterbury.

— 400,000 volunteers in the historic environment sector.

— 12% of all holiday visitors from North America go to Stonehenge.

— Market research shows that visitors from all over the world value this country’s history andheritage, and that access to history and heritage, always a strong driver, remains a core reason forcoming to this country. According to a survey of visitors to the Britain and London Visitor Centre56% had already or were planning to visit one or more of a castle, church, monument or historichouse. Research carried out in 10 emerging tourism markets found that the most likely activitythat people would take part in when visiting Britain was again visits to a castle, church, monumentor historic house.

5. Responses to specific questions posed by the Committee are set out below:

The eVectiveness of DCMS and its sponsored bodies (such as VisitBritain) in supporting theindustry.

The structure and funding of sponsored bodies in the tourism sector, and the eVectiveness of thatstructure in promoting the UK both as a whole and in its component parts.

What data on tourism would usefully inform government policy on tourism.

6. The comments below take these three questions together. We believe that there is a very important rolefor both DCMS and VisitBritain in supporting the tourism industry. In the light of the findings about theimportance of the historic environment to the brand image of this country to foreign tourists, the



maintenance and enhancement of that environment is a key factor in underpinning the growth in touristdemand. Policies and funding to achieve that desirable state of aVairs are not the responsibility of any onebody or person, but the DCMS should make sure that its own policies and funding allow the historicenvironment to make its full contribution to the tourism oVer. In addition there is a leadership role forDCMS in ensuring that other organisations in the public and private sector are aware of the contributionthey can make to the historic environment.

7. Individual organisations in the heritage tourism sector undertake marketing, promotion and research,but because the benefits of such activities are likely to go beyond any one organisation’s immediate interests,there is a risk of under-provision, compared with what would be desirable for the industry, and byimplication for the whole economy. Therefore there is a case for some co-ordinated public fundedpromotion of the industry to make up for that under-provision. However, while there is a clear justificationfor public involvement the scale and nature of that involvement is less obvious. In particular the increasinguse of electronic media to communicate information, ideas and opinions directly to consumers may becomplementary to, but also in part substitutes for, traditional means of communications such as books andtourist oYces. But whatever the format of communication we know that VisitBritain’s marketing eVort cangenerate excellent returns to the industry, and net additional activity to the economy as a whole.

8. Public investment and marketing eVort by regional and national organisations should market areas orgroups of attractions rather than individual attractions. This can have a beneficial eVect by encouragingpeople to stay longer in a place or region and therefore spend more money in the local economy. An exampleis marketing for the area around Hadrian’s Wall where the diVerent attractions work together to producejoint publicity and leaflets. An additional consideration is that visitors come from very diverse backgroundsand with diVerent requirements. Marketing and the services provided by the tourism industry should beplanned with this diversity in mind. Another example English Heritage is involved with is the Sacred BritainTourism Partnership, a grouping of organisations with an interest in promoting tourism to historic placesof worship. We have a particular interest as a major grant-giver to places of worship, given that we includea standard condition of grant requiring the grant recipient to open the building to the public. We have awider interest as well in encouraging access to the historic environment.

9. We value timely and accurate data about short term trends in the sector in order to monitor andbenchmark the performance of our own sites, and we supply data to VisitBritain. We also support thecollection of annual data to monitor longer term trends in visits, by site type, by region, by type of visitor,entry charge paid, and employment. These data are regularly reported in Heritage Counts, the annual reporton the state of the historic environment. Data of suYcient quality and data will be needed to accuratelymonitor and predict the impact of the Olympics on diVerent forms of tourism. In general we believe betterco-ordination of the collection and analysis of tourism statistics would be of benefit to all those involved inthe sector.

