Authority / Contact | Main points |
Tim Huntingford, Chief Executive, West Dunbartonshire Council | - Scottish Statutory Instruments (SSIs) are an acceptable way of moving towards a new integrated tourism network.
- Development and implementation role of CoSLA is welcomed.
- Strong support for proposals that Local Authorities negotiate Partnership Agreements with VisitScotland to ensure that the Council's tourism and associated economic development and social priorities are delivered for their area.
|
Judith Pollock,
SPO- Environment & Tourism,
East Dunbartonshire Council | - Concern about local democratic responsibility within the new structure. Local Authorities should be represented on the Board of VisitScotland with an appointment from CoSLA. Also, each Hub should have a Board which includes a representative of each Local Authority on it.
- Concern about the core costs of the new tourism structure and the costs of each specific initiative and the effect this will have on services.
- Expectation that the flexible co-operative arrangements between the Visitor Information Centre and the proposed VisitScotland Hub would be retained.
- Seeking reassurances that tourism opportunities in the Council's area would be equally represented and supported by Scottish Enterprise Dunbartonshire, as those in the area which lies within the boundary of Scottish Network 2 Tourist Board.
- Assumption that the power given to the Board by the SSI to provide finance to any person in relation to activities relating to tourism would be through the Business Gateway.
|
Keith Winter,
Head of Development Services,
Fife Council | - Concern over how long it will take for the Scottish Executive to bring forward primary legislation to replace the Area Tourist Boards (ATBs) with the new national network.
- Mention should be made of the assurances given by both VisitScotland and the Executive that existing financial reserves built up by ATBs will be retained and will be available for use locally by the successor Hub. Additional wording should be inserted in paragraph 13.
- Recommendation that Local Authority representation within the new structure should be continued, increased and formalised.
- Recommendation that both urban and rural Local Authorities are represented on each Network Board.
|
Brian Simpson, Economic Development Manager,
East Lothian Council | - Welcome the approach to grow the tourism industry by 50% by 2015, and hope the economies of scale envisaged will be translated into an enhanced service for the visitor and local business by VisitScotland and the local tourism Hubs.
- Need to discover meaningful ways of engaging the business community given that membership will cease to exist.
- Expectation that appropriate representation by Local Authorities with VisitScotland and the local tourism Hubs will be ensured.
- Desire for clarification on the proposed Partnership Agreements with Local Authorities. These would allow Local Authorities to monitor performance and spend within the context of the Community Planning and Best Value.
- Expectation that Local Authority contributions will be calculated equitably, whether on the basis of service or of importance to the local economy.
- Hope that efforts will be made to disperse visitors from the cities.
|
Mary Pitcaithly, Chief Executive,
Falkirk Council | - Concern about council representation within the new tourism structure.
- Desire to work with the Scottish Executive, their ATB and VisitScotland to clarify these issues.
|
Iain Urquhart, Executive Director,
South Lanarkshire Council | - Support for the review of ATBs and keen to continue and develop an effective working relationship with VisitScotland.
- View that the new Hub structure should be based on the Lanarkshire Economic Forum (LEF). The partnership approach to tourism development, operating through LEF, should be regarded as a model of good practice.
- There should be adequate representation from Local Authorities, Enterprise Companies, Chambers of Commerce and Higher Education to strengthen the Hubs and provide the relevant mix of expertise and experience.
- The new agreements need to include the purchase of services from visitscotland.com. As VisitScotland's specified provider it should form part of the overall package of support negotiated for each area.
- Visitscotland.com provides a vital element of the information disseminated via Tourist Information Centres, and it ensures that quality improvements keep pace with locally negotiated requirements agreed with the VisitScotland hubs.
- Need for a specific provision for Council representation to adequately reflect the geographic areas covered. Representatives from City, Urban and Rural authorities should also be sought. This could be coordinated via CoSLA.
|
Doug Grimmond, Dundee City Council
| - Stressed importance of the Local Authorities having a strong role in the way the tourism industry operates.
- Local Authority involvement in tourism should increase at both a local and national level.
- All funding or other assets at the local level must stay at that level and not be used for the national or international level unless specifically agreed.
- The proposed Hubs should be budget holders with power to use assets locally and participate in local strategy and joint projects.
- Any Local Authority expenditure provided to the local tourism hubs should be subject to a local service delivery agreement.
|
Philip Riddle,
Chief Executive,
VisitScotland | - Replacement of ATBs with two Network Boards is a workable solution, and the SSI covers the process in a satisfactory way.
