Memorandum submitted by the Historic Houses
Association (HHA)
OVERVIEW
1. The Historic Houses Association is in
an authoritative position to comment on the practical effects
of tourism policy.
— Over 500 of the historic houses,
castles and gardens in the membership of the HHA are open to the
public, more than those in the stewardship of the National Trust,
English Heritage and their equivalents throughout the UK, combined.
— In 2005 these houses welcomed
some 15 million visitors.
— About seven million of these
were to special events, such as concerts, festivals, conferences,
weddings, civil partnerships and corporate events.
— These visits generated £1.6-£2.0
billion in spending in the UK economy (using the former BTA "multiplier"
that £1 spending at the entrance gate generates up to £24
in accommodation, transport, catering and retail.) In fragile
rural economies expenditure in and related to historic houses
can be crucial.
— 10,000 people are directly employed
by privately owned historic houses in tourism opening (HHA 2002
Survey)
— The tourism enterprises operated
by historic houses are key to underpinning the viable management
of these landscapes; without tourism, agriculture alone would
no longer be able to support them.
2. Britain's tourism industry depends on
our historic environment and the critical message within this
submission is that the chronic under-funding of public support
for the maintenance of Britain's heritage needs to be addressed.
Britain's historic environment helps define
our national and international identity, shaping how we think
about ourselves and how other people see us. Iconic images of
Britain's heritage featured strongly in our successful Olympic
bid and VisitBritain's research demonstrates, by way of example,
that 72% of tourists from Russia and 66% of those from China say
that castles, churches, monuments and historic houses are top
of their list of things to visit in Britain.
However, the physical fabric of the historic
environment, both our public buildings, listed places of worship,
and our privately and charitably owned heritage, is in ever increasing
need of investment and repair.
3. In January 2007, Britain's leading heritage
organisations—Heritage Link, English Heritage, the Historic
Houses Association, the National Trust and the Heritage Lottery
Fund—presented Government with a report, Valuing our
Heritage—The case for future investment in the historic
environment (not printed), which details the challenges facing
owners and guardians of our historic sites, buildings, places
and gardens. The report shows that spending per head on heritage
in England is less than in many other European countries whilst
heritage regularly tops the list of reasons why tourists visit
the UK, supporting a tourist industry which contributes £83
billion to the economy each year. Over 17,000 buildings are at
risk in England alone despite the money already committed to maintenance
by private owners and public support. HLF awards are down
15% in real terms over the last two years, and English Heritage
has seen its spending fall by £19.6 million in real terms
over the last five years.
4. We need to invest in the resource upon
which this is dependent and Valuing our Heritage set out the benefits
of investment in the historic environment and the case for
targeted increases in funding to:
— support the implementation of
the new heritage protection system;
— maintain the fabric of our heritage
by increasing funding for restoration and preventative maintenance
including for listed Places of Worship;
— restore English Heritage's grant
in aid to 1997 levels; and
— broaden audiences and get more
people involved with the historic environment.
Q1. The challenges and opportunities for the
domestic and inbound tourism industries, including cheap flights
abroad and their impact on traditional tourist resorts
1.1 The popularity of heritage including
historic buildings as a driver of domestic and inbound tourism
continues unabated. Internal competition for visitors is now being
met by competition from abroad. The fall of the Iron Curtain,
development of low-cost airlines and expansion of the EU has opened
up new outbound travel possibilities for that significant segment
with an interest in culture and heritage.
1.2 The Grey Market. 50% of global population
growth between 2006-50 will be a result of the increase in the
number of people aged 55+ (US Census Bureau projections). This
means one in four people alive in 2050 will be aged 55 or over
and this market segment is more likely than younger market segments
to be motivated in choosing destinations by culture and heritage.
Between 2000-05 the growth in visitors to the UK aged 55+ has
been 32% and in 2005 more than 5 million over 55s visited Britain
from overseas, representing 1 in 6 of the UK's 30 million inbound
visitors. The UK will be competing for this culturally and heritage
orientated Grey Market, seeking to retain domestic visitors who
might otherwise go abroad and to promote potential inbound tourists
the exceptional heritage of Britain.
1.3 New air routes offer both challenges
and opportunities. A trend towards North Africa becoming a destination
for low-cost carriers is growing. Ryan Air has reached agreement
with the Moroccan Government to establish up to 20 new routes
to the country from its European bases during the next few years.
Conversely, the creation of a second international airport at
Beijing within the next five years will mean air travel in China
continuing to expand exponentially, both in terms of domestic
and international travel. Similarly, economic growth in India,
together with significant infrastructure investments including
airports, will open opportunities to attract inbound tourism from
those countries. To reduce the balance of payments deficit (£18bn
in 2005) there is a need to ensure that the UK visitor economy
benefits from expected growth in travel from emerging markets
such as India, China and Eastern Europe as well as recapturing
some of the ground lost in more mature markets including the USA
and Japan.
1.4 Short Break Holidays. The growth in
domestic short break holidays provides new opportunities for marketing
not only on a regional basis but the packaging of attractions
and accommodation. Heritage attractions which might typically
merely market themselves both locally and nationally could benefit
by combining with providers of accommodation to produce specific
short break offers. Two out of three English holidays are short
breaks. The 2005 UK Tourism Survey (UKTS) shows the increasing
trend of short break holidays overtaking the longer, more traditional
holiday. In 2005 there were 44.8 million overnight holiday trips
lasting between one and three nights, with 23.1 million holiday
trips lasting four or more nights.
1.5 Filming. There is a very strong link
between filming, literary connections and tourism. It generates
media attention which focuses on tourist attractions (eg the Da
Vinci Code—Rosslyn Chapel and various locations; and
Miss Potter—the Lake District). Successful films
have been a notable generator of tourism for several decades (some
short term impact and some longer term—eg Brideshead
Revisited—Castle Howard) but fewer films are now being
made in the UK due to the incidence of taxation and the financial
incentives provided for filming elsewhere. A benevolent taxation
regime for film makers in Britain would directly contribute to
the promotion of UK as a tourism destination.
1.6 Cost. The UK is an expensive destination,
most noticeable in the price for overnight accommodation. The
cost of a destination is one of the most important drivers of
demand. Costs to the tourist are of course affected not only by
domestic inflation but also by currency exchange rates. The UK
has become less competitive relative to destinations across the
Americas, Asia and parts of Europe. Since 1996 the cost of Sterling
has risen by 17% in US$ terms, whereas the cost of many South
American currencies has declined by more than 50% during the past
10 years.
Q2. The effectiveness of DCMS and its sponsored
bodies (such as VisitBritain) in supporting the industry
2.1 Need for Investment in the Tourism Asset:
"There is a close relationship between the successful development
of tourism and the strengthening of the cultural assets of the
country... Good management of the things that make everyday life
better benefits us commercially and socially by attracting satisfied
visitors". (Tomorrow's Tourism Today, DCMS 2004).
Heritage is a key contributor to tourism revenue
and should be recognised as such. The overview on page one of
this submission sets out a compelling case for investment in our
historic environment. From the HHA's perspective, the scale of
the threat can be further quantified: HHA's 2003 survey revealed
a £260 million backlog of repairs to privately owned historic
houses. The increasing costs of conservation and regulations compliance
have been accompanied by the declining provision of local authority
grant support (which has virtually disappeared) and of English
Heritage restoration grants, now only about £2 million per
year in practice for the whole of the privately owned sector.
The cumulative real terms fall in the grant from DCMS to EH between
2000-01 and 2005-06 is measured by EH at almost £20 million,
which has also estimated that an increase of £3 million per
year would be needed to restore the real terms value of grants
to former levels.
The result is that the maintenance of privately
owned heritage, not only in the larger houses, but also in the
smaller houses for which the costs of opening constitute a higher
proportion of the house's overall turnover, is under threat. Unless
there is a positive increase in the provision of public financial
support for privately owned heritage, the cost of repairs and
restoration will become harder and harder, or in many cases impossible,
to meet and the current backlog of repairs will continue to grow.
As owners become unable to fund repairs there will be severe consequences
for the tourism benefits to the local and wider economy.
There is also a need for the Heritage Lottery
Fund to invest in initiatives that the private sector provides
in the realm of capital improvement—including repair—for
public benefit. The HHA will continue to press strongly for restoration
and conservation projects for heritage in independent ownership,
which deliver public benefits, to be eligible for Lottery funding.
2.2 Role of DCMS: DCMS needs to champion
tourism much more strongly. Tourism is the UK's seventh largest
industry, generates £15 billion pa in export earnings and
employs some 2.1 million people (source: Tourism Alliance). Yet
despite the size and value of the industry to the UK economy,
DCMS allocate fewer than 3% of their total staff to tourism. DCMS
is also failing to ensure that the policies and initiatives of
other Government Departments do not adversely impact on the tourism.
This is particularly concerning as an estimated 80% of tourism
businesses are classified as SMEs, which are particularly prone
to changes in the regulatory regime.
2.3 Policy Development/Advocacy/research:
The creation of VisitBritain and the demise of the English Tourism
Council have resulted in DCMS becoming the sole statutory repository
of tourism advocacy, policy development and research. VisitBritain
and its subsidiary Enjoy England, have been created to provide
what appears to be solely a marketing and promotion function and
we have lost a statutorily funded independent tourism voice capable
of holding the Government to account. The need for credible, authoritative
and independent statistics and research to provide a sound base
for policy development, funding decisions and agenda setting is
critical.
2.4 Sponsored Bodies: Greater clarity is
needed in the relationships between VisitBritain/Enjoy England,
VisitLondon, the RDAs, Visit Scotland, Visit Wales, the regional
tourist boards (where they exist) and local destination management
organisations and authorities. There exists—even within
these organisations themselves—confusion about roles and
responsibilities and for those who work with and are dependent
upon these bodies, the lack of any commonality of structure in
the nation countries and regions has resulted in a frustrating
and confusing tier of tourism functions.
2.5 Domestic Marketing To ensure UK residents
fully appreciate the attractions on their doorstep before opting
for travel overseas, there must also be domestic campaigns, nationally
and regionally co-ordinated. Promotion of domestic tourism is
likely to be more effective than punitive measures aimed at deterring
outbound travel (taxation and limiting airport capacity). The
achievements to date from Enjoy England have been encouraging
but it will be important to ensure that they are adequately resourced
to deliver their identified strategic targets through, at least,
to 2009. Present funding for the marketing of England stands at
only £12.4m. Confidence in the statistical analysis and the
feedback will be crucial to the success of every campaign—they
are at present someway short of delivering that confidence.
Q3. The structure and funding of sponsored
bodies in the tourism sector, and the effectiveness of that structure
in promoting the UK both as a whole and in its component parts
3.1 Central government funding. At a time
when Britain should be increasing its tourism profile in the run
up to the Olympics, it is perverse that VisitBritain's budget
is being reduced in real terms. Britain cannot compete in the
global market if funding is so restricted that we have the situation
where Tourism Australia has spent more on one campaign targeting
anglophone countries (So where the bloody hell are you?) than
VisitBritain's entire budget, which has to cover the whole world.
VisitBritain receives £35.5 million to market Britain in
36 countries around the world; Tourism Australia spent £72
million on this one campaign! We need to see a substantial increase
in funding to VisitBritain if the UK is going to compete on a
level-playing field. Undoubtedly, VisitBritain has the ability
to better inform but is disadvantaged by having much smaller budgets
than tourism organisations in other countries that are competing
to attract the same visitors.
While total DCMS funding has increasing by 61%
over this period, VisitBritain has fared the worst of all DCMS
sponsored bodies with only a 9% increase in its funding. By comparison,
broadcasting and the media received 182%, sport 134%, the arts
109% and museums, galleries and libraries 42% over the same period.
The increase for the Architecture and the Historic Environment
sector over this period was only 14%, and to English Heritage
itself, 11%, below the rate of inflation, so the heritage sector
is being hit by a double whammy.
3.2 Regional funding: The inequalities of
regional funding across the UK mean that the playing field has
been described as "mountainous".
RDA direct investment into tourism is out of
step with where visitors go and with where visitors spend. In
2003, the South-East was ranked second (only behind London) in
respect of tourism contribution to the UK economy but in terms
of RDA investment, it was ranked ninth (out of 10) with only the
East of England receiving lower investment. This situation lacks
credibility and does not reflect the reality or real value in
tourism terms on the ground.
Receiving funding via the RDA means that tourism
has to compete against all other potential regional economic activities.
This is a dangerous position to be in as RDAs can be more easily
influenced by shifts in Government policy. There is a need for
secure and guaranteed funding—tourism promoters and providers
need three year rolling commitments (at least) so they can plan
ahead—and resources are being wasted in every region due
to the uncertainties and complexities of the annual bid process.
The HHA has received details from its members of obstructive practices
within RDAs together with evidence of a lack of understanding,
knowledge and experience within the RDA about tourism. Likewise,
the recognition by RDAs that the historic environment is a positive
element in economic growth, but also needs to be conserved in
order to survive to fulfil this role, is patchy.
