Tourism not a goldmine
A Bendigo Advertiser article “Tourism businesses get a boost” (July 18) claims “The tourism industry brings an estimated $400 million to the Bendigo economy”.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Bendigo Tourism in its 2016 annual general meeting report boasts tourism is a “1 million dollar a day industry”.
Both claims are careless, false and mislead.
Sadly, highly paid respected people, who have previously been provided the real data, continue to peddle nonsense.
Tourism Research Australia search shows visitors who travel to Greater Bendigo expend around $400 million annually.
But TRA is very clear that $400 million visitor expenditure is for all goods and services for the entire trip – say from Adelaide for a Bendigo stay, and return – and includes: motels, clothes, fares, takeaways, presents, hire, fuel (even if purchased in Adelaide), etc. Think of your own tours.
Therefore, goods and services purchased outside Greater Bendigo cannot be counted in Greater Bendigo’s expenditure. Even Sesame Street’s The Count knows this. Yet Bendigo persists.
My best calculation is 60 per cent of that $400 million visitor spend, or $240 million, is actually spent in Greater Bendigo.
TRA surveys include all visitors – business people, holiday-makers, those visiting relatives and friends, and others (funeral, medical, study, etc) – not just “tourists”.
TRA indicates around 40 per cent of visitors are real tourists. Therefore tourism brings $96 million (40 per cent of $240 million) annually to Greater Bendigo’s economy. That bowls out Bendigo’s claims of $400 million annually and $1 million a day.
A council’s website tells us more. Tourism and hospitality sales in 2000 were $416 million; in 2016, $408 million. Down $8 million over 16 years, despite council pouring near $150 million of residents’ money into the industry.
Tourism can be a better industry if it and council smarten up and become more rigorous. The recent merging of council’s tourism and major events units is a good first step.
Tourism must now scrupulously investigate the data, and where necessary redeploy our dollars to services that provide better net community benefit outcomes.
Ted Coleman, Strathfieldsaye
Language bar set too high
In response to Glenis Hawthorne’s letter (“Mixed messages confuse”, Bendigo Advertiser, July 26), I would like to clarify that the federal Liberal government is not advocating for an “acceptable command” of English, but university level English.
The government rhetoric on this is misleading.
Labor supports people living in Australia being helped to speak English and the existing citizenship test is already in English.
But setting the bar at a university level English test isn’t right.
Many Australians, whether they be new arrivals or born here, contribute to our communities without needing to speak and write perfect English.
It is appropriate that the university level English test is currently applied to foreign students wishing to study in Australian universities.
Frankly, many Bendigo residents would not pass this test.
Requiring university level English sends a message to every single Australian who doesn’t have university entrance qualifications that the Australian government, if given the choice, would prefer those Australians were not here.
Lisa Chesters, Federal Member for Bendigo
Actions hard to swallow
What is it that seems to affect New South Wales politicians and public servants? They lack empathy with the public's concerns about the water environment, the interests of the Murray/Darling towns, and the small irrigators' concerns regarding the availability of water. Is it something in the water?