Visit Britain tourism agency to cut jobs
How important to rural England is its tourism offer? Not as important as it should be, suggests this article in The Guardian.
Do the assets sell themselves? or do nationally funded representatives in countries like Mexico and Thailand have a major role in driving tourism visits to places like Stonehenge?
It is all too easy in these hard financial times to be seduced by simplistically criticising the overseas work of organisations like Visit Britain. But when we all have to take a hair-cut (including those like me with no hair!) these are legitimate questions.
Downstream from the sad news that 13 overseas offices are to shut as part of efficiencies at Visit Britain I still have a debate about why the public sector “does” tourism.
I am not saying it is bad thing per se, but as local authorities are concerned with economic development across all sectors I have often wondered why they choose to engage directly in tourism on a commercial basis when they don’t choose to get involved directly in mainstream manufacturing or commercial financial services.
Not that I am advocating the latter! I am sure the roots of this are historic in the context of the inheritance of tourism assets by councils and I am sure that where market failure predominates, particularly in view of the new general power of competence proposed for local authorities in the Localism Bill there is no reason why councils shouldn’t be more entrepreneurial.
Everything is up for grabs in these strange times. I am sure you will have views.