One of the HHA's regional tourism representatives
has stated: "Our [Regional Marketing] campaign in 2006 yielded
a return on income of 15:1, making it almost certainly the best
investment the RDA made that year, and one of the best returns
of any tourism marketing campaign in the UK." Despite this,
funding to date has not been guaranteed for 2007.
3.3 Structure of Regional bodies: There
needs to be a properly resourced structure that can provide co-ordination
to the devolved tourism responsibilities of the nations and regions
of Britain with a requirement for RDAs and regional tourism bodies
to work with VisitBritain on national programmes and initiatives.
Having set the objective of "effective
and co-ordinated partnership work" (Tomorrow's Tourism Today,
DCMS 2004), the result in practice has been the opposite. The
delivery of tourism promotion in the regions is confusing, fragmented
and opaque. There appears to be no parity of approach between
regions, with coterminous regions finding it impossible to interact
with each others. A common complaint from our regional representatives
is that regional tourism bodies act independently with no reference
to regional strategy and that marketing functions and projects
are undertaken in isolation and funded independently.
We are aware of some policies and guidelines
which are perverse and counterproductive which appears to make
a mockery of the Government's desire for a co-ordinated and joined-up
tourism industry. In Yorkshire where the Yorkshire Tourist Board
is funded by the RDA (and has a remit to bring new business from
outside the region) it is prevented from promoting Yorkshire within
Yorkshire. Given the region's size and geography this is wilfully
obstructive. Our members are also finding that some of the sub
regional organisations which are charged with promoting regions
within regions are in such a state of chaos two years after their
inception that this vital function simply is not being carried
out.
In East Midlands, one member historic house
has been prevented from putting their leaflets in the local TIC
as they were not fully paid up members of the Destination Management
Partnership. It is not reasonable to expect all tourism providers
to become full members of such DMPs as such a requirement would
unfairly discriminate against the small tourism provider.
However, we are aware of some innovative and
far-sighted initiatives. Culture Northwest, in partnership with
the Northwest Regional Development Agency (NWDA), English Heritage,
the National Trust and the Historic Houses Association is involved
in a unique alliance to raise the profile and develop the offer
for heritage tourism across the North West. The NWDA and English
Heritage jointly fund a Heritage Tourism Executive employed by
Culture Northwest, with a grant scheme funded by the NWDA to match
fund capital investment for heritage visitors to the North West.
We would like to see this initiative replicated elsewhere.
We believe that, on balance, the structure that
appears to work best is as follows:
(i) the tourism body at the Regional level
should be small in terms of staffing and overheads, but big in
terms of vision and have the objective to promote and represent
the overall tourism offer of the region. It should work closely
with the RDA and work to improve the understanding in RDAs that
tourism is of considerable importance to the general economic
and social success of the region;
(ii) the tourism bodies at the immediate
sub-regional level are key to the success of tourism promotion.
It is here, in particular, where there needs to be close partnership
working between the private and public sectors. Promotion at this
level can encourage cluster marketing of heritage or other sites,
along with accommodation, and can bring the local authorities
in, so that their efforts are maximised and are not in conflict
with the promotion work of other bodies. These sub-regional bodies,
be they "Area Tourism Partnerships" or "Destination
Management Organisations", should co-operate, not compete,
with each other and should help to shape the strategic promotion
effort at the Regional level. It is at this level that the role
of the independent operator can fit best;
(iii) VisitBritain, and within that EnjoyEngland,
does not have the clout to determine the overall national allocation
of resources for tourism promotion to different regions. However,
if VB was adequately resourced to carry out its function of being
a provider of interpreted statistics and research to Government
and more widely, it could provide essential advice and influence
in the making of this allocation by Government and the RDAs. The
current relative sizes of tourism promotion budgets in different
RDAs do not reflect, in our view, the relative importance of tourism
in the different regions, so the allocation of resources to RDAs
and the way in which the RDAs decide what resource to allocate
to tourism need to be reviewed by Government and the RDAs; and
(iv) we would not expect VisitBritain to
seek to influence how the regional or sub-regional tourism bodies
spend their money on day to day promotion, but we would expect
EnjoyEngland in particular to sit down with the Regional tourism
bodies and reach a common understanding of the priorities for
tourism promotion, on a regular basis. In inputting their view,
the regional bodies would be informed by the practical experience
of their very active sub-regional tourism bodies. This is where
the experience of the independent operator with hands-on operating
expertise can add great value.
Q4. The effect of the current tax regime (including
VAT and air passenger duty) and proposals for local government
funding (including the "bed tax") upon the industry's
competitiveness
4.1 VAT. Accommodation is the most expensive
part of the visitor experience. The imposition of VAT @ 17.5%,
a rate that is higher than in many competing countries, adds significantly
to the cost. If VAT on accommodation could be taken down to a
European average this would help the industry's competitiveness.
4.2 Heritage Buildings. Heritage buildings
are a major draw for visitors but, to perform adequately in the
tourist marketplace, must be properly maintained and kept in good
repair. HHA survey work in recent years indicates that 20-25%
of the cost of major repairs to privately-owned historic buildings
is met from the sale of works of art. The totality of the heritage
product is thereby being diminished. Unlike new work or alterations
to listed buildings, we are in the perverse situation where repair
work is subject to VAT. The much called-for exemption of listed
building repairs from VAT would make a significant contribution
towards maintaining them as an important tourism asset. Freeing
the private owner to apply for HLF funding would in parallel ease
the maintenance burden whilst also supporting the tourism product.
4.3 Bed Tax. An analysis by the Tourism
Alliance suggests that a 5% increase in tax on hotels would see
a decrease of £608 million per year, the equivalent of approximately
6,000 jobs in the tourism industry. 5% of visitors, the highest
spending part of the total, would be affected by a bed tax. Elsewhere,
where a bed tax has been introduced (the Balearics), tourism diminished.
In 1990 the Mayor of New York City imposed a 5% bed tax, resulting
in the local tourism industry stagnating, and being specifically
boycotted by conference organisers. The tax was subsequently removed.
We are dismayed that Sir Michael Lyons has called for further
consideration of such a tax in his report published on 21 March,
albeit he includes the qualification that local authorities would
be required to demonstrate local public support. However, we note
that, in response, the Government appear to be opposed to the
tax. The idea of a "bed tax" should be "put to
sleep" before it distracts the industry any further.
4.4 Visas. Analysis of UK visa statistics
showed that the higher costs introduced in July 2005, with no
consultation or notice, reduced the number of applications by
10%—UKinbound have estimated that this effect has cost the
Exchequer over £25 million in lost tax revenue. The joint
Tourism Alliance/VisitBritain/UKinbound study on the impact of
the recent increase in visa charges concluded that the impact
on China and India alone was in the order of £150 million
in lost revenue from export earnings—this reflects just
two of the 163 countries whose citizens require visas to visit
the UK. The global impact is therefore undoubtedly much higher
and very significant. As an example, the Yorkshire Tourism Board
is concerned that its unique opportunity to capture the Asian
market this summer when it hosts the Indian International Film
Academy Awards will be frustrated by the high cost of obtaining
visas.
4.5 Licensing The HHA is has contributed
evidence to the Government's independent review of licensing fees,
pressing for a reduction in fees for large events - ie back
into line with the costs actually faced by councils—to ensure
that independent venues operating often in rural areas are not
unfairly disadvantaged when tendering to host such events. The
HHA supports the conclusions of the Elton Review which calls for
changes to the fees structure to ensure that for larger events
they do reflect only the reasonable costs of local authorities
in providing licences. The HHA also supports the recommendation
in the Elton Review that the licensing fees regime should be de
minimis for certain premises types where licensable activity is
peripheral to overall activity.
4.6 Council Tax: The Lyons report recommends
the addition of new Council Tax bands for the least and most expensive
residential properties. Subject to the Government's response to
Lyons in relation to the threshold values for these bands and
the ratio of the Tax on the new top band to the Tax on a home
of average value, the HHA believes that the Lyons approach is
more realistic, practical and equitable than one alternative that
has been suggested, of a flat rate percentage of market value
(ie the abolition of bands). A flat rate would disfavour historic
houses, many of which are rated as private residences, even if
they are open to the public, because the owners do not benefit
from an assessed high market value. Many owners did not choose
to live in the houses they manage and are not in a position to
sell, and they should not be encouraged to do so. The notional
market value of the house is not reflected in the income that
the house may or may not generate, or the costs of its maintenance.
In the case of Grade I houses there is an obligation to maintain
them, for the benefit of the nation, and a significant increase
in Council Tax would correspondingly reduce their ability to fulfil
this obligation.