- Recommendation that in Paragraph 8(f) of Schedule 1 to each of the SSIs, the words "and the Scottish Tourist Board" should be added immediately after the word "authorities" with brackets. This will remove doubt over the powers of the Network Boards to contract with the Scottish Tourist Board for the delivery of their functions.
|
John Rennilson, Director of Planning and Development,
The Highland Council | - Concern about a lack of provision for Local Authority representation on the two interim Boards.
- Partnership Agreements are not seen as sufficient, and accountability needs to be catered for.
- Reinforcement of the point that there is a need for engagement of Elected Members at the National level.
- CoSLA should be asked for representatives rather than approaching individual councils.
|
George Harper, Strategic Director of Development Services,
Argyll & Bute Council | - Query of what and how much services could be bought by Local Authorities through Partnership Agreements.
- Concern about the lack of Local Authority representation on the new hubs.
- Require details of how marketing is to be undertaken or funded in the Hub areas.
- Danger that in Network 1 the Edinburgh, Glasgow, Dumfries and the Borders Gateways, where English tourists first enter Scotland, will absorb proportionately more resources than the rest of the network.
- Question of how differences between local and national priorities will be resolved, and whether VisitScotland will have the power of veto over local issues.
- Concern that resources will be taken away from local tourism issues in order to strengthen the Gateways.
- Future of Tourism Information Centres unclear.
- Clarification of partnership role for other public agencies e.g. Local Enterprise Companies network, Scottish National Heritage, Historic Scotland, Forestry Commission etc. and local businesses.
|
Andrew M Holmes, Director of City Development,
The City of Edinburgh Council | - Raises concern about democratic accountability for the funding relationship embedded in the proposed Partnership Agreement.
- How will negotiations take place between VisitScotland and Local Authorities.
- Need for the roles, responsibilities and remit of the Hubs to be clearly set out.
- Desire for the proposed South ATB to ensure appropriate international marketing for the City of Edinburgh takes place.
|
Bryan McGrath, Scottish Borders
| - Overall the SSI proposal is welcomed. However, there are points that require further attention and clarification in order to ensure that operation of the tourism system is not hampered at a ground level.
- Desire to see the details of the Partnership Agreements released, which should provide a clearer view of how the new institutions will work with Local Authorities.
- Local Authority representation on the new Boards or any future board structure is critical to ensure the necessary links and coordination with local planning and economic development.
- Representation should represent both rural and urban interests. Nominated representatives should be suggested by CoSLA/Local Authorities.
- Regarding the transfer of staff, it is recommended that there is preservation of salary and terms and conditions where staff are adversely affected by any standardisation process.
- An appropriate transfer process must take place with regard to property and Intellectual Property rights held by the current ATBs. To ensure that the local assets that Scottish Borders Tourist Board has developed over time are not lost from the area the regulation must clearly state that local assets will remain in the local areas unless specific agreement is reached with local partners.
|
John Allan, Director,
Midlothian Council | - Need to resolve the issue of democratic accountability. Local Authority involvement is seen as necessary for resolving this difficulty. This is especially true because of the extensive geographical area covered. Representation on the Board should be broad with communication channels open and well integrated with the Hubs at the local level.
- Suggestion of having elected member representation on the two Boards at national level to address the democratic deficit.
- Tourism Action Plans, that have been developed for each of the four Council areas in Edinburgh and Lothians, could serve as a model for other areas of Scotland and as a basis for the proposed Partnership Agreement. These clearly identify the respective roles and responsibilities of the private and public sector agencies, which is an area that needs focus in the SSI.
|
Alan G Campbell, Chief Executive,
Aberdeenshire Council | - Lack of democratic accountability resulting from a lack of adequate Local Authority involvement. Local democratic representation on the Boards is needed, especially because there is the possibility that the interim boards will not be short lived as expected.
- The proposed Partnership Agreements are especially important in defining the roles and responsibilities for the Local Authorities. A major issue to resolve with regard to the Partnership Agreements are how the existing staff of ATBs, together with assets and liabilities, will be transferred to the two new Boards.
|
Margaret Sutherland, Senior Executive Officer,
Orkney Islands Council | - Welcomes the proposed Hubs and Partnership Agreements.
- Pleased that CoSLA is participating in discussions regarding Local Authority representation.
- Desire to see all staff transferred to a new pension fund, which will involve an actuarial valuation exercise. The costs of this exercise should be met by VisitScotland or the Scottish Executive and not by the fund members.
|
Jim McGuiness, Head of Community Resources,
North Lanarkshire Council | - Confusion over an apparent time lapse between 1 December 2004 and 1 April 2005. The Council believes that the SSIs provide a framework for abolishing ATBs on 1 December, but the new scheme will not be effective until 1 April 2005. This would have implications for the legal framework.
- Concern as to how tourism interests with North Lanarkshire are going to be represented if there is no Local Authority representation.
|
Alistair Shaw, West Lothian Council
| - Keen to preserve the central and historic role that Local Authorities have had in tourism.
- To preserve the active involvement of Local Authorities, the Scottish tourism industry requires Local Authority involvement in decision making at Hub level and CoSLA representation on the Board of VisitScotland.
- Argument is made stronger by the likelihood that the temporary measure may be long lived. Therefore, the issues must be addressed at the SSI stage.
|
Angus McCormack, Chair,
Comhairle nan Eilean Siar | - Seeking assurances about local autonomy and flexibility.
- New structure should be implemented as soon as possible to provide certainty within the industry and to allow the goals of streamlining and customer focus to be achieved at the earliest possibility.
- Desire to avoid a democratic deficit. There should therefore be appropriate representation on the Boards by Elected Members. The SSI should address this and clearly state the proposed composition of the Boards.
|
George Black,
Chief Executive,
Glasgow City Council | - The preferred option for taking the development of the tourism industry within Glasgow forward is a variation of the status quo which would include Board representation from the Councils and from main organisations involved in tourism development/management within the city. A membership structure should entitle all businesses operating within the sector to receive services in return for an annual subscription. However, the Council recognises that this is not possible under the current proposals.
- The SSI provides an opportunity to establish a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) to fund and manage the Convention Bureau, The New Glasgow Brand and The Seeglasgow.com website.
- To address a democratic deficit the SSI should make provision for the Board membership of SPV's, and their voting rights, to be adjusted to reflect the financial contribution of the participating agencies.
- Limiting board membership of the 2 interim ATBs to the Board members of VisitScotland is wholly insufficient given the extent of their geographical and market segment coverage. There should be representation from Edinburgh and Glasgow City Councils, with an additional representative representing the rural Local Authorities.
- Concern that the international image of Glasgow may be diluted as a result of the Hubs having no input into international marketing. The working relationship which develops between VisitScotland, the Hub and the proposed SPV will be critical in determining the extent to which Glasgow's international reputation is protected and projected.
- Assumption that specific funds which the Council has made available to Greater Glasgow and Clyde Valley Tourist Board for the new city brand, for conference subvention and for new air services marketing will transfer to the SPV, which would thereafter take responsibility for these activities. Further expectation that other ATB assets which have been provided by a Local Authority will be ring-fenced for expenditure within that area.
- Seeking assurances that the Scottish Executive will bring forward primary legislation as soon as possible to alleviate considerable uncertainty for both the Local Authorities and the tourism industry in general.
|
Donald J Lunan, Planning and Development Manager,
The Moray Council | - Desire to see clarity of the new structure, especially details on the 'Hubs' concept.
- Looking for an assurance that all local assets will be ring-fenced for local use only.
- Concern that there will be a lack of democratic accountability.
|
Claire Downs, Policy Officer,
CoSLA | - Unclear as to why primary legislation is not being utilised to take the process forward as a priority in the coming parliamentary session. This would demonstrate a clear commitment to a stable, long term solution.
- It would be advantageous for there to be a clearer indication of how long the two interim Network Tourist Boards will remain.
- Should be stated clearly in the SSIs how local assets and property will be transferred to the relevant local area Hub office. Paragraph 13 should be amended appropriately to reflect the Scottish Executive's commitment.
- Clarification on whether current employees of the 14 ATBs are to become employees of VisitScotland or they will technically be employees of the 2 invisible Hubs.
- Seeking assurances that a proportion of the membership of each Board would be drawn from the local government community. A clause guaranteeing Local Authority representation, similar to the one included in the secondary legislation that established the existing ATBs, should be included.
|
ARRIVED AFTER THE DEADLINE |
Ian Fraser,
Head of Economic Development,
Stirling Council | - Concern that there will be a lack of democratic accountability and that the appointments may be contrary to the Nolan principles of appointments to public bodies.
- Desire that the changes do not result in a deleterious position with regard to VAT.
- Seeking clarification on roles, remits and responsibilities of the hubs. However, the general concept of the Partnership Agreements is welcomed provided that they provide a more transparent method of assessing value for money from a Local Authority perspective.
- SSIs should reflect the Executive's undertaking to protect local assets through ring fencing.
|