MOST Islanders spend quite a lot of time thinking about holidays. It seems that the time has come for the States to follow their lead by spending a lot more time on the subject of tourism in general.

There is nothing pleasant about watching the decline of an old and much-loved friend, which is perhaps why successive States administrations have shown a tendency to look away from tourism – and agriculture – and to focus instead on finance.

But the latest figures may prompt the present Council of Ministers to redirect its collective gaze. The number of business visitors is down by 22% on last year, leisure visitor figures are down 9.5% and the number of visitors from the prime market, the UK, is down by 13%.

This shocking and clearly significant decline cannot be ignored and is unlikely to be explained away purely by reference to ‘the recession’. Most importantly, steps must be taken to halt the trend.

Quite apart from the compelling case for encouraging diversity in the economy – which, given the events of the past 12 months, scarcely needs spelling out here – there are the questions of the impact on the Island’s hotels, restaurants and tourist attractions, the loss of around £10m to the Island economy, and the loss to the finance industry of almost a quarter of the visitors who come here for reasons of business.

But there appear to be three stumbling blocks hampering remedial action.
Firstly, despite fine sentiments expressed in Strategic Plans, diversification inside the finance industry has, in practice, been viewed as far easier to achieve than genuine diversification in the wider economy.

Secondly, many hoteliers have taken up the lucrative option of cashing in their chips by selling hospitality sites for housing. Such redevelopment represents a permanent loss to the Island’s tourist bed capacity.

Thirdly, the tourism industry itself sticks dogmatically to the line that there must be increased direct public sector support, over which, moreover, it insists that it must exercise a high degree of control.

That is about as far as the debate on the future of tourism has gone for some time. It must go further.

Could, for example, a rearrangement of political responsibilities help? One of the quieter changes during the move to ministerial government was the demise of the former Tourism Committee. Could it be that the present structure, in which all industries are under the umbrella of Economic Development, simply is not capable of delivering the level of intensive care that tourism now requires?