Tourism Development Areas (Hansard, 12 March 1979)

§ 17. Mr. Adley
asked the Secretary of State for Trade what further considerations he has given to the creation of tourism development areas, as distinct from industrial development areas; and if he will make a statement.

§ Mr. Meacher
As my right hon. Friend announced in a written answer on 22 November last year, we shall be reviewing the areas eligible for tourist project assistance in two or three years time. In principle, I favour tourist development areas, but we would need additional funds to launch them.

§ Mr. Adley
Is the Minister aware that the acceptance of the principle will be welcomed, whether or not extra funds are provided or present funds reallocated? May I take it from that that he accepts the proposition that tourism has different requirements from manufacturing industry and that one of the main problems on the British tourist scene is the decaying tourists towns around our coastline, many of which are not in development areas? Does he think that his proposals will help those areas or those who want to invest in those areas?

§ Mr. Meacher
I am glad that the hon. Gentleman accepts the proposed increase in public expenditure that is involved here, even if not in other areas. As I am sure he will know, we have extended the coverage of section 4 assistance to the intermediate areas which, for example, will take into account Blackpool, South-port, Morecambe, Colwyn Bay and Skegness. Many of them are the sort of towns that I believe the hon. Gentleman had in mind. For the rest of the country, two-thirds of all tourist disbursements by the English Tourist Board is in respect of publicity, promotion and research, none of which is territorially limited.

§ Mr. Ronald Atkins
Does not my hon. Friend agree that there is extra need for tourism to be extended from London and the Home Counties to some of the remote areas, especially those areas that have pockets of unemployment? Falmouth is an example, as indeed, are many parts of Cornwall, Scotland, the North-East and elsewhere.

§ Mr. Meacher
That is why in November 1974 this Government launched the tourism guidelines, precisely to concentrate the attractions of tourists to those areas which have great natural beauty and untapped tourism potential but which at the same time have the greatest economic need in terms of higher unemployment.

§ Mr. Anthony Grant
I very much welcome the Government's change of attitude on this subject. But is it not quite absurd to pump public money into places where tourists simply will not go and where they will not even be seen dead in? Since the Government appoint the tourist boards, why not let the Government fix the public expenditure limit and then let the tourist boards decide how best that should be applied, because they know more about it than Ministers and civil servants?

§ Mr. Meacher
There are many parts of the country, particularly in Scotland, Wales and the West Country where, far from wishing to be seen dead, people wish to spend their holidays, and be seen very much alive, for as much of the year as they can. As to fixing public expenditure and leaving the decision to the tourist boards, we make an allocation to them and it is up to them how they spend their money. We have guidelines, but we listen to the advice of the boards with regard to the construction or changes in the guidelines. That is one of the reasons why we have this modification in policy.