| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
9 Apr 2003 : Column 379—continued
7.20 pm
The Minister for Tourism, Film and Broadcasting (Dr. Kim Howells): I congratulate the hon. Member for Bridgwater (Mr. Liddell-Grainger) on raising this important matter in today's Adjournment debate. The hon. Gentleman is right to talk up the virtues of Exmoor and of the coastline where the moor tumbles into the Bristol channel. It is one of the most spectacular coastlines in the country, and I confirm that it has very steep hills. I remember toiling up from Porlock Weir, which has a very good pub called "The Ship", if I remember rightly—although on that occasion remembering rightly was very difficult. There is no question but that Exmoor is a remarkable part of the world. It is one of Britain's great wildernesses.
The hon. Gentleman is right, too, to urge people to visit Exmoor this Easter. It is a great place, and he has put his finger on something very important—that Britain's great tourist areas such as Exmoor will work their way out of the lingering effects of foot and mouth only by getting tourists to visit. I very much admire the way in which the hon. Gentleman framed his argument, but I was sorry to hear him talk so disparagingly about Sir Michael Lickiss.
I can tell the hon. Gentleman—I have never told the House this before—that, when I was given the privilege of taking on the job of Tourism Minister, I looked around the whole of Britain for a model. I wanted to find out how we could get more value from the money going into tourism. I found that the south-west was among the best areas in that regard, if not the best. Cairns Boston and Malcolm Bell of South West Tourism had developed a working relationship with Sir Michael and the regional development agency, partly as a result of the terrible blight that was foot and mouth. I wanted that model to be replicated across Britain.
In part, the south-west model appealed because, London aside, the area probably attracts more tourism than any other in Britain, with the possible exception of
Cumbria and the lake district. However, it is certainly one of our premier areas, for lots of reasons. I hope very much that the hon. Gentleman reassesses Sir Michael's contribution, as he was operating under very difficult circumstances.I took the tourism job in June 2001, right in the middle of the foot and mouth crisis. It was a terrible experience. I remember going to Exmoor for the first time. People just wanted to sit down and talk to me about what the outbreak meant for their businesses which, very often, were lifestyle businesses, as the hon. Gentleman noted. For instance, people might have put their retirement money into a bed and breakfast or a little hotel, the entire existence of which depended on the open path running alongside.
I agree that we have learned the lessons of the period. God forbid that it ever happens again but, if it does, I hope that we would handle it better than previously. Having seen so many images of cows with their legs stuck in the air on burning pyres with black smoke crossing the landscape—not generally on Exmoor, but often in the south-west—I then went around the world trying to persuade people to come back to Britain as a great place to visit. The hon. Gentleman is right to remind us that those lessons are there to be learned and that those mistakes should not be made again.
I shall not bore the hon. Gentleman or other hon. Members with endless statistics about the south-west, but it is a remarkable success story. Indeed, the area needs to be. The hon. Gentleman mentioned the particular difficulties of businesses on and around Exmoor, but he could have talked about the effects further down the peninsula, in Cornwall, of the decline of the mining industry. Many years ago, when I used to go down there on rugby tours, it felt like a wealthy area. When I went back in the late 1990s, I was shocked by the change that I saw in the hinterland areas that had suffered the effects of the running-down of some of their basic industries. The fact that Cornwall won objective 1 funding is in many ways a bad thing. The hon. Gentleman is right to talk about the fragility of much of the economy and the centrality of tourism. As he suggested, even in areas where we assumed that the most important industry was agriculture, tourism was more affected in terms of jobs and revenue.
Mr. Flook: The Minister has wandered off down into Cornwall, which, as he knows, is quite a long way from Somerset. In my constituency, as in that of my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgwater (Mr. Liddell-Grainger), we can see large parts of south Wales. I am not sure whether people in Pontypridd can see Exmoor. I am always struck by the fact that Wales has a rather munificent £8 per head spent on it in terms of tourism, whereas we in England get only 24p per head. When can the Minister speak to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to try to get that huge disparity reduced? That would help Exmoor quite remarkably, because there are only several thousand people there, and on a per head basis they get, by comparison, almost nothing to help in attracting tourism to Exmoor.
Dr. Howells: That was a fine, if brief, speech in the form of an intervention. The hon. Gentleman makes an interesting point. It is true that divvied up, so to speak, public expenditure per tourist is much higher in Wales
and in Scotland than in England. If one looks at the reverse of that, as one must, the number of visitors to England is phenomenally higher—partly because of London, of course—and the spend is hugely more than in Scotland and Wales. The bigger spend per head of population is partly something that we have inherited as a result of the game of catch-up that those tourist boards have been playing. Despite the fact that Wales and Scotland are full of magnificent tourist attractions, they have a long way to go in terms of convincing people to visit them, wonderful though they are.We need to remember that the great majority of in-bound tourists to this country come through London. The regions of England as well as the nations of Wales and Scotland have never worked hard enough to find out how to use London as a more productive gateway and to persuade people to visit such places as Exmoor. London has not been proactive enough in encouraging those types of gateway partnership, to use a cliché, to get people down there. However, this debate was initiated by the hon. Member for Bridgwater and I will not go into that subject now.
The hon. Gentleman highlighted the most difficult accommodation cases. It is often a question of accommodation, but some terrific initiatives are up and running—private-public initiatives to raise the quality of accommodation. Last year, 2 million people visited Exmoor, which is a tremendous number. The businesses in the area have realised in a big way, certainly since foot and mouth, that we must make that number sustainable. We have to keep those visitors coming back and they have to want to come back.
The hon. Gentleman was right to highlight the difficulties that some people face just to stay in business. However, as he knows, there is also some great accommodation in Exmoor—some of the best to be found anywhere in the country, not only because of the views and the location, but because of the way the staff treat people. One always gets a great welcome in the area. We cannot emphasise that enough.
As well as looking to the Government to advertise the delights of this country and persuading visitors who go to London and the other tourist honey pots to visit the slightly more remote areas, which is a difficult job, we must ensure that when they get there they have such a good time that they want to keep going back.
It is a Catch-22 situation in many ways. The hon. Gentleman made a joke about the way the Small Business Service might turn up to help the business. He said it was lunacy for someone from the service to come along and say, "What you need is a much better-structured business plan," or whatever. He is right. There must be more immediate help than that. I would like to think that there often is. I am sure that he would also admit that in many cases a good business plan would not come amiss. It might help the business to access the help that is available. Often, that is a mystery to such businesses and they will not try to tap the
potential help that is there for them because they see it as being too bureaucratic and involving too much red tape. Perhaps they are hostages to fortune. I do not know.I have become sceptical. I think that the situation often depends on the business. In some of the best cases, a personal link has been forged between the business and the agency. Sometimes, it is all down to personalities. It would be nice if we could find a formula that would avoid the necessity for personalities to become involved, but all too often that is the case.
The Exmoor national park authority receives a total of £3.32 million from the Government, and it has been given an extra £260,000 for 2003–04—a rise of 8.5 per cent. Those figures include the sustainable development fund of £125,000 in 2002–03 and £200,000 in 2003–04.
The hon. Gentleman has told us about some of the virtues of the park. A dedicated park authority was set up in 1997 to conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area, and to promote opportunities for the public understanding and enjoyment of its special qualities. From my dealings with the tremendous people who are involved in the north Devon partnership, I know that they realised, long before the Government, that there were changes in the way that people take holidays nowadays and in the length of break they want. Those changes often lead to the development of niche markets.
Exmoor has great potential for such developments; for example, cycling, although not necessarily up Porlock Weir hill. People could cycle down it, perhaps—very carefully. Other holidays could involve horse riding and walking.
On my last visit to the area, I managed to upset a few people by saying that we need to think about families. Parents might want to do some walking on a beautiful moorland ridge, but their children might not. The right hon. Member for Haltemprice and Howden (David Davis) is a great walker and I am sure that he has enjoyed time on Exmoor, possibly walking along the coastal path, which is one of Britain's great treasures, but teenage kids might not want to do so. Teenagers might think that it was the worst possible nightmare.
The hon. Member for Bridgwater mentioned Butlins at Minehead. That company has been extremely imaginative and has understood the need for a good mix of attractions.The national parks need to consider such ideas. The prospects are exciting. For example, there could be architecturally adventurous but discreet water centres where parents could park their kids. Parents and children could all do what they wanted, without spoiling the unique attractions of places such as Exmoor.
I welcome the debate, and I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government are very much aware of the pressures on businesses on Exmoor. We shall continue to do everything in our power to try to help them.
- Adjourned accordingly at twenty-three minutes to Eight o'clock.
| Index | Home Page |