The eVect of the current tax regime (including VAT and Air Passenger Duty) and proposals for localgovernment funding (including the “bed tax”) upon the industry’s competitiveness

10. VAT is an issue for the heritage sector because of the diVerent treatment of new build (zero rated)and the generality of expenditure on repairs and maintenance to buildings (subject to 17.5%). We believethat this discrepancy provides an incentive for owners and developers to demolish old buildings or heritagefeatures and replace with new. English Heritage and others in the historic environment sector are of theopinion that this is a perverse incentive for heritage and environmental reasons. A recent report from theSelect Committee on Culture, Media and Sport, Protecting and preserving our heritage supported the sector’sview. However, the Government has chosen not to make any fundamental changes to VAT for construction,and due to EU rules, there is now no scope to make any fundamental changes until 2010 at the earliest. TheListed Places of Worship Grant scheme refunds VAT on specified expenditure for listed places of worship(and recently extended to listed monuments). But there remains a large amount of the historic environmentowned by non-commercial organisations or private individuals that have to pay the full rate of VAT on mostrepairs and maintenance. Given that the historic environment is such an important part of the tourism oVer,we believe that the tax system should provide incentives for its preservation and improvement rather thanundermine it as is the tendency now.

The practicality of promoting more environmentally friendly forms of tourism

11. We believe that the historic environment can make an important contribution to sustainabledevelopment and protection of the environment through the preservation of existing buildings rather thandemolition and building new. Demolition and building new can have significant negative impacts throughincreased demand for landfill and extraction and transport of natural resources. Tourists are both attractedto old buildings and distinctive places and landscapes and contribute directly and indirectly to their upkeepthrough expenditure on admissions, retail and accommodation. As part of its investment in its own sites,English Heritage is successfully implementing a range of environmentally friendly projects including reusingan existing historic building as the visitor entry point in Osborne House, combining a Visitor Centre for oursite and a Tourism Information Centre for the wider area in a single bespoke building at Helmsley Castle,



and developing a policy for locally-sourced food in the catering facilities at its sites. Other examples ofimportant heritage buildings and sites that have been maintained and enhanced through strong links withheritage tourism are briefly described below:.

Cliveden: An example of a conversion to a hotel. A country house built by Charles Barry in 1851 on thesite of a previous house built by the second Duke of Buckingham. The present site consists of a grade 1 listedgarden, extensive woodlands and Italianate mansion. The house has been host to virtually every Britishmonarch since George I and has been home to three Dukes, an Earl and Frederic Prince of Wales. In 1893it was purchased by the Astor family and became a meeting place for the great and famous including CharlieChaplin, Winston Churchill, and George Bernard Shaw. The property and gardens are now run by theNational Trust, but the building is also let as a hotel operated by a private company. An example of a sitethat is both a visitor attraction and a commercial operation that contributes to the sustainability of thehistoric environment.

St Ives: An example of a fishing and seaside town that has reinvented its tourist oVer to include culturalactivities, while retaining its historic buildings and distinctiveness. The success of Tate St Ives in attractingvisitors and economic activity is itself partly based on the attractive historic environment of the town, andat the same time the owners and managers of that historic environment benefit from the higher incomes andexpenditure associated with the Tate.

Saltburn-by-the-Sea: pier restoration and heritage centre. The pier was built in the 1860s and is now theonly remaining pleasure pier in the North East. Grant from the Heritage Lottery Fund enabled a restorationprogramme to take place, with improvement in access. The pier has enhanced the locality as a touristattraction and beneficial knock-on eVects on local businesses.

Clacton: seafront gardens Clacton’s Edwardian were a popular visitor attraction until the 1990s whenthey became run-down and overgrown. HLF grants have enabled extensive repairs and improvements tobe carried out together with new facilities and access. The gardens are now the focus of community eventsand are part of the overall improvement in the character of the resort that has led to increase in visitornumbers.

Bexhill: De La Warr pavilion First public building in the UK built in the Modernist style. Built in 1935to a design by Erich Mendelsohn and Serge ChermayeV the structure quickly became a popular public spaceand also including cultural and leisure facilities for local people and tourists. Following an £8 millionrestoration project (funded by the Arts Council England, Heritage Lottery Fund, and others) completed in2005, the pavilion provides an art gallery, auditorium, studio space, terrace and bandstand, public spacesand retail outlets. Visit numbers since re-opening have been encouraging demonstrating that a strikingdesign can attract interest and economic activity.

