News 
 Local News 
 News 
 General 
 Council slammed for 'mothering' tourism industry 

Council slammed for 'mothering' tourism industry

28 Dec, 2009 04:09 PM
REDLAND City Council's decision to continue managing tourism in-house has been slammed as "absolute nonsense" by the chairman of the taskforce set up by the council to investigate the best way forward for the industry.

The committee recommended that Redlands Tourism merge with the council's current tourism services under a new, independent organisation with external tourism experts who would actively seek their own funding to become less financially reliant on the council and end the current system of fractured funding and duplication of websites, brochures and phone numbers.

Chief Executive Officer of Story Bridge Adventure Climb and local resident, Paul Lewin, chaired the advisory committee and said the model it proposed had received unanimous support across the community.

"We consulted with the [Redland] Chamber of Commerce and all its member businesses, everyone from banks and retailers to car rentals as well as Brisbane Marketing and Tourism Queensland and we had 100 per cent backing for the design," Mr Lewin said.

"So to have a handful of councillors vote against it with no knowledge of tourism is total nonsense, and I note that no councillors proposed an alternate model, which means the taskforce is dissolved, the report is shelved and there is nowhere constructive to go forward from here."

Redland City Mayor Melva Hobson and Councillor for Cleveland and North Stradbroke Island Craig Ogilvie were also on the advisory board and voted for the proposed new structure with councillors Wendy Boglary (Div 1), Kathy Reimers (Div 8) and Debra Henry (Div 3).

"I'm absolutely disgusted by the outcome of this vote, especially when four of the six councillors who voted against it didn't even attend the workshops, and those of you who voted to set up the taskforce in the first place clearly recognised there was a problem, but are now reverting back to a broken, status quo arrangement," Cr Ogilvie said.

In May 2008, all sitting councillors voted to form the taskforce, except Cr Murray Elliott, who was absent, and former councillor Peter Dowling, who voted against. Cr John Burns was not a councillor at the time.

Deputy Mayor Toni Bowler said her vote against the proposal was a show of support for the new manager of tourism starting with the council in the next week, and said a number of her residents who worked in tourism had not been consulted and did not agree with the proposal.

Cr Karen Williams said while recognising the vote did not endorse a funding amount for the new committee and that the council was already spending $770,000 on tourism, the figure of $1million as an initial cost had come up several times, and "the council cannot afford not to be frugal".

Cr Murray Elliott said the council was mothering the industry, and that "tourism operators should get together and offer us a 50-50 funding option, not one where we're giving them $1million, and they put in $100,000".

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Page:
1

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Vote all the councillors out of office next election!! They do not know how to promote tourism as a business industry but rather like to use rate payers money to support their EGO.
Posted by bendigo, 28/12/2009 7:30:56 PM, on Bayside Bulletin
Huh? $770,000 of ratepayers' money to bring tourists? Many would come to places like Straddie without any kind of promotional urging anyway, so this money has to be measured against any new tourism it attracts that wouldn't have come here otherwise. And even then, who gets the return from this expenditure? A few fast food outlets. This is NOT what RCC should be splurging rates on.
Posted by fignatz, 29/12/2009 9:31:36 AM, on Bayside Bulletin
Kudos on the vote. I don't see how this would get unanimous support from business, when no other industry sector gets that level of financial support from the Council.

I do see why those in Tourism would love the chance to get $700k+ a year channelled into an organisation that they ran on the agreement that they'd "try" to gain financial indepedence in the future.

Posted by Brett, 29/12/2009 9:42:26 AM, on Bayside Bulletin
Surely if these businesses are successful they can do their own promotion. The council seems to be propping up life-styles.
Posted by burdened, 29/12/2009 10:50:46 AM, on Bayside Bulletin
Tourists spending money in an area benefits all local businesses and residents. Research Australia has demonstrated that the tourism dollar is spent 6-8 times in the destination and this is unique to tourism. EG tourists spend in hotels, shops, restaurants, transport, banks etc and because of this income these businesses and staff spend on other local services.

Ask any business or local on the Gold Coast and see how much tourism affects their income.

Promoting an area benefits all local businesses and creates local jobs. These NO vote councillors need to take time to understand the uniquesness of promoting tourism.

As a local - I can see the benefit to my business - and NO I am not in typical tourism.

I'd also like to see more jobs in the area for my kids.

Posted by banker, 30/12/2009 8:59:16 AM, on Bayside Bulletin
I have no opposition to tourist promotions, but I do wonder at the ethics of taking rate money from retirees who have moved to the Redland, retirement homes, working people, other industries/businesses to prop up the tourist industry.

There is no subsidy for the building industry, electrical stores or service stations. These businesses have to survive by their good business practises and their own unsubsidised advertising.

There is an opportunity for the council or a private company to co-ordinate a tourist promotion as a user pays thing without the large input of our money. This just seems such a non-council activity. As I said before - propping up lifestyles.

Posted by burdened, 30/12/2009 12:14:05 PM, on Bayside Bulletin
Promotion of an area is the benefit of ALL businesses. The post office, stores, service stations, builders all prosper from promotion of the destination. If we don't have thriving businesses in the area then Redlands will become a large retirement village with no shops / things to do.
Posted by banker, 31/12/2009 9:31:28 AM, on Bayside Bulletin
I just ask, are we propping up non-viable businesses???
Posted by burdened, 31/12/2009 12:21:23 PM, on Bayside Bulletin
Promotion of an area does not prop up unviable businesses. If a business is unviable, then it will close. Promoting a destination helps all businesses in the area. If the tourism unit was to run a specific tourism tactical campiagn, then the local tourism operators would have to put money into that campiagn. There is no free ride here.
Posted by banker, 31/12/2009 3:37:14 PM, on Bayside Bulletin
$770,000 in promotion is not a free ride?? When did this start??? banker, please explain, in little words, how this works in your world.!!!!!
Posted by burdened, 31/12/2009 5:30:01 PM, on Bayside Bulletin

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
How to manage tourism in the Redlands is again subject of fierce debate.
How to manage tourism in the Redlands is again subject of fierce debate.

Most popular articles

1) Apple iPhone 4 32GB44 plans 12%
2) Apple iPhone 4 16GB44 plans 6%
3) HTC Desire4 plans 2%
4) Apple iPhone 3GS 8GB33 plans 2%
5) Sony Ericsson Xperia X10 Mini Pro37 plans 1%

Mobile Phones | Broadband Plans

Get the best deal at Fairfax Digital - Rural Press



Bayside Bulletin / The Redland Times







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Navigate

Classifieds

More Ways to Read

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2010. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...