Download Transcript RTF RTF 82 K - Greater London Authority

Appendix A
Economic Development, Culture, Sport and Tourism Committee
20 May 2009
Transcript of Item 7: Tourism in London
Dee Doocey (Chair): So we come to the main item of today’s business which is tourism in
London. Can I start by asking the LDA about the London Tourism Action Plan. There are 44
actions listed and I wondered if you could perhaps pull out from that the ones that you think are
probably the most important.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): If I can just couch it,
obviously this is the second Action Plan within the overall Tourism Strategy that takes us through
to 2016 and this Action Plan is a four year action plan so it takes us to beyond the Games in
London. That is specifically intentional. The previous Action Plan was a three year one, four year
one, because we need to be thinking about the legacy impacts that relate from tourism.
If I can take you to page 11 of the Action Plan which sets out some of the key achievements from
the 2006/09 Action Plan. What is particularly pertinent is these are the headings and the
approaches that we are continuing with in the current Tourism Action Plan. I do want to say that
we really appreciate the opportunity to participate in this because we are going through a
consultation process and it is quite clear from this document that we have set out some suggestions
as to how we move forward, we have been testing them through the consultation process which
started in April, we have been talking to the industry and talking to boroughs and interested
parties and this will enable us to feed into what should the final Action Plan look like. So we are
really pleased that we have been able to participate in this.
So those key headings that are identified in there from ‘a global city’ through to ‘industry support
and partnership’ are still the key themes of how we think we should break it up. The actions that
are identified – when you talk about the 44 actions – under each one of those headings there are a
set of things that are already underway which relate to the current year one that we are in. What
is important is, have we not got right some of them, do we need to focus on more of those things,
particularly in the current economic climate, and what we have learned from the investment that
we have recently made as part of the Mayor’s Economic Recovery Action Plan; that the targeting
of Europe and the USA and particularly taking advantage of the low value of the pound has
actually reaped some quite good benefits and we have got some latest figures on that from the
investment that we have put into that in terms of return.
So they are very much actions that are about the current year, some of them which will extend
onwards. But each one of these actions, we feel, is particularly pertinent to driving forward and I
think that the things that are coming through at the moment from the consultations – and these
are early soundings that we have taken from our meetings – are to ensure that at the Games and
during the Games the volunteer scheme – there is always a volunteer scheme that will take place in
the Olympic Park so if you are a visitor to the Games and you go in the Olympic Park there are
lots of volunteers around supporting – that takes place throughout London so that the visitor
experience, as soon as you come into London, is there.
The other key aspect is ensuring the quality of the hospitality – not only the hotel rooms which is a
simplistic way to describe it – but also the staff and the whole industry. So there is a whole issue
1
with regard to the training and skills. And to ensure that through this current economic climate
we are continuing to promote London to the places from where we feel that we can attract the
most people to come into London to help with the improvement of the economy within London at
the moment. I think those are the key things that are emerging at the moment.
Dee Doocey (Chair): Are you happy that the training is in place? One of the things that concerns
me slightly is a lot of this is not mandatory, clearly, and I am sure the big chains will make sure
that their staff are appropriately trained, I am not entirely convinced that at the lower end of the
scale which is, if you like, the budget end, that you will necessarily get the sort of training that you
would like and we would like.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): We have to take a
different approach obviously to the smaller operators compared to the large operators because they
do offer comprehensive training schemes. Part of what we are trying to do – and we tried to do it
under the previous Action Plan – is to ensure that working in the hospitality industry is looked at
as a career rather than just the one off leading to a high churn.
So part of what we will do, from the LDA, is specifically encourage the smaller chains, the
independents, to ensure that the quality is there and try to look at ways of how can we, particularly
in training staff, minimise the bureaucracy for those organisations which are around getting people
skilled and trained through, if necessary, setting up third party entities to take care of all of that
bureaucracy yet enabling people to support.
We are looking at that particularly with regards to apprenticeships so people that are already in
the industry becoming apprentices for their continued training and, indeed, to get more people into
the industry. So we are trying to be creative but that creativity be driven by the views of the
hoteliers, particularly the smaller hotel chains, and, where necessary, see how they can link up to
some of the bigger ones as well. So we are exploring different avenues.
John Biggs (AM): I take the view our job is to be inquisitorial so nothing personal but I read
through your strategy and it reminded me of when I was at primary school I wrote an essay which
was extremely long and I thought it was very clever and at the end of it the teacher wrote, “It’s all
in there somewhere”. I thought when I read this strategy it is 44 points, you have not really
convinced me you have got the three bone-crushingly urgent ones, and I am worried that it is all in
there somewhere but there is not really a clarity of direction.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): I would like to think
that the bone-crushingly urgent ones and whether they are urgent for now or the must dos that we
have to achieve over the next four years; if they are not in there at the moment they will come
through the consultation. But what particularly will come through the consultation is how we
need to highlight this in particular so when the final action plan is produced it is much more
snappy and clearly shows these are the key things we are trying to achieve and then it goes into a
bit more detail because at the moment it has gone into suddenly huge amounts of detail in the way
that it is presented.