How to derive maximum benefit for the industry from the London 2012 Games

12. There are activities planned for deriving benefit before, during and after the Games. English Heritageand other national cultural organisations are planning the delivery of a Cultural Olympiad running from2008–12. The Cultural Olympiad is not confined to sport, but embraces a huge spectrum of activities fromvisual and performance art to the historic environment and science. In addition to the Cultural OlympiadEnglish Heritage is planning events, publications and exhibitions that will celebrate and complementBritain’s hosting of the Olympics. After the Games there is an opportunity to enhance and develop thetourism oVer, with direct or indirect links to Olympic activities and sites.

March 2007

Witnesses: Mr Colin Dawson, Chief Executive, British Association of Leisure Parks, Piers and Attractions,Mr Robin Broke, Director, the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions, Mr Gregor Hutcheon, AssistantDirector for Policy and Campaigns, National Trust, and Dr Simon Thurley, Chief Executive, EnglishHeritage, gave evidence.

Chairman: Good morning, everybody. This is thefirst oral evidence session of the Committee’s inquiryinto tourism. This morning we are focusing on twoparts. The first is devoted to those representingtourist attractions, or sights of interest to tourists,and those who own or represent the owners of suchattractions and, secondly, we will be turning to therole of local authorities. For this first part, can Iwelcome Colin Dawson, the Chief Executive of theBritish Association of Leisure Parks, Piers andAttractions, Robin Broke, the Director of theAssociation of Leading Visitor Attractions, DrSimon Thurley, Chief Executive of English

Heritage, and Gregor Hutcheon, Assistant Directorfor Policy and Campaigns for the National Trust. Iam going to ask Nigel Evans to begin.

Q1 Mr Evans: Good morning, everybody. In itslatest strategy document, the DCMS has describedtourism into the UK, or tourism generally, as“flourishing”. Is that how you would describe it? Iwill start with you, Robin, and work down.Mr Broke: To be fair, I think that is a bit wide of themark in that you can do almost anything with visitorfigures and, as we all know, statistics can be playedmany ways. There is no doubt that in 2006 there was



23 October 2007 Mr Colin Dawson, Mr Robin Broke, Mr Gregor Hutcheon and Dr Simon Thurley

a record year with 32 million visitors, but the fact isthe global market share for us should have been fargreater really and that is the underlying thing; it is allabout missed opportunities. We think there has beena sudden downturn in August. UK Inbound wouldsay there was minus 5% on arrivals and minus 4%forward bookings, like on like August this year withAugust last year, and VisitBritain would say there isminus 4% on value in August. This may pick upagain and we think we are seeing a visas impactcoming through, with the high cost of visas, butthere are definitely missed opportunities. The WorldTravel and Tourism Council are predicting that overthe next ten years there could be 50% growth inworld tourism. If we keep sinking and losing ourpecking order internationally, at the rate we are atthe moment, our balance of payments deficit willprobably go from minus £18 billion a year to minus£30 billion over the next 10 years. I do not think weshould be complacent here.

Q2 Mr Evans: You say it is 32 million but it shouldhave been higher. What figure should it have been?Mr Broke: I would have to come back to you.VisitBritain will be able to give you that sort ofevidence. It probably should be of the order of 37million, but that would need VisitBritain to runthose figures. This is absolute fact, which is acceptedby everybody, we are losing our global market share.

Q3 Mr Evans: To who?Mr Broke: That is a good question. Again, I am notthe expert on that, but there is more travel comingout of the Far East and, I suppose, initially some ofthat will go closer to that area. We are putting upmassive barriers, particularly with our visa charges,with our VAT on accommodation at 17.5% and withair passenger duty. Not all these things are wrongand we do not want just anybody arriving in thecountry. We would like the visa system to be solid,but the question is whether all of that cost forpolicing it should fall on tourism or whether itshould fall on a general government budget. Ifsomebody comes and spends £500 here, that is to ourbenefit, and if they are kept out because theadditional cost of the visa to come here over comingto the Schengen is an extra £40–£50 per head of thefamily, well then, again, it is a lost opportunity.Mr Dawson: I would agree with Robin that the useof the word “flourishing” is slightly over the top. Wehave had a reasonable period of time in recent times,but we have missed a number of opportunities. If Ican answer your question relating to domestictourism rather than overseas tourism, which I thinkis the issue that Robin has primarily dealt with there,those opportunities are really relating to things suchas the competitive nature which we find ourselves inin a domestic tourism. The domestic tourism markethas changed because we now find that our nearEuropean neighbours are real and genuinecompetitors with the growth of budget airlines,which are now at virtually every regional airportaround our shores. The issues we have missed out onare things like our VAT level for accommodationand attraction income. If that were to be at a reduced

level, a number of issues would be addressed. Youwould find that the prices of admission andaccommodation would be reduced, there would beincreased opportunities for capital expenditure, youwould find an increase in admission numbers and,also, we would be that much more competitive withthe European states that currently have a lower rateof VAT than ourselves.

Q4 Mr Evans: Who are we losing out to?Mr Dawson: We are losing out to France definitely,we are losing out to Spain and, to a lesser extent, weare losing out to Germany, but it is those nearneighbours of ours who I think are the greatestthreat to us, France in particular.

Q5 Mr Evans: You have got free admissions to artgalleries and museums, is that not a plus? If you goto Paris you will get fleeced.Mr Dawson: I think there is a slightly diVerent feelfor the attractions such as the museum sector. Whilstthat is an important part of the attractions sector, itis not total, there are a number of other attractionsfor which people have to pay admission fees and it isthose sectors that I am primarily concerned about.Additionally, we have missed an opportunity of notchanging our daylight hours. Daylight saving to usis an absolute must. We have an opportunity therewhere it is estimated, quite realistically and veryconservatively in my mind, that we could earn anadditional £2 billion of earnings for our tourismindustry if we adjusted to what is commonly called“Double Summer Time”. Those opportunities goway beyond tourism, but it is tourism whichobviously is the important issue. In supporting that,there is the health issue where people would havegreater opportunity for activity and exercise duringthe day. There is the opportunity for road safety,fewer accidents it is estimated by research that ispublished today, which you may have seen in thisweek’s Sunday Times by Cambridge University.They are estimating 104 fewer deaths and 400 lessmajor injuries, a total cost to the Health Serviceestimated at £200 million. These are enormoussavings. There are energy questions which the DSTwould address. There are exercise opportunities forpeople to take more exercise because the end of theday will be that much lighter. It attacks the obesityquestion which is very top of the mind at themoment. I think there are huge opportunities whichwe have had and we have lost, and I would like to seein the very near future we would certainly addressboth those, a reduced level of VAT and daylightsaving.Dr Thurley: I do not think I am really competent tosay whether it is flourishing, buoyant, successful,what I know is the heritage part of the touristbusiness is doing pretty well; 63 million visits to 821attractions last year. There are various factors whichaVect how big a slice of the tourism market heritagegets. You might want to discuss that later, I do notknow. In answer to your question, from myperspective tourism is a vitally important part of



