Accessibility settings

In order to remember your preferences as you navigate through the site, a cookie will be set.

Color preference

Text size

Agenda item

Tourism Review

To receive a presentation providing an overview of the project plan and the 2021 group and an update on the independent tourism review.  

Minutes:

45.1          Attention was drawn to three specific projects by the Community and Economic Development Manager. Members were advised that the Battlefield Interpretation project, which was a Battlefield Society led project, was looking at providing a focus for the battlefield. It was felt something was needed which was accessible all year round and, whilst a number of options had been considered, the focus now was on the Gupshill Manor and an outbuilding on the site which could be used for interpretation and to act as a central point for walks into the Town Centre. The Gupshill Manor was very amenable to the ideas but was currently going through the process of getting support from Greene King which was taking quite a long time. In terms of Tewkesbury 2021, this was a project based around organising a series of events throughout 2021 to celebrate 900 years since the consecration of Tewkesbury Abbey and 550 years since the Battle of Tewkesbury; the events would celebrate the culture and heritage of the Abbey. Unfortunately, the plans had been somewhat hampered by the COVID-19 pandemic as it was not known what could or could not go ahead but the Executive Committee had recently agreed to support the project with a grant of £25,000 which it was hoped would kickstart the planning process once more. Lastly, the tourism review had been delayed until the summer due to COVID-19 but a consultant had been appointed to look at the current offer, future offers and the resources required. The final report was due in January, and the consultant was present at today’s meeting to provide a presentation of her findings.

45.2          Members were advised that the review had been split into two parts; an external market assessment (visitor behaviour and digital trends) and internal assessment (tourism product, current tourism resource and stakeholders). Recommendations had then been made in terms of the Council support which would be required for the key projects. In addition, a review of key partner stakeholders, business models, initiatives and the opportunities they presented had been undertaken. The recommendations being made were about the key priorities for strategic direction for tourism in the Borough to 2025, including the response to COVID-19; to engage and support tourism businesses, including working with Gloucestershire Airport, key events and the Tourist Information Centres; headline ideas for income generation and a business model; outline marketing focus to 2025; and a suggestion of the resources needed. The consultant outlined her experience in the tourism sector which included working for the Forestry Commission at Westonbirt; Visit Bristol; Visit Cheltenham and the Forest of Dean and Wye Valley. In terms of Tewkesbury Borough’s tourism economy, Members were provided with a snapshot taken pre-COVID which had shown approximately 158 tourism businesses made up of 129 accommodation businesses and 27 attractions; 2,273 jobs in tourism in the Borough which was 5% of all employment; visitors to the Borough had spent just under £136 million in 2019; the impact of the tourism economy went far wider than ‘traditional’ tourism and included £23 million on accommodation, £16 million in attractions, £32 million in shopping and £41 million on food and drink. In terms of all staying trips in 2019, the comparison showed Tewkesbury Borough having an average performance which was above Stroud and the Forest of Dean Districts but below Gloucester City, Cheltenham Borough and Cotswolds District – it was noted that, since 2014, staying trips had increased by 19% spending approximately £47 million. In terms of day visits and day visit spend in 2019, Tewkesbury Borough had 1.8 million visitors spending £64 million which represented a fall of 5% since 2014. Tewkesbury Borough had the lowest day visitor spend of all of the Districts at £63.8; this compared to the highest spend in Cotswold District of £221.6. The tourism economy snapshot during COVID-19 had seen 12 commercial businesses/charities interviewed which had shown a mixed picture but all had lost significant income to varying degrees; potential closure for some bed and breakfasts, guest houses and smaller hotels with all corporate business and weddings lost; Great Western Railway had seen a 90% loss of income and Tewkesbury Abbey had lost 72% of its income; outdoor activities, self-catering, camping and caravanning had seen significant footfall in July and August for domestic day and staying leisure visitors; September and October had been much quieter with the usual older visitors, coach groups and overseas travellers not travelling; the Office of National Statistics reported in early November that accommodation and food service activities industry had the highest percentage of businesses with no cash reserves at 6% compared with 3% across all industries; and the accommodation and food service activities industry had the highest percentage of businesses with no or low confidence that their businesses would survive the next three months at 32%. In terms of the external assessment, the headlines looking forward were that lockdown and travel restrictions would continue into 2021 with people staying locally; the overseas market was not set to recover until 2024 with domestic tourism likely for the next 18 months, particularly in rural destinations and self-catering; there was consumer demand for digitisation and need for experiences; the county strategy to support tourism would offer opportunities with Visit Gloucestershire, Cotswolds Tourism, Tourism Zones and the Tourism Sector Deal; the consumer focus was on being safe from COVID with less travel on public transport and interest in the environment continuing; the market would be competitive with 95 towns and villages in the wider Cotswolds; there was concern from local residents about attracting visitors who may bring COVID with them. In respect of the internal assessment, there were a lot of attractions across the Borough and there were opportunities in the towns of Tewkesbury and Winchcombe as hubs as well as walking and cycling opportunities; the current resource available to support tourism was minimal; there was no dedicated staff resource coordinating or leading on the visitor economy; there was no active public or private group to support or drive tourism in the Borough or in the towns; there was no cross-working resource to bring together other visitor economy related projects such as the Heritage Action Zone, the Garden Town or the Cultural Consortium; all projects/initiatives including Tewkesbury 2021, Heritage Park, Experience Winchcombe needed experienced tourism strategy, marketing and digital support input; Tewkesbury 2021 was a big year with an opportunity to deliver civic pride and a positive knock-on effect for promotion of the destination for visitors; there was a need for a clear distinction of destination brands for Winchcombe and Tewkesbury to include local culture, retail and hospitality; the product offer in the area was good, however traditionally lacked year-round experiences, particularly in Tewkesbury; there was no marketing plan or resource to proactively grow the visitor economy; and there was an opportunity to support place-making - not just tourism – for Tewkesbury Borough as a great place to live, work, visit and invest. The full report was due for completion in January but the next steps as she saw them were to ‘survive’ with immediate engagement and support for businesses in the short-term; ‘recover’ with support for businesses to make as much money as possible to continue trading; and to ‘thrive’ to become stronger more distinct brands within the Cotswolds family with proud engaged communities.

45.3          A Member noted that the map of tourist attractions provided did not include Gwinnett’s Tomb in Down Hatherley; he was the second signatory on the American Declaration of Independence and, whilst he was not buried there it was his family tomb. In response, the consultant indicated that there was much that was not included as it was not known about very widely; however, when working more digitally it was possible to create tourism resources at a low cost. In addition, information could be shared by people that understood it as part of a bigger story. This was the reason places needed someone to champion the area, tell the stories and share them widely – this was known as a destination marketer.

45.4          In response to a query about where the final report on the tourism review would go, the Head of Corporate Services indicated that this would depend on the content of the report e.g. if it required funding/resource then a report would be prepared to go to the Executive Committee. Another Member agreed with the central thrust of the information provided in the presentation. He explained that he had lived in the Borough for five years and pre-COVID he had had a lot of visitors but none of them had known about Tewkesbury Borough or its heritage assets and he felt the Council was missing a big opportunity in that regard. Another Member thanked the consultant for her interesting presentation, he understood the need for the Borough to better promote itself but he questioned whether she had taken into account the links the Growth Hub had with the business community and the promotion it already did in that regard. The Chief Executive agreed with the view and advised that it would be helpful for the final report to reference the work the Growth Hub did, he understood the need for more resources for tourism but felt the resource that was already available should not be forgotten. In addition, referring to Visit Gloucestershire, he advised that the Joint Committee for Economic Growth had identified tourism and tourism recovery as a key consideration for all Councils in the county and work around that was being done on behalf of the Joint Committee which would receive proposals in due course. The County Council was proposing to make a grant to Visit Gloucestershire to look to supporting tourism next year and the Council’s team was part of those discussions – he hoped all of this would be referenced. He explained that the Council had limited resources due its size, which had also been stretched by COVID-19, to the extent of having a potential deficit over the five year Medium Term Financial Strategy period of more than £5 million. This would lead to some tough challenges and decisions on the services it was able to support. There was a lot which was unclear at the current time and would depend on what the government was able to do to support local authorities going forward. A partnership approach would be essential between the public and private sector to ensure the tourism economy was supported and he would be interested to understand the various models and how to access funding; he understood this would be a choice for the Council but if it had private sector partners that drew in more support that would be helpful.

45.5          A Member noted that he had heard it commented frequently over the summer that the Tourist Information Centre in Tewkesbury was not open and he questioned why this was. In addition, he was of the view that the state of the building was not a good reflection on Tewkesbury and asked that the windows and doorway be cleaned. He also referred to the twinning links with Miesbach and felt this could be built upon more than it was currently. The consultant agreed that twinning was definitely an opportunity that needed to be communicated with the right people. The Visit Gloucestershire strategy would be really important as it would work with the districts on all of those ideas. There could be challenges faced with funding as often it was provided to destination marketing organisations which Gloucestershire did not currently have and she felt this did need to be urgently addressed. In response to the Tourist Information Centre query, the Economic and Community Development Manager explained that he would ensure the cleaning was undertaken. The Centre in Winchcombe was in the library and therefore had not been able to open. In addition, many of the staff in the Centres had been in the shielding category during the first lockdown. Once lockdown had been lifted, the decision had been taken, from a safety point of view, that the Tourist Information Centre in Tewkesbury would remain closed in line with the reception area at the Council Offices. The websites and social media channels continued to be updated and the calls to the Centres were being transferred to staff so were being answered. This situation was due to be reviewed shortly but Officers felt there had to be careful thought to the amount of marketing that could be done so visitors were not being encouraged to areas where there were restrictions in place.

45.6          Accordingly, it was

                 RESOLVED           That the information provided in respect of the tourism review                                be NOTED.

Supporting documents: