Chamber
Plenary, 29 Nov 2007
29 Nov 2007 · S3 · Plenary
Item of business
Tourism
No specific figures were given about the marketing budget, but it was made clear that VisitScotland's view is that the core marketing budget has not gone down and, in fact, has increased. That is without taking into account the £5 million for the year of homecoming and the £1.5 million for the next three years to focus on the Ryder cup.
We are optimistic about the future. I recently attended the VisitScotland award ceremony at the Edinburgh international conference centre and was impressed by an industry that is in buoyant mood and is hungry for the future.
We welcome the debate and support much of the Government's approach, but there are two areas that we want to highlight in our amendment. The first relates to what might be called localism. We had concerns about the abolition of the area tourist boards and we think that the situation needs to be considered for the future. Certainly, any moves to centralise the industry further need to be resisted. It is important that local opportunities are given at local levels, so I was encouraged to hear the minister say last week that we need to improve engagement at a local level. I was further encouraged yesterday to hear VisitScotland say that the vast bulk of the 109 tourist information centres are safe. It is important that we stand up for them.
Tourism initiatives in Scotland are often best marketed by local tourism areas. That is particularly true in Edinburgh, which has capital city status and should be looked at again as an exception. VisitScotland talks about a national dish with local flavours, but it is important that we can taste those local flavours. The Government should commit to localism as far as possible.
The second part of our amendment refers to the aspiration to achieve 50 per cent growth and makes it clear that we need a plan to do that. The tourism framework, which is a largely positive document, and the 50 per cent figure that came out of it were produced in March 2006—a year and a half ago—yet there is still no clear plan for delivery. That is one thing that prompted the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee, with all-party support, to decide to look into the issue and come up with some suggestions and answers. That is important because, only last week, the chief executive of VisitScotland said that we need to quantify activity in key areas, allocate responsibility and measure progress on the 50 per cent growth ambition. If we do not do that, there is little chance that we will meet our aspiration.
Between 2005 and 2006, the overall position of tourism in Scotland deteriorated. The number of passenger trips decreased by 7.2 per cent and visitor spend decreased by 1.3 per cent. That is not good news and we need to reverse that trend as quickly as possible. The situation last year was excellent for international tourism. Visitor trips increased by 14.2 per cent and spend increased by more than 19 per cent. That is particularly impressive given the strength of the pound last year. There were impressive gains from the United States of America, France and Ireland. However, it was a bad year for domestic tourism, which affects the overall figures. We saw big decreases in the numbers of UK and Scottish tourists—people from the east travelling west, and people from the west and east travelling north and south. That is important and it is another reason why we favour localism. Between 2005 and 2006, the number of overnight stays in Scotland by Scottish people dropped sharply by 3 million, from 22 million to 19 million. That is why our amendment focuses on localism and getting a plan behind the 50 per cent growth figure.
We have many positive ideas. We must move as quickly as possible to year-round tourism, which will be good for the industry. It will mean that we will be much more likely to hit our targets and that we will have much more stability, which will improve the career paths and skills of those working in the industry. We need great initiatives such as the Cambo snowdrops campaign, which tries to bring tourists to Fife in February and March when it is traditionally quiet. We want increases in business tourism and, in particular, in wildlife tourism. We already have a strong reputation throughout Europe in wildlife tourism, but we can make it even stronger.
We are optimistic for the industry. We want greater control locally and a clear plan in place as quickly as possible to meet the growth aspiration. I note in passing that, according to the Scottish Government website, in 1996—the last full year of a Conservative Government—the Scottish tourism industry was worth £5 billion a year. Last year, it was worth £4.1 billion. We need to move quickly.
I move amendment S3M-945.3, to insert at end:
"further recognises the important work done by the excellent network of tourist information centres; believes that decision-making at a local level is a crucial element of an effective tourism strategy, and calls on the Scottish Government to give a more detailed explanation as to how the 50% growth ambition is to be met and the role of the public, private and third sectors in doing so."
