§ 8. Mr. Adleyasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what are the implications for tourism in England of the Tourism (Overseas Promotion) (Scotland) Bill [Lords].
§ Mr. ButcherThis legislation, which was debated in the House on 21 February, does not affect in any way the statutory function of the British Tourist Authority to promote England, and all other parts of Britain, abroad.
§ Mr. AdleyMy hon. Friend knows of my interest in the industry and of my full support for the Bill. In the debate that he has just referred to great concern was expressed by Scottish Members about the appointment of one person to be chairman of the British Tourist Authority and the English tourist board. Will my hon. Friend make urgent and serious representations to the Scottish Office and to our Scottish colleagues to assure them that the appointment is no threat to the tourist interests of Scotland? Does he agree that the long-term interests of Britain depend on strengthening the regional boards in England?
§ Mr. ButcherI am delighted that my hon. Friend has given me an opportunity to clarify the position. He is right when he says tht the joint chairmanships which Duncan Bluck will occupy are no threat to the current position and role of the Scottish tourist board. With regard to the English regional tourist boards, my hon. Friend may be encouraged to know that the ETB is being asked to devolve certain marketing functions to the regional tourist boards. In general, as he will know, the future movement of tourist policy will depend to a large extent on what Mr. Duncan Bluck can pursue. It is only because there was not legislative time available to sort out the position across the country as a whole that we were unable to formalise this earlier.
§ Mr. BruceThe Minister has said that there will be no confusion between the chairmanships of the English tourist board and the British Tourist Authority. I am afraid that we in Scotland know too much about confusion between 245 England and Britain to be convinced. Will the Minister acknowledge that in these circumstances a budget of £200,000 to enable the Scottish tourist board to promote itself is not likely to be adequate to make a significant difference to the strong position of London as the gateway to tourism in Britain?
§ Mr. ButcherThe total spend of Scotland will be something like £3,200,000, because it has been allocated approximately £3 million through the British Tourist Authority. London remains the major magnet for the United Kingdom as a whole. Many tourists who eventually go to Scotland will have come to London as the first step in their international route to Scotland.
§ Mr. HicksIn view of the content of the statement on tourism made by my hon. Friend the Minister of State last November, and my hon. Friend's remarks about the future role of regional tourists boards within England in respect of marketing and promotion, will my hon. Friend assure the House that nothing contained in the Bill will prejudice those areas?
§ Mr. ButcherI can give my hon. Friend that assurance.
§ Mr. GouldDo not these organisational changes take place against a backdrop of a declining trade balance in tourism? Is the Minister aware that in 1981, 1982 and 1983 we failed to earn our customary surplus and that we have fallen into a substantial deficit? Why has that happened? When will the position change, and what is the Minister doing to change it?
§ Mr. ButcherWe still have a £8 billion turnover in tourism in the United Kingdom. It is a major industry, almost on a par with the car industry in terms of turnover. Our position internationally is affected by a number of factors, not least exchange rates, and tourist policy within the United Kingdom has to be tempered by those movements.