23 October 2007 Mr Colin Dawson, Mr Robin Broke, Mr Gregor Hutcheon and Dr Simon Thurley

what we are doing, it is a vitally important part ofsupporting our heritage in this country and tourismplays a very important role in it.Mr Hutcheon: I would agree with where Simonstarted, from the National Trust perspective we havehad a reasonable year. We had a tricky period overthe summer, indeed the sector did overall, butaround Easter and around autumn time our visitornumbers are up, our feedback on what people aregetting is great and our membership, which isanother indicator, is at record levels at 3.5 million. Ithink we will probably be slightly quietly moreoptimistic than perhaps some of our other partnersaround the table. I think that is mainly because forus the domestic market really matters most and, wewould argue, the domestic market matters most tothe UK. It is £60 billion compared with around £12billion if you were to compare the size of thedomestic revenue market with the internationalmarket. The second theme which has emerged so faris around missed opportunities. For us the missedopportunity is to really focus on growing thedomestic market in its broadest sense. What we areseeing is a growing appetite amongst our visitors andtourists domestically for access to the real,authentic, locally distinctive experiences, whether itis local food or visitor attractions, heritage sites andfantastic landscapes. What we are also beginning tobetter understand is the economic significance of, Ido not know what the term would be, the less formalin tourist infrastructure, the softer elements of whatour tourism oVer is. I was really struck by some workwhich the Ramblers’ Association did recently on theeconomic value of the Cornish Footpaths which, Ithink the conclusion was, outstripped the economicvalue of the flagship project in that area, the EdenProject. It is these informal, small-scale, often familybusiness-type enterprises which, we would argue, arethe life blood of the tourist economy. They are alsodoing reasonably well, although there are issues thatwe could do more to make more of thoseopportunities.

Q6 Mr Sanders: Low cost airlines have seen anenormous increase in the number of peopletravelling longer distances than in the past, but it isa two-way process. Have we benefited from inboundtourism as a consequence of the increased number offlights and their relative cheapness to the past?Mr Dawson: Certainly not in our sector. I would nothave thought there would have been any benefit onthe incoming flights.

Q7 Mr Sanders: Why not?Mr Dawson: Because I do not think they come forthe type of attractions which we operate in theprivate sector, I am sure my colleagues probablybenefit to an extent. That is the whole point, that weare competing with theme parks, amusement parks,safari parks and those are growing enormously inEurope due to the obvious benefits to tourism. Ithink that is why they are far more competitive for usnow, and those opportunities exist within their owncountry. What happens with our tourists is they are

going over there and finding, “Oh, yes, I can do thesame thing over here for my family holiday that I cando in the UK”.Mr Hutcheon: Speaking from the National Trustperspective, as a conservation organisation as well asa significant tourism operator, we are extremelyconcerned about the impact of the huge growth inlow cost flights, not just on the tourism deficit, whichwe know has been growing significantly over the lastten years, and already this year around £13.5 billionmore is being spent abroad by our UK residentsholidaying abroad compared with the inbound but,also, for the significant environmental impacts fromthe growth of this industry. We face it directlythrough the demands of airport expansion, and weare currently opposing expansion plans at StanstedAirport. We are concerned about the impact onproperties around Wolverhampton, East Midlandsand John Lennon International at Liverpool. Theassociated impacts are around traYc, extradevelopment, noise, air pollution and ultimately it isundermining the tourism oVer. It was interesting tosee some work from, I think it was, the Campaign toProtect Rural England (CPRE) last year whichhighlighted the impact on tranquillity, one of thereally tremendously important aspects of thecountryside, from aircraft now stacking aroundthese regional and major airports, so it isundermining part of our tourist oVer.

Q8 Mr Sanders: What is your answer to that? Wecannot stop people flying abroad if the oVer there isbetter than the oVer here. What needs to be done topersuade people to increase the domestic tourismmarket?Mr Hutcheon: It is a very complex issue. There areall sorts of elasticities and things to take intoaccount, but we need to progress on two fronts. Oneon the positive side, as I was highlighting earlier, weneed to emphasise the attraction of the domesticmarket to encourage people to holiday at home andto make that experience more rewarding, a highquality experience, and perhaps address some of theother issues we mentioned earlier around the cost, tomake it more attractive to people to reduce thedemand for flights. We also need to make it a slightlymore even playing field and recognise that currentlythe aviation industry has expanded on the back of afailure to take account of its wider environmentalcosts. We could look at issues like an EU-widecharging scheme, aviation fuel tax, and internationalCO2 emissions trading schemes. These are all verytricky and diYcult issues to progress, but those arethe ones we think will make the most diVerence.

Q9 Mr Sanders: In terms of the amount of money wespend on marketing, VisitBritain spends far more onmarketing this country overseas than it does on thedomestic market. I think

final volume 2 tourism · and attractions, robin broke, director, the association of leading...

Documents