It is very much work in progress. We think we have got most of the things captured there but, as I
say, there are things coming up where we need to give a greater emphasis to in the final document,
the Action Plan – which will be a public action plan. It will be more snappy and sitting behind it
will be more detail.
John Biggs (AM): I know we have limited time, Chair, but it would be wonderful if some of our
other witnesses could very constructively and thoughtfully and kindly highlight where they think
it has got it wrong.
2
Dee Doocey (Chair): I will bring in the other witnesses at the appropriate time.
Could I continue with my questioning, Sarah [Ebanja], and ask have you got any ideas of
addressing this issue that, generally speaking, tourists tend to think that it is a bit of a rip off in
London? You have only got to go across Westminster Bridge and you see somebody hawking
fresh orange juice for vast sums of money. During the summer I saw somebody selling bottles of
water for £5 a bottle. Does that concern you?
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): I think there are a
number of things. I will revert to Carolyn [Smith] but under the last Action Plan we did
introduce the London Visitor Survey which tried to get a view of visitors when they came to
London and some of the things they thought were good or bad and those sorts of issues. I do not
know if that emerged as one of the issues?
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): It has
done in the past. People see London as expensive and I think will always do so. We are very lucky
at the moment in that the exchange rate is working to our advantage in that although people
overseas are not as aware of exchange rates as we tend to be in the UK and do not know the value
that their euros and their dollars are going to afford them when they get here, once they get here
they are seeing that there is a lot more value.
Obviously what we want to do is point people in the direction of things that are good value for
money and that is why we are putting money towards making sure that accommodation is quality
assured accommodation and things like that.
In terms of our role in trying to stop people ripping off, independent vendors, I think it is very
difficult for us to do that.
Dee Doocey (Chair): On the quality assured accommodation, what processes do you have in
place? For example, if I open a hotel today and it is absolutely marvellous and somebody says that
is one star or whatever it is, what processes are in place to make sure that in three years’ time,
when I have sold it to somebody else who has let it go downhill, that it is not still claiming to be a
one star. Just explain how that works?
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): There
are two quality assurance schemes that are nationally recognised within the UK at the moment.
There is the AA one and there is the one run by Visit Britain. They both require people to go in
and mystery shop to make sure that they are up to standard and they give them the star ratings. I
think it is every two years they need to be reassessed. So, yes, if a hotel changed hands one year
after then there could be a difference but they do go in. So to retain their star rating they need to
keep being assessed so they pay towards this.
What we have done at the LDA is to encourage people to join these star rating schemes is we have
given subsidised assistance, we have run workshops, we have engaged with an organisation that
will go round and tell people what they should be doing to get up to the level that is required and
then also subsidised the actual assessment itself. We have moved the number of organisations,
accommodation providers; we have now got 73,000 hotel beds out of about just over 100,000 are
registered. It is 66% of the hotels beds.
Dee Doocey (Chair): I have no doubt at all that you are taking action to see what can be done.
What I am just not still clear about is you say that it has got to be reassessed every two years but
3
what happens if I am a dodgy hotel keeper and I have sold it to my mate and they do not bother to
say, “Can you reassess me?”; does somebody automatically go in?
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): It is a voluntary
scheme. So if you are dodgy you are dodgy.
Dee Doocey (Chair): So there is nothing you can do about it really?
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): It goes back to your
point about the orange juice and the perceptions. When we think about tourism from when
somebody is sitting at home thinking, “Where should I go on holiday?” or “Where should I go for a
break?”, in the promotional messages – whether it is Visit London or through whatever form of
media – it is really important because you are first of all trying to get someone to think, “Actually I
want to go to Britain and I want to go to London”.
So you start that off very early and in some respects through that trying to alleviate any fears they
may have because for any capital city there is always an issue people might be fearful of violence or
fearful of being ripped off. I think that is one of the important things about having the volunteer
scheme around as well; that people can feel reassured when they come to London because the
welcome will start – it not only starts from enticing them to come in the first place – as soon as
they land at any port of entry here or even if they are coming from elsewhere in the UK.
Going back to the hotel thing; it is a voluntary scheme. If someone wants to be a rogue landlord -part of the responsibility is also down to the local authorities to ensure that if anybody is having
homes in multi occupational hotels and things like that they are up to certain standards.
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): We do
know through the work we have done exactly which hotels are registered officially because we will
go back and we will say to them, “Your membership is running out. Can we reassess you?” So it is
something that we are very aware of. Also on the Visit London website the star ratings we would
check and make sure that they are up to date.
Dee Doocey (Chair): But you do not have a black list for me who has been running a hotel and
still got a plaque outside that still says I am AA registered when I have not been AA registered for
20 years or something?
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): The
organisation that we work with is out on the street all the time and they will go in and say, “You
should remove that”. They do not actually have the authority to get them to do it.
Dee Doocey (Chair): All right. I want to bring in some of the other guests. Comments please?
Anyone want to volunteer some comments?
Simon Calder (Travel Editor, The Independent): I am obviously delighted that everything is
being done to try to improve the value that people are getting and the perceptions of that are very,
very important but I am not sure that we are not giving too much emphasis to grading hotels.
Yes, it is all very good having an inspector going to a hotel and ordering a room service omelette
at 2 am to see if they can deliver it, but actually, if you look at the world’s biggest hotel market
which is by a mile the United States, they do not have any star ratings and they do not have any
inspectors. If you want to find out what a hotel in Las Vegas – which, after all, is the biggest city
in terms of tourism in the world – you might go onto TripAdvisor or you might just go on to
Hotels.com and see what is cheap. I am not sure that we are focusing too much on making sure
4
that everybody is nicely graded whereas, in fact, that is leaving behind the wider question of are we
offering good value?
I take your point that people are not as aware abroad of the pathetic value of the pound as we are
when we try to go abroad, but they are still finding -- for example, when you arrive in London you
have the choice – if you land at Heathrow – of having to unravel the difficult system of getting an
Oyster Card or buying a ticket on the most expensive domestic train anywhere in the world, the
Heathrow Express. Those are the very difficult first impressions to overcome.
Mark Elliott (Managing Director, Time Out): I think also the issue around grading is an
interesting one because obviously we are in an era of the democracy of information and I think
there is certainly some sense that actually users will define what a grading is or is not based on
things like TripAdvisor and so on and so forth. Particularly some of the slightly older grading
systems are relatively redundant in an age when people generally go online and make choices based
on other users’ information. So I think there is a certain question there about how relevant perhaps
that focus is.
Dee Doocey (Chair): Which is obviously why you want to get the widest possible consultation
and get the widest possible amount of users.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): With regards to the
value of the system as you spoke about, Simon [Calder], it is the only quality assurance system at
the moment in the UK and that is why we recognise that and we emphasise that but your points
are very well made.
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency):
Exactly. We do understand the limitations with it; it is just that is all we have got to work with
currently. Also TripAdvisor is on the Visit London website as well so people can look at the two.
Dee Doocey (Chair): We have got to move on because otherwise we are just going to run out of
time. The second question I want to ask is about the number of overseas visitors and specifically
the fact that it dipped last year, particularly in the last three months of the year. Just looking at the
figures; the Americans down by 18%, Japanese down by 24%, Germans down 11%, Spanish down
7% and Italians up 18%. I wondered if you could comment on that and I was wondering why you
think the cheap pound has failed to attract visitors? Rather than the LDA comment I would
actually prefer the panel at this stage to comment.
Helen Bull (Marketing Director, Merlin Entertainment): I am from Merlin Entertainment.
We are actually seeing the opposite of that. Our number of overseas visitors has actually risen
quite considerably over the last five or six months whilst the United States which is our strongest
market has dropped from where it was. It is still about 12% of our visitors so it is holding up well
but particularly Italians, Germans, Spanish and French are the key countries that we are seeing.
So across the four London attractions that I look after we have bucked that trend really which is
obviously encouraging and positive news. Obviously what we are hoping is that they will go back
to their own countries and say they have had a great experience and encourage other people to
come.
I think things that are not helping us at the moment are things like transport at weekends in terms
of people getting around London. There are a lot of engineering and closures which I think, for
tourists, are probably not giving them a great impression of our city but also makes it difficult for
them to get around as well so I think that is something that is hampering people’s journey and
probably impression of the city.
5
Dee Doocey (Chair): It is the joined up thinking bit that is needed, isn’t it?
Richard Pulford (Chief Executive, Society of London Theatre): Could I make an observation,
if only from the point of view of the theatre in London? Actually the Americans are not going
anywhere. It is not that they are not coming here. Within America they are not even travelling a
great deal in their own country. Broadway, for example, is having some difficulties in that regard.
So I do not think it is a London problem; I think it is a much more general problem than that.
We are fortunate in that, to a quite considerable extent, we have found – we have not actually
targeted it too much – that an increase in British tourists coming into London has done a great
deal to offset the declining number of North American tourists. We have two particular markets
perhaps. One is the anglophone market who are more likely, for obvious reasons, to support the
play offering in London and the non-anglophone who are more likely – I do not want to divide it
too strongly – to go to musicals. So a European audience is more likely to go to musicals than it is
to go to plays.
One of the issues about some of the European tourism is that the tourists are being encouraged,
sometimes by Eurostar, to come for the day and that is not terribly helpful if I may say so from our
point of view. It may not be so inclined from Helen’s [Bull] point of view but from the theatres’
point of view and indeed from the point of view of the restaurant trade and hotels, it is not terribly
encouraging. If you get on Eurostar in Brussels the largest adverts you see are for spending a day
in London and I think that is something that it would be very helpful if we could change.
Dee Doocey (Chair): So they need to spend a night and go back the next day?
Richard Pulford (Chief Executive, Society of London Theatre): We need them for a night.
Yes.
Dee Doocey (Chair): For the hotels. I am going to ask Andrew [Boff] to ask his question next
because I know Sarah [Ebanja] and Carolyn [Smith] have got to leave at 11 am so I am keen to
make sure that the LDA, if you do not mind, questions are asked before we leave.
John Biggs (AM): Are we clear that this is a lagging indicator and it is wrong; the 3.6%
reduction?
Dee Doocey (Chair): 3.6% reduction in tourism, yes, that is correct. As I understand it what you
are saying is that you aren’t declining in your particular bit.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): We would like to take
some credit for that. As you know we had two campaigns. We invested nearly £1 million in it.
On the £450,000 campaign which was in December with Ryanair that has generated over
£9 million return on investment – and that one was Ireland, Spain and Italy. The £600,000
campaign, which again was Europe, has generated £11 million return on investment to date.
Dee Doocey (Chair): We have not got time to go into it now but presumably you are as aware of
these figures as anyone else and you are doing everything you can to change them round?
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): Yes.
Tony Arbour (AM): On leading and lagging indicators, this morning’s papers are reporting a
very strong rise in the value of sterling against overseas currencies. Are we not perhaps pinning
too much on the fact that sterling is worth so little and it may be that the UK is going to be more
6
expensive for overseas visitors simply because of the changing exchange rate and maybe we should
be planning for that?
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): We are planning for
it. Even when the exchange rate was high before it was still an attractive destination. What we
are trying to do is be able to swiftly respond to the particular economic climate. In the Evening
Standard a couple of weeks ago there was a whole cover which was Only in London and that was
really promoting London particularly to Londoners and to the rest of the UK. Indeed what we are
looking at all the time – because we work closely with Visit London on this – is where should the
markets be that we can attract and how quickly can we start the campaigns there because there is
always a lead in time? So we are very conscious and that consciousness is particularly coming to
the fore with the current economic climate and the swiftness of that. But we need to be responding
when these things happen.
Dee Doocey (Chair): So you have a Plan A and a Plan B if it changes?
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): Yes. So
we moved quickly to go into Europe. That is why we have focused our attention on Europe
because of the euro to take advantage of the exchange rate now.
Dee Doocey (Chair): So it is your fault that he has not got anyone in his theatres!
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): It is a really good
point. We need to be talking to Eurostar.
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): With
Ryanair they are stays overnight. We focused on that. But the Only in London campaign, because
it is a longer running campaign, what we did not want to do was focus too much on value because
then, as you say, if the exchange rate swaps then that is the campaign blown. So it is the unique
features of London to try to attract people to London for that.
Dee Doocey (Chair): I do not want to inhibit discussion but we have eight questions, we have
only done two, and we have now spent half an hour on two so we are going to have to -- and
John [Biggs] is bursting to ask dozens.
John Biggs (AM): No, no, no. Carry on.
Andrew Boff (AM): You have already touched on this partially and that is the challenge of the
Olympics. Is there any more that we need to do for that event to prepare London’s tourist
industry?
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): For the Olympics?
Yes, there are lots of things and I will just give a simple example. I think, based on the current
plans, the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) is of the view that a lot of the venues will be
completed in 2011 and those venues in any event need to be tested for health and safety purposes
before they can be fully open to the public. How can we start attracting people to the Park in 2011
rather than waiting for the Games? So all of those things that we are thinking about -- and that is
part of what we are trying to get from here; what can we do in the run up to the Games? What are
some of those ideas that are coming through? So it is consistent promotion of London.
There is international promotion that we are seeking to do as well that uses the Games as a
catalyst but actually recognises London is a great place to come to anyway. We will attract people
here because of the Olympic Games full stop. Some people – a fewer number – will be put off
7
because they think everything is going to be going on with the Games and they are not interested
but we still want to attract people so there is a whole range of different approaches that we can
take towards that. This Tourism Action Plan is trying to elicit some of those ideas so that we can
really focus on them.
Dee Doocey (Chair): Simon [Calder], you wanted to come in?
Simon Calder (Travel Editor, The Independent): I actually pay quite a lot of attention to the
Olympics because it affects tourism flows from the UK and I like to see what the impact has been
and if you do not mind I will very, very quickly go through the last six.
So Seoul had no impact at all; nobody did go to Korea and nobody does go to Korea; sorry.
Barcelona; of course a tremendous success, putting that on the map. Part of, it must be said, a
great year for Spain because they had Expo in Seville and so on. Atlanta; again, nobody went
there, nobody goes there. Sydney was great; very good. Athens; sort of mixed. Beijing; big, ugly
Asian city, nobody is really going to go there.
Now London clearly is very, very well poised because it is a natural destination anyway but I think,
again, maybe a bit like the accommodation grading, we are slightly obsessing about the Olympics.
2012, the summer, is going to be a disaster for tourism in London. I am sorry. If you look at what
happened in Sydney and Athens which are perhaps the closest examples; hoteliers put up their
rates – and I know you have got agreements in place so that will not happen – but most people are
going to say, “Well the whole city will be in lock down”.
The thing I think it is most important to do is effectively to write off August 2012 but to make sure
that people understand that the building work that is taking place is in places that you would not
want to go to anyway, with the greatest respect to Stratford, and it is not in the same way as
Athens where the whole city basically was one big set of roadworks for three years before the
Olympics.
Yes, it is great that we are spending, what £355 million, on a media centre to get the right
approach and that will pay dividends afterwards, but I think possibly people who think 2012 is
going to be great per se are perhaps maybe deluding themselves.
Dee Doocey (Chair): Could I just follow up a couple of those? First of all the media centre. We
are not paying it to get a great media centre; we are paying it because it is an International
Olympic Committee (IOC) condition -Simon Calder (Travel Editor, The Independent): Of course.
Dee Doocey (Chair): The Americans in particular pay vast sums of money which basically funds
the Olympics.
I would also take issue with the fact that you would not want to go to Stratford. I was there at the
Olympic Park last Monday and it is really hugely impressive and it is doing amazing regeneration;
£3 billion has been put into the infrastructure. So although I know you made it as a slightly light
hearted remark, I -Andrew Boff (AM): Come on. Which tourist is going to go to Stratford, Dee [Doocey]?
Dee Doocey (Chair): To see the Olympic Park? I think they will be queuing up in their millions.
8
Andrew Boff (AM): We are in that ironic situation where one of the jewels of London will be
unavailable – Greenwich Park – because it is going to be full of horses. So the tourists will not be
able to see it.
John Biggs (AM): For the record, Stratford is part of my constituency but I do accept that it is
not likely to become a major tourist destination for four years.
Dee Doocey (Chair): It is not number one on the list.
John Biggs (AM): Where I am interested in this discussion is that I think there is a risk, as I said,
with the 44 varieties that we are trying to have a piece of everything and we need to have a very
clear vision of what we want out of the Olympics and how it is going to lever up the offer for
London. It may be there is a risk in London that because we have got so much else going on –
banking and so on – that we get smug and we say, “Either they will come or they won’t” and I
think that is the wrong posture. So that is what I am looking for in this.
Mark Elliott (Managing Director, Time Out): From a media owner’s perspective there is a
complete lack of clarity I think about what the Olympics is bringing to London both on a detailed
plan by plan basis but also in a slightly more headline brand perspective as well. I think obviously
we are still a few years out and people’s attention spans are short and 2012 seems, for a lot of
people a fair way off, but I think in terms of trying to understand what it is going to do for the city
and how we can help bring that experience to life for Londoners as well as the international market
is very unclear at the moment and we struggle even getting any clarity on who to talk to about
those questions.
Helen Bull (Marketing Director, Merlin Entertainment): John [Biggs], I think your point
about saying we are rather hoping that people will either come or they will not come I think is a
valid one. There is nothing, as far as I am aware, at the airports saying that we are an Olympic city
and that 2012 is not that far away and we want to be getting it into people’s minds now that they
want to be coming back in two or three years’ time. Beijing was last August and not really
anything is advertising the fact that we are now the next Olympic city and I think we need to start
getting that into people’s minds.
Richard Pulford (Chief Executive, Society of London Theatre): Can I just add something? I
rather agree with what Simon [Calder] said. I go to the theatre a lot. It is the nature of my job. I,
from time to time, go to New York to go to the theatre because it has a similar appeal, though
different. If New York had won the Games the one time I would not go to New York to go to the
theatre would be during an Olympic Games. So I do think that it is quite a serious question
whether the established visitor attractions are going to fare so well during the period of the
Games? I agree with Simon; I think there are big question marks over that that frankly, at this
stage, it is almost impossible to answer. It would be wrong to assume it is going to be a bonanza.
Helen Bull (Marketing Director, Merlin Entertainment): We are not forecasting too. Again,
all the learning that we have had is that actually you get the benefit after the Games once you have
had all that media attention. So in terms of our five year plan we are not forecasting any increase
actually in that year.
Andrew Boff (AM): Specifically to the LDA, just to run through the couple of figures you gave us
about the returns on investment that you got from particular campaigns, you can tie that down? It
was a publicity campaign presumably. I do not know if any public relations (PR) company can
actually say an increase is due to a particular campaign.
9
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): There
is an agreed methodology that looks at -- well in fact with the Ryanair campaign it is people who
have actually booked on the website and they use an average of how much money they would
spend on the trip knowing how many days they are going to be in the UK. So it is an average per
trip that you can work out the actual spend.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): I did start it by saying
we would like to take some credit for it!
Andrew Boff (AM): Absolutely. But that does move me on to my question really which is what
performance targets have you set yourself for tourism over the period of the Olympic areas? How
do you work out your return on investment? What kind of outcomes from employee training or
people in the tourist industry training will you be setting yourselves?
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): It would depend on
what the final Action Plan looks like what the specific measures would be. We need to bear in
mind that the Tourism Action Plan is, in essence, a strategic document and it is not always the
responsibility of the LDA; we have a small amount of resources and other parties as well to do that.
Our main investment is through Visit London which does the marketing and promotion and it is
linked to return around that which is based on an agreed methodology that is used quite
universally.
Let’s just say it was the hospitality industry and training, we would set targets around the numbers
depending on the amount of investment that was going in. That would not just be LDA
investment; it would probably be if you are trying to upskill people that are currently in
employment or put people in employment and put them on apprenticeships, that would be utilising
our own resources, Learning and Skills Council (LSC) resources and other resources as well, the
Sector Skills Councils, so you would link specific targets depending on what you are trying to
achieve.
One might be the number of people that start an apprenticeship and complete their apprenticeship,
for example. Or another one might be the number of businesses that are currently not linked to an
accredited grading scheme that do become linked to it, or participate in improving their facilities.
Particularly around, for example, greater accessibility for those that are mobility impaired or have
some other disability.
Andrew Boff (AM): But you would be able to monitor that and attribute that to your input rather
than anything that was happening anyway?
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): Yes. If they are
specifically getting LDA resources, or indeed any other public sector resources, you have to be able
to directly demonstrate it was as a result of your resources that led them to take a particular course
of action which they might not have done otherwise.
John Biggs (AM): I wanted to punch this point if you like. Under Ken [Livingstone] as much as
under Boris [Johnson] we used to have these return on investment press releases and I just do not
believe them. Spend £1 million a million tourists come, they all buy a £10 meal and therefore we
have got a 10 million per cent return on our investment. It is rubbish obviously and we do need to
have more sophisticated measures and I hope that you are saying the LDA is moving towards that
and that our report on this will push you toward doing that as well.
10
Tony Arbour (AM): The inference is that these people would not have come unless it was your
campaign. The truth of the matter is they would not have come via Ryanair possibly because of
your campaign but they would have come, many of them, in any event.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): The point that you
are putting forward applies to any form of marketing or branding.
Tony Arbour (AM): Of course.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): We feel, through the
efforts that we placed in terms of additional resources to try to encourage visitors to come to
London – which was not just an idea sitting behind a desk to do it – in discussions with the
businesses and the commercial sector in London because there is a feeling, under the current
economic climate, that there would be a severe diminution, where would you target resources to
try to encourage people to visit? The decision was in some areas you knew people were not
travelling anyway so the greatest return was likely to come from Ireland and Europe within that
particular climate and particularly short breaks. There is a different attitude towards short breaks
now than there was in the past. If you are trying to have a focus on Londoners actually enjoying
London’s opportunities as well.
John Biggs (AM): The fact that it is difficult to measure does not mean that we should not spend
real energy doing it. I imagine the commercial people here spend a lot of time studying their
customers and understanding why they came and what they can do to make it better for them next
time.
Andrew Boff (AM): One thing I am interested in. Every report that this Assembly considers
talks about its contribution towards climate change targets. It seems that the tourism industry
kind of avoids that; us being an island.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): Not necessarily.
There could be very simple measures; when you go to a hotel and it tells you, “If you don’t want
your bath towels changed every day then hang them up and don’t stick them on the floor” so there
are little measures that can be taken as well as larger measures. For example, if new hotels are
being developed or facilities are being developed in London for the new hoteliers to take on whether under franchise or not – how you make sure that they are sustainable buildings.
Dee Doocey (Chair): Thank you, Sarah. I really do not want to go off on to environmental issues
when we are doing this, as important as it is, but we are here to look at tourism. I would like to ask
our guests if they have got any comments to make on anything that has been said so far?
Simon Calder (Travel Editor, The Independent): Very quickly picking up on the Ryanair thing.
I absolutely agree that it is very difficult to measure the particular impact but Ryanair is a very
special case where you can actually have a look. Yesterday I was in Munich West as Ryanair calls
Memmingen. If you went any further west you would no longer be in Bavaria! There they have
just started this new link. In the local paper, the Memminger Zeitung, yes, there are advertisements
because the only place, if you live in Memmingen – as with so many other odd little places that
Ryanair goes – the only place you can fly to is London. So I think, actually, that is money arguably
very well spent because you are saying to the good people of Memmingen, “Do you want to do
some DIY this weekend or would you like to go to the world’s greatest city?”
Dee Doocey (Chair): You will remember that for your next campaign, “Do you want to do some
DIY this weekend or would you like to go to the world’s greatest city”!
11
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): That could be a
slogan.
Dee Doocey (Chair): I think you should charge them for that!
Tony Arbour (AM): We have just heard about targeting Europe but arguably you should be
targeting the domestic market. I seem to recall that when the Great Exhibition opened in 1851 – I
was fairly young in those days! – the number of people who visited London as a proportion of the
inhabitants of the country was well over 30 per cent whereas hardly anybody had ever travelled
outside their little village. I have seen statistics recently which say, even to this day, there are
large numbers of people who rarely travel more than 30 or 40 miles from their homes, so clearly
the market you should be trying to get is the domestic market. I suppose this is primarily for the
LDA, what are you doing to get the domestic market in?
As an aside, I am a Londoner and I am accustomed to high prices. I think the prices in London are
astonishing. The prices of your attractions, Helen [Bull], seem to me to be astonishing. If one
wants to take a family of four out, even with the special offers which you give – I would be
interested to know how many of your customers are coming in, so to speak, at the door price rather
than having one of the discounts – seems to me to be an absolutely astonishing thing. It is still
probably cheaper to go to – I do not know – Majorca than go to all four of your attractions.
Helen Bull (Marketing Director, Merlin Entertainment): Would you like me to ...?
Tony Arbour (AM): Please!
Helen Bull (Marketing Director, Merlin Entertainment): In terms of the prices that we charge,
obviously we look across our competitors so we do not just pluck prices out of the air so we do feel
we are competitive against other paid for attractions. The other thing that we do on a weekly basis
is measure things like value for money and customer satisfaction etc so we can gauge how people
are feeling about things. I am happy to say, with the London attractions, on the whole we do have
very good value for money scores, particularly at the London Eye and at Madame Tussauds.
In terms of the number of people coming through on a promotion it really varies. In something
like July and August when we have a lot of promotions out there with people like – at the moment
we have got Persil and there is a Tesco promotion going on where you can do two for one – it is
about 40 per cent of the queue coming through on a promotion. So people are picking them up.
Again, we need to be reactive to the market we use; certainly online so people like lastminute.com
and 365tickets.com to be able to do a lot of tactical offers. I guess one thing we have been involved
in over the last three years which unfortunately does not seem to be happening this year is the
Oyster Card promotion and that was something that ran throughout the year where all of our
attractions were included in two for one offers there. I think that is a great shame for Londoners
and now that is spreading out to the Home Counties, that that is something that is not taking place
this year.
Tony Arbour (AM): It is right, is it not, that the growth of visitor attractions in London has been
far greater in the free attractions than in the paid for attractions?
Helen Bull (Marketing Director, Merlin Entertainment): Yes, that is correct.
Tony Arbour (AM): The British Museum has never been more popular. Does that indicate that
visitors to London are spending less? What does that demonstrate; that they are going to the free
attractions – which have been free for many years – in greater numbers than they had done before?
12
Helen Bull (Marketing Director, Merlin Entertainment): I think some of that is down to the
current economic climate. I think what people are doing is they are choosing perhaps one
attraction to go to. What we are not finding is people are going to all four of ours at any one time
or over a weekend. They are planning their day and they are doing a mixture. They are saying
they’ve got a budget and perhaps instead of doing two paid for attractions last year they might do
one but then they will do something for free and they will go for one of the menu offers that are
there at restaurants and things as well. I think they are probably doing less paid for attractions
than they were but thankfully, because of the status of our attractions that I look after, those
generally are the ones that are on their list if they are going to do one of them.
Richard Pulford (Chief Executive, Society of London Theatre): I just wanted to say because
nobody mentioned it but I will mention it myself; theatre ticket prices are something that come
under scrutiny from time to time. I was going to support something that Helen said.
It is astonishing when we survey audiences – to me it is astonishing – how many of them, what an
enormously high proportion of them think they have had very good value for their evening out
and, at the end of the day, there is no absolutely right price for a visitor attraction like the Wheel
or indeed for a theatre except insofar as you have got to get your capital back. The right price is
the one that people are happy to pay and if they think it is good value who are we to second guess
them?
Personally I would not assume that 79% of my visits to the theatre represent good value and I do
not even pay for them! But it is the case – we absolutely know this – that people take enormous
pleasure in the experience that they have and they do not mind paying for it.
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): I was
going to say that the Only in London campaign is not just focused internationally; we are very
much targeting both Londoners – there was a promotion in the Evening Standard and they are
carrying the story – but also in national and regional newspapers as well. Also there is a PR
campaign that is actually meant to be launching today which, again, will be focused on the UK
media so we are not just turning our back on Europe. The idea was though that we wanted to
focus on the eurozone while we had that advantage so we put money in there. But the campaign
between Christmas and New Year was a UK one as well.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): The other point about
the free attractions, as you refer to them, what they also do as well is they have exhibitions which
are paying exhibitions so -Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): You get
them in the door and then you -Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): Charge them.
John Biggs (AM): By the way I think our theatre is superb in London.
Dee Doocey (Chair): So do I.
John Biggs (AM): I cannot get enough of it. It is just I am stuck in this damn building all day!
This is the transport question. The best way to put the question is to say it appears to a lot of
people that Transport for London’s (TfL) role is to milk tourists as cattle rather than to treat them
13
as an asset for London who need to be nurtured. Is that a fair view and are we properly integrated
on that?