We are optimistic about the future. I recently attended the VisitScotland award ceremony at the Edinburgh international conference centre and was impressed by an industry that is in buoyant mood and is hungry for the future.
We welcome the debate and support much of the Government's approach, but there are two areas that we want to highlight in our amendment. The first relates to what might be called localism. We had concerns about the abolition of the area tourist boards and we think that the situation needs to be considered for the future. Certainly, any moves to centralise the industry further need to be resisted. It is important that local opportunities are given at local levels, so I was encouraged to hear the minister say last week that we need to improve engagement at a local level. I was further encouraged yesterday to hear VisitScotland say that the vast bulk of the 109 tourist information centres are safe. It is important that we stand up for them.
Tourism initiatives in Scotland are often best marketed by local tourism areas. That is particularly true in Edinburgh, which has capital city status and should be looked at again as an exception. VisitScotland talks about a national dish with local flavours, but it is important that we can taste those local flavours. The Government should commit to localism as far as possible.
The second part of our amendment refers to the aspiration to achieve 50 per cent growth and makes it clear that we need a plan to do that. The tourism framework, which is a largely positive document, and the 50 per cent figure that came out of it were produced in March 2006—a year and a half ago—yet there is still no clear plan for delivery. That is one thing that prompted the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee, with all-party support, to decide to look into the issue and come up with some suggestions and answers. That is important because, only last week, the chief executive of VisitScotland said that we need to quantify activity in key areas, allocate responsibility and measure progress on the 50 per cent growth ambition. If we do not do that, there is little chance that we will meet our aspiration.
Between 2005 and 2006, the overall position of tourism in Scotland deteriorated. The number of passenger trips decreased by 7.2 per cent and visitor spend decreased by 1.3 per cent. That is not good news and we need to reverse that trend as quickly as possible. The situation last year was excellent for international tourism. Visitor trips increased by 14.2 per cent and spend increased by more than 19 per cent. That is particularly impressive given the strength of the pound last year. There were impressive gains from the United States of America, France and Ireland. However, it was a bad year for domestic tourism, which affects the overall figures. We saw big decreases in the numbers of UK and Scottish tourists—people from the east travelling west, and people from the west and east travelling north and south. That is important and it is another reason why we favour localism. Between 2005 and 2006, the number of overnight stays in Scotland by Scottish people dropped sharply by 3 million, from 22 million to 19 million. That is why our amendment focuses on localism and getting a plan behind the 50 per cent growth figure.
We have many positive ideas. We must move as quickly as possible to year-round tourism, which will be good for the industry. It will mean that we will be much more likely to hit our targets and that we will have much more stability, which will improve the career paths and skills of those working in the industry. We need great initiatives such as the Cambo snowdrops campaign, which tries to bring tourists to Fife in February and March when it is traditionally quiet. We want increases in business tourism and, in particular, in wildlife tourism. We already have a strong reputation throughout Europe in wildlife tourism, but we can make it even stronger.
We are optimistic for the industry. We want greater control locally and a clear plan in place as quickly as possible to meet the growth aspiration. I note in passing that, according to the Scottish Government website, in 1996—the last full year of a Conservative Government—the Scottish tourism industry was worth £5 billion a year. Last year, it was worth £4.1 billion. We need to move quickly.
I move amendment S3M-945.3, to insert at end:
"further recognises the important work done by the excellent network of tourist information centres; believes that decision-making at a local level is a crucial element of an effective tourism strategy, and calls on the Scottish Government to give a more detailed explanation as to how the 50% growth ambition is to be met and the role of the public, private and third sectors in doing so."
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Alex Fergusson):
NPA
Good morning. The first item of business is a debate on motion S3M-945, in the name of Jim Mather, on tourism.
The Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism (Jim Mather):
SNP
I am pleased to open the debate on such an important subject and to encourage people to come up with yet more ideas that can help to improve a key sector. I ...
Jack McConnell (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab):
Lab
Will Mr Mather say how many people at the seminars called for the ending of the route development fund? The Government has decided to end the fund, but the t...
Jim Mather:
SNP
The member knows that the route development fund is constrained by what Europe will wear at the moment, but I must tell him that, of the 160 people who atten...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
If members are keen to intervene, time is available in the debate. Members who press their request-to-speak buttons will be able to contribute properly.
Jim Mather:
SNP
Bring them on. We need ideas.
Tavish Scott (Shetland) (LD):
LD
I am surprised that Mr Mather said that no one in the tourism industry to whom he has spoken is worried about the loss of direct flights to and from Scotland...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
They are following a previous example, I think, Mr Scott.
Tavish Scott:
LD
Does the minister accept that he could find ways to augment VisitScotland's marketing budget, to allow for the development of a new mechanism for providing t...
Jim Mather:
SNP
VisitScotland has a good budget and much imagination is being applied to the issue. However, I have with me a list of issues that were raised at the seminars...
Brian Adam (Aberdeen North) (SNP):
SNP
Will the minister confirm that the £5 million for the homecoming project is not currently in VisitScotland's budget but is additional money?
Jim Mather:
SNP
It is additional money.What excites me about the project is that the plan is to activate 5.1 million Scots—in the churches, universities, schools, profession...
Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD):
LD
What is the Scottish Government's thinking on what we might call genealogical tourism, in which people come back to Scotland to look for their roots with the...
Jim Mather:
SNP
I am exceedingly positive about that. We are working closely with the registrar general for Scotland to develop that further—he is even reducing his charges ...
Lewis Macdonald (Aberdeen Central) (Lab):
Lab
We welcome the debate, but it is a debate about means, not ends. The objective of a 50 per cent increase in tourism revenue by 2015 is one that we supported ...
Rob Gibson (Highlands and Islands) (SNP):
SNP
Are you in the Labour Party suggesting that more and more people will arrive by air in Scotland or that they will use more sustainable forms of transport in ...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
I am not suggesting anything, Mr Gibson. Lewis Macdonald might be, and I am sure that he would like to answer.
Lewis Macdonald:
Lab
I am indeed, Presiding Officer. I am suggesting that if we are to achieve a 50 per cent increase in tourism revenue, there needs to be an increased number of...
Rob Gibson:
SNP
I would prefer that people come in from Leeds by road or rail rather than air. If you are looking at the largest number of visitors who come here at the mome...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
I have tried to make it clear to members that they should not use the term "you" in the chamber. It is preferred that they refer to members by their proper n...
Lewis Macdonald:
Lab
I am delighted that Mr Gibson supports tourism by road and by rail. That is encouraging. However, I hope that, come decision time, we will have a vote that s...
Jamie Stone:
LD
Does the member agree that that point also applies to the A9 north of Inverness, a road with which he is acquainted?
Lewis Macdonald:
Lab
I am well acquainted with that road. I hope that the range of strategic transport projects that have been carried forward from the previous Administration wi...
Jim Mather:
SNP
I am sure that the member will not concede that the idea of the route development fund was evolved in the SNP ranks, but will he say what steps he would take...
Lewis Macdonald:
Lab
I certainly agree with Mr Mather if his point is that the SNP did not think of the route development fund. There is nothing sustainable about air visitors to...
Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Does the member accept that the route development fund in its present format cannot continue to exist because of European rules?
Lewis Macdonald:
Lab
That is not a question for me—it is clearly one for ministers. However, there is a question for all of us. If we think that the route development fund has be...
Gavin Brown (Lothians) (Con):
Con
Has the member seen a specific line in any budget anywhere that is described as being only for marketing, and can he prove that the funding has been reduced?
Lewis Macdonald:
Lab
Along with me, Mr Brown attended yesterday's meeting of the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee, so he will recall that the visitor engagement line in the ...
Gavin Brown (Lothians) (Con):
Con
The debate should be an opportunity to unite behind Scotland's tourism industry, of which we should be extremely proud, but already the rain has arrived in t...