4.7 Overseas Visitors: UKinbound's research
into the total tax take from overseas visitors shows that a minimum
of 35p in every pound spent by visitors in the UK is then taken
in tax. This level of visitor taxation is the third highest in
the world and has helped to undermine the UK's international competitiveness—to
the detriment of the UK's share in the global tourism market and
to the detriment of our home tourism businesses including the
heritage sector.
Q5. What data on tourism would usefully inform
Government policy on tourism?
5.1 Research is vital and it is needed in
key markets to examine perceptions of Britain as a holiday destination.
Research should include:
— positive and negative images
of Britain when compared with competitors;
— the barriers and triggers to
travel;
— knowledge and perceptions of
English regions; and
— how marketing collateral can
be designed to appeal to those markets.
Taking the Japanese market as an example. The
"baby boom" generation in Japan, known as the Dankai,
are taking up new hobbies after work and there is an increased
tendency to travel. Particularly popular are "must see"
destinations, especially famous historic locations and world heritage
spots that they may have read about or seen on television, galleries
or museums. Research suggests that many were keen to travel to
Britain but other destinations are higher on their list. This,
it appears, may be because of a general lack of knowledge about
Britain outside London. They are unaware of famous British sites
and historic locations and have the impression that Britain has
few museums and art galleries beyond the British Museum. Similarly
it seems they are not aware of the huge heritage of historic houses
and their associated contents, many of which outshine and are
the envy of major museums. The implication is that if they had
greater information, Britain would be higher on their wish list
of destinations.
5.2 Domestic Tourism Data. A third
of the UK tourism market is made up of day visitors. For a proper
understanding of how this market operates, detailed research is
required, as has in the past been carried out by the national
tourist boards, individually and collectively. Of particular importance
are:
— tourism trends, number of trips,
distances travelled;
— objectives, market groups, trends
in visitors to attraction;
— gross revenue trends; and
— employment and capital investment.
Q6. The practicality of promoting more environmentally
friendly forms of tourism
6.1 The term "environmentally friendly
forms of tourism" should encompass sustainability in its
overall sense, rather than only the most visible environmental
"footprint" of the type of tourism concerned. In practical
terms, for historic houses, castles and gardens, this means that
an assessment of the environmental impact of the operation of
these sites should include not only the most immediately apparent
environmental impacts, such as the carbon emissions of transport
to reach the site, but also the social, cultural and economic
sustainability of the attractions in question, both for the local
population and economy and for the wider economy and society.
6.2 Environmental sustainability:
(a) Transport: The distances travelled
by visitors to historic houses and the means to reach them are
clearly factors in their environmental impact. It is desirable
that people should be able to travel by public transport and for
some historic houses there is scope to do this. Houses such as
Blenheim Palace, Syon House and Chatsworth are located in or near
towns with such links. However, many historic houses are located
away from urban centres and therefore the scope will be more limited.
The negative environmental effects of limited public transport
should be balanced with other positive environmental, social and
economic factors, as explained below.
(b) Local sourcing of food and other materials:
The environmental "friendliness" of historic houses
can be improved by reducing the "food miles" of the
consumables sold at historic houses together with distances travelled
of the products in their shops. Many houses are already increasing
the proportion of products in their shops, cafes and restaurants
that are locally sourced. Indeed, houses, such as Chatsworth,
which have shops dedicated to local farm produce, have made it
part of their public policy to do this and where the house is
linked to its own farm or to local farmers this shows the integration
of the house in its local community. There are a great many local
food initiatives in the country such as Savour the Flavour in
the West Midlands and Peak District Cuisine in Derbyshire. The
building and other materials used in the maintenance and conservation
of the buildings and the energy used are very relevant too and
houses can be encouraged to use local building materials wherever
possible.
(c) Energy efficiency and sourcing of
energy: Current discussions at national level between the
HHA and English Heritage, with the involvement of the Country
Land and Business Association (CLA) are encouraging. However,
questions such as the installation of new more efficient radiators
in period rooms, glazing and insulation, can be controversial
and there is balance which needs to be struck to ensure that the
historic integrity of the building is retained. Energy use also
embraces the sourcing of energy and at several historic houses
there is the scope to develop alternative and renewable sources
of energy to heat the house and sometimes neighbouring houses
too. Biomass, ground source heating, solar heating and wind turbines
are all possibilities. Biomass heating, from the estate, has been
developed at such houses as Doddington Hall in Lincolnshire, Rotherfield
Park in Hampshire and Winton House near Edinburgh.
