Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 7 Hansard (26 June) . . Page.. 2609 ..

MR QUINLAN

As people probably know, CTEC has already reorientated itself and is running programs. We have run an autumn program and we now have a winter promotional program up and running. These seasonal programs will take place, and they seem to be getting the appropriate reaction-particularly the autumn one. With regard to the accommodation industry, one of our best performance times was over Easter and the following weekend, which was the Anzac Day long weekend.

In response to an issue raised, Australian Capital Tourism will be looking at its logo. That is a process towards which they are working. In the longer term, they will be looking at the question, although not necessarily the answer yet, of the value of badging. I refer to things like "All the parts of Victoria"or the Northern Territory motto, "You'll never, never know, if you never, never go!"

The Victorian campaign seemed to work. Although just about everybody in Australia can repeat the Northern Territory one, it did not seem to have any impact on tourism itself. It is just that we knew it was attached to the Northern Territory. We want to look at that question to see if it works-in terms of effect, as well as recognition.

In response to Ms Dundas' point, we intend to have a regional focus. It has already been discussed in our draft-our discussion paper leading up to the economic white paper-that, in all things, we recognise that we are part of a region. The orientation in tourism these days is for people to experience tourism. We must be able to provide an experience. That should not be restricted by artificial boundaries.

Looking to the future, it is my hope that Australian Capital Tourism continues to evolve, and that the membership of the board of Australian Capital Tourism will become more representative of the industry. I have not moved quickly on that because there is still division between stakeholders within the tourism industry, as to whether that is necessarily the best way to go, and whether it will bear any fruit in the form of material support from the industry.

I do not want to see Australian Capital Tourism, as it replaces CTEC, turning into an organisation which has an amount of government money to spend, with stakeholders in the industry telling us how to spend it. It has to be a little more strategic than that. If you look at the mjaMatchpoint report, you will see that it contains a number of criticisms.

Nothing much in that report is positive or constructive. We still have a way to go to get to the constructive point. We must recognise that, although a number of the stakeholders in the industry promote Canberra, they do so through their own promotions and venues. All of the hotel chains promote, "Stay with our hotel chain when in Canberra."

Whilst we want to work with those people, we want to work with the "Come to Canberra"message, as well as the messages, "Stay at this place"or "Visit this particular place when you are in Canberra."There is a desire on the part of the government to involve the industry more, but it must be a two-way contract. The additional positions on the Australian Capital Tourism board will allow us to step towards that and to, in fact, test the water.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .