§ 3. Mr. Silvesterasked the Secretary of State for Trade what discussions he has held with interested parties on plans further to promote tourism in the North-West; and if he will make a statement.
§ 7. Mr. Knoxasked the Secretary of State for Trade what measures he is taking to assist the development of the tourist industry in the Leek parliamentary constituency, in view of the recent expenditure on promotion of tourism in development areas.
§ 15. Mr. Blakerasked the Secretary of State for Trade what recent discussions he has had with the English Tourist Board regarding its strategy for marketing English holidays for residents in the United Kingdom.
§ 23. Mr. Gwilym Robertsasked the Secretary of State for Trade what additional steps he is taking to encourage tourism outside the development areas; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. MeacherThe Government currently provide more than £15 million a year to the English Tourist Board and to the British Tourist Authority, of which only about £2 million is for assistance to tourism projects in the development and special development areas. Most of the remaining £13 million is spent on publicity and marketing, which benefits all regions, including the North-West and the Midlands.
§ Mr. SilvesterDoes the Minister agree that tourism can provide as much employment as manufacturing? Will he, therefore, look again at the question of areas in the North-West which are outside development areas but which are nevertheless the best for tourist development?
§ Mr. MeacherThere may be some misunderstanding about the position. Out of a total tourism budget of just under £20 million, nearly £16 million is used for publicity and research and general promotion, which benefits all parts of the country and not only the development in special development areas. That is four-fifths of the total budget.
If we are talking about the remaining £2 million only which is available to the 6 English Tourist Board in the coming year for project aid, if that were distributed over the whole country it would dilute its effectiveness to an unacceptable degree.
§ Mr. KnoxIs the Minister aware of the considerable concern of those trying to develop the tourist industry in my constituency? Does he agree that expenditure by the English Tourist Board on advertising discriminates strongly against those in my constituency and in favour of the development areas? This is a further burden and difficulty and discriminates against the tourist industry in my constituency. Does he realise that people find it difficult to make the industry prosper?
§ Mr. MeacherOn the specific point about advertising, I disagree that there is any discrimination in ETB advertising against parts of the country outside development areas. The traditional resorts and the development areas are not competing for the same market. They are not promoting the same product. The main annual advertising campaign of the ETB, such as the "Let's Go" leaflet, is directed at helping the traditional resorts as against the foreign resorts.
§ Mr. BlakerAlthough I welcome the work done by the English Tourist Board, is the Under-Secretary of State aware that a recent document entitled "Advertising Strategy for the English Tourist Board" prepared for the board by an organisation called KMP Limited, a firm of advertising agents, advocates a strategy not simply of encouraging extra tourists into development areas but of diverting the existing English tourists from the resorts to development areas? Does he approve of that strategy?
§ Mr. MeacherWe are certainly concerned, in accordance with the November 1974 guidelines, to shift an increasing proportion of the extra number of tourists coming into this country into the less congested areas, where there is a great deal of undeveloped tourism potential. But that is perfectly compatible with promoting the traditional resorts. As I have indicated, the main annual advertising campaign of the ETB is directed towards those resorts, including that of the hon. Gentleman.
§ Mr. RobertsIs my hon. Friend aware that in recent correspondence that we 7 have had I have drawn his attention to the situation in which the English Tourist Board is using enormous advertisements for parts of development areas whereas areas such as the heart of England, including in and near Shakespeare country and Cannock Chase, are getting only the minimum of advertising? Is his Department mixing the twin aims of helping the development areas on the one hand and stimulating tourism on the other?
§ Mr. MeacherNo, it is not. I think that the two aims are perfectly compatible. We are often criticised because there is too much congestion, for example, in Stratford, Oxford or London, and there is pressure on the ground of alleged people pollution—which is becoming the fashionable phrase—to move people out of those areas. I do not think that my hon. Friend need worry. Stratford and these other areas will continue to receive very strong support from the British Tourist Authority in foreign advertising.
§ Mr. HefferHas my hon. Friend had the opportunity of reading the excellent booklet, published in conjunction with the English Tourist Board and the Merseyside County Council, which describes the facilities which exist on Merseyside—not only the seaside resorts, but many other facilities, such as museums, music and the arts? Will he tell the hon. Members who are opposing the proposition that there should be extra tourist facilities for areas such as mine that we are doing a great disservice to those areas, which require all the assistance that they can get?
§ Mr. MeacherI am well aware that the "Costa del Ribble", or whatever area my hon. Friend is promoting, does not need further assistance in order to promote its tourism. The point that I am making is that we have £2 million only in the English Tourist Board in the coming year for all tourism project aid. If we distribute it across the whole country, the impact of that money will be lost.
§ Mr. NottMay I take up the question of what the Minister described as people pollution, a new and interesting term? If Labour Members of Parliament no longer wish to take their holidays in the Cornish development area, I am sure that this is a loss of tourism traffic which we can reasonably bear with equanimity.
§ Mr. MeacherThe hon. Gentleman's view of what constitutes people pollution in Cornwall is a matter for him.