(d) Waste reduction and recycling:
Owners and managers of historic houses are already involved in
local waste management plans to reduce waste and increase recycling.
6.3 Social and cultural sustainability:
(a) The knock-on effects of employment
on local services: In more remote rural areas historic houses
may be an important source of employment and economic activity,
especially in the winter if country sports are pursued, and when
other types of tourism are dormant. Business tourism, corporate
hospitality, filming and conference/banqueting are important too.
The creation of new jobs to replace those lost in agriculture
is highly significant. Recent HHA surveys (2002 and 2006) show
not only that some 10,000 people are directly employed in house
opening (in the UK, 2002), but also that many thousands more are
employed in other activities, including these other aspects of
visiting. Employment and local incomes have a consequential effect
on the viability of other activities, such as shops, garages,
pubs. In turn the availability of these services will be a factor
in enabling families and others to continue to live in the area,
and for services such as post offices or schools to continue.
If a village can keep these basic services, and thus the people
that use them, it can also continue as a hub for social activity
and community cohesiveness.
(b) Educational facilities: Recent
HHA surveys indicate that 150—200 Member houses offer educational
facilities, be they primary, secondary, tertiary education or
life long learning and special interest groups. Often, these are
houses already open to the public seeking to expand the use of
their assets. Such educational facilities are of benefit to local
schools and people and are often specially designed to reach out
to those communities who may traditionally have felt themselves
excluded.
(c) Retention and maintenance of cultural
assets: The richness of the heritage is often the top reason
why people visit the UK from abroad. It is also a key reason for
people to wish to use these places for corporate events, wedding
ceremonies, concerts and festivals. Without tourism the funding
to maintain the cultural asset that is the house, its contents
and its surrounding land, would in the majority of medium sized
and larger houses, simply be chronically insufficient. The loss,
especially if works of art were sold away from these houses into
private collections or abroad, would be suffered by local people
and the wider British public alike.
(d) Identity and community cohesion:
Historic houses and gardens often constitute places where people
can go to get away from the daily routine and to explore, in the
context of a wider sweep of history and continuity, where they
themselves place themselves in 21st century Britain. Visitors
are not only the better off; the DCMS Taking Part Survey of 2006
found that 56% of lower socio-economic groups had visited a historic
site within the last 12 months. The Black Environment Network,
the Gateway Gardens Trust and the Anglo Sikh Heritage Trail have
all organised trips to historic houses within this period. This
amenity for community cohesion is part of social and therefore
overall, sustainability.
6.4 Economic sustainability:
Historic houses attract people from abroad,
assisting the UK Balance of Payments and providing an alternative
for British citizens considering a break abroad. The richness
of Britain's heritage, unique in its combination of architecture,
contents, surrounding land and continuing occupation, pulls people
in from abroad and then disperses the economic benefits they bring
around the economy. Tourism is one of the biggest industries in
the UK, generating £75 billion turnover, with heritage at
its heart.
Using the methodology of the BTA (1999) which
estimated that for every £1 spent at the door of a historic
environment attraction, £24 is spent on transport, accommodation
and retailing, historic houses were found in 2002 to generate
in the region of £1.6 billion to the economy. They were also
found to be supporting 10,000 jobs related to day visiting alone,
often in fragile rural economies.
Q7. How to derive maximum benefit for the
industry from the London 2012 Games
7.1 Heritage is a valuable asset in the
objective of realising the Olympic tourism legacy. It is essential
that the Government appreciates the importance of heritage in
tourism and, consequently, properly investigates the benefits
of building on that asset in attracting people to the UK before,
during and after the Games.
In the HHA's view, the following policy actions
are necessary for heritage to be able to make its full contribution
to realising the tourism legacy before, during and after the Olympics.
(a) The chronic under-funding of public
support for the maintenance of Britain's heritage needs to be
addressed: Please see comments in the introductory Overview
and Questions 2.
(b) To successfully sell the UK as an
Olympic destination in a few years time, we will need to create
a definitive UK brand. This is not simply a logo or clever
strapline but a brand of core values that embody the UK offering
while embedding excellence, quality and value in everything that
we do. Every part of the tourism industry, from government downwards,
to buy into that brand and to deliver meaningful funding if we
are going to be successful.
(c) Government, at national, regional
and local level, should take care not to introduce or expand regulation
on tourism/heritage businesses that adds unnecessary or disproportionate
costs. Britain is already in a very competitive tourism market.
Impractical heritage listing obligations, over restrictive planning
policies or a "bed tax" on accommodation to raise funds
for local authorities, as has been suggested by some outside the
tourism industry, are striking examples of the type of measures
that the Government, its agencies and local authorities should
not pursue. Please see detailed comments under Question 4.
But the Government should also be more imaginative
about recognising the adverse effects on heritage tourism from
other possible measures. DCMS in particular, but also other Government
departments, should start to take their "heritage proofing"
responsibilities seriously. Otherwise the viability of heritage
sites to contribute to the tourism legacy of the Olympics will
be unnecessarily disadvantaged.
(d) Systematic use of relevant websites.
Internet browsers considering a visit to Britain must be captured
by the VisitBritain (visitbritain.com) and the London Olympics
websites (london2012.com/en/ourvision) and then linked to other
websites that can provide easily navigable guidance on heritage
related accommodation and attractions. The HHA is pleased to see
that since making its submission to the DCMS consultation on the
Olympics tourism legacy in November 2006, EnjoyEngland has raised
its profile such that anyone googling on "hotels in Britain"
or "accommodation in Britain" or "staying in Britain",
will now be guided to the EnjoyEngland site, amongst others. VisitScotland
and VisitWales should take note.
However, when browsers are caught by the EnjoyEngland
or London Olympics sites, both of which have pages about accommodation
and cultural attractions, there should be (but are not) links
to the main heritage organisations—HHA, National Trust and
English Heritage, all of which have easy to navigate directories
of heritage attractions. It would then be easy for any HHA members
with other facilities, such as training facilities for Olympic
participants, to make visiting Olympic teams aware of these facilities.
We are working with VisitBritain to effect such a link and will
do so with the London Olympic site.
(e) Government should work with the grain
of tourism businesses to promote higher quality welcome to visitors.
For example, the representatives of visitor attractions are working
with VisitBritain to develop an updated and customer-relevant
national Code of Practice for Visitor Attractions, and to secure
participation from as many attractions as possible.
The exercise promises tangible benefits for
visitors and the HHA is pleased that VisitBritain has said it
will provide promotional support for the initiative. We await
confirmation of this at the Visitor Attraction Forum meeting on
26 March 2007. It is also important that the Government explicitly
confirms its recognition that grading is appropriate for tourism
accommodation but not for attractions and heritage sites. Places
such as Stonehenge, Blenheim Palace, Alton Towers and the Wallace
Collection are very different and cannot be squeezed into a one-size-fits-all
regulatory approach as has been suggested in the past. There is
a responsibility on the industry to improve quality and share
innovative ideas, but there is an equal obligation on Government
to understand the practical realities of tourism businesses and
to commit itself to support VisitBritain and the other territorial
tourism bodies and moral support for the industry—a true
partnership.
It is vital for Government to lead on standards
of cleanliness and customer service—we must all install
a sense of pride and assume a level of responsibility in delivering
the very best standards at all times. Litter, graffiti, and other
sources of unsightly appearance must be eradicated to present
"Britain at its best" and our customer service standards
need to radically improve to present the best welcome possible
for all domestic and overseas visitors.
7.2 Business tourism and the Olympics.
There is potential for business visitors to enjoy staying at a
heritage site outside London as part of a business visit to London
that takes in a visit to the Games. Indeed, the business could
be conducted at the heritage site too, nearer to an airport, and
away from the congestion of London. The website links to VisitBritain
and from VisitBritain and the London Olympics site should be put
in place to facilitate these opportunities.
7.3 The Cultural Olympiad 2008-12.
After the initial consultation of a wide range of heritage bodies
in early 2006 there has been a period of quiet in terms of DCMS's
plans for the Cultural Olympiad, certainly as regards national
consultation involving private sector operators.
Privately owned heritage properties organise
a huge range of cultural events each year, ranging from classical
concerts and plays through to opera, pop and rock festivals, history
festivals, re-enactments and pageants. There is scope for this
sector to be involved in the Cultural Olympiad and to spread the
benefits of the advent of the London Games throughout the country.
There is a strong case for this part of the Games preparation
in particular to have a much stronger heritage focus than appears
to have been the case so far.
March 2007
|