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): Do not answer the
first bit!
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): I am
not answering that bit!
John Biggs (AM): We are meant to have joined up government in London so this must be a
priority.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): We cannot respond as
to whether it is milking people or not. I think what is really important – which I think you have
emphasised, John, and which has come out this morning - is that we have got to make sure that the
whole transport accessibility and moving around London is affordable and it is value and
particularly the points with regards to Oyster Cards. It can be confusing for Londoners; let alone
the people that come into London. So I think that we have really got to make sure not only that
TfL transport fully joins up with us – and we do work closely with them – but also the other modes
of getting in so even Eurostar that we have spoken about and the national bus companies.
John Biggs (AM): But I do not get a great sense of urgency out of your draft plan on this.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): It may be that we
need to beef this up a little bit more on that side.
John Biggs (AM): Right. So it is seen as expensive. We have already had a comment about
weekend closures, inconvenience and signposting for people. I think one of the reasons people do
the theatre is because of the integrated -- things like lastminute where you can buy a ticket for the
transport and the theatre and a hotel in one and sticking Oyster into that would be a pretty useful
thing to do. Is that going to be a priority?
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): We will take this
back.
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): Oyster
we know is the key.
Richard Pulford (Chief Executive, Society of London Theatre): Can I just say I think we
sometimes assume in London that everybody knows about it and they do not. Not even in the UK.
Dee Doocey (Chair): I agree.
Richard Pulford (Chief Executive, Society of London Theatre): It can be a big shock for them
when they arrive at Kings Cross and find it is going to cost them each £4.
Simon Calder (Travel Editor, The Independent): The big problem, as far as I see it, is that you
finally get from an airport via a very expensive link into the centre of town and then your problems
are only just beginning; £4 to go one stop. Of course the way to overcome that is to have an
Oyster Card and the value, like the cost of theatre tickets and the Eye, for Europeans has fallen by
about 20% in the past year and for Americans by 25%. So value is not an issue.
14
What they do, for example, in Singapore is they say, “Right. Here you are. We’ve got this
fantastic public transport system but you are not getting on it until you have bought a stored value
card. You have got to buy that and then we will take you around very cheaply.” Whereas here you
have the option of paying ludicrous amounts of money to go on the Tube or the bus. So if you
make it non optional then I think you would actually be improving the service and the value to
visitors.
John Biggs (AM): Is the general view of our commercial witnesses – if I can call you that – that
we have not quite got it right yet?
Richard Pulford (Chief Executive, Society of London Theatre): Yes.
John Biggs (AM): There is nowhere to park this supplementary question but I will stick it on
here. Is there a particular issue about business tourism in London as well and access to transport
or is that easier? Whenever I go to a conference somewhere else you get a complementary metro
ticket and in London you do not seem to get that. Is that a problem for us?
Richard Pulford (Chief Executive, Society of London Theatre): I have not noticed it. The
bigger problem is that business tourism is falling.
John Biggs (AM): But I think in our report if we make one, Chair, we might make some comment
on the lack of reference to business tourism in this strategy, which I thought Visit London had
done a bit of work on but it does not come across.
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): We can
bring that out in this.
John Biggs (AM): My other question is about outer London. This is the ritual outer London
question. In what ways will the Plan change the way the LDA and Visit London promote outer
London or work with outer London boroughs and attractions? Apart from Chessington of course
which everyone goes to.
Dee Doocey (Chair): And Hampton Court, excuse me.
John Biggs (AM): Is that London? I thought that was Yorkshire or something!
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): In the last Action
Plan a number of things were developed but one of the things that was developed was having a
more localised approach to tourism in London so that is working very closely with the boroughs
themselves and, particularly in terms of this Action Plan, we worked closely with London Councils
in the development of the Action Plan because it is all about promoting London as a whole, not just
necessarily that central activity zone.
In the recent campaign, the ‘Only in London’ one, we have got unique things to visit or things to
do in every London borough. There are 260 at the moment and it is rising. There was a call put
out to people to say, “What can you do uniquely in your particular area?” So that is of importance
and we work very closely with them to develop that and promote that.
In terms of what is coming out of the Outer London Commission, some boroughs will have more
emphasis -- in fact I think in our consultation, for example, some of the South London boroughs
have greater presence than some of the North London ones but we are working closely with them
to encourage that.
15
John Biggs (AM): Can I ask two tiny supplementaries then? One is my wife likes plants and trees
and things. We went to New York. We went to the Brooklyn Botanical Gardens which I would
not have ordinarily thought of. I put up with it and she enjoyed it. It is a sort of suburban
experience. Do you think we are doing enough to promote things like that?
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): We are working
closely with London Councils. The issue goes back to one of the points made earlier. What we are
really trying to do is obviously maximise the value from any investment from the LDA and the
boroughs. It is really important that we encourage the boroughs to do as much. So a campaign
that promotes the Horniman or Clissold Park or Trent Park in the north; to really try to push that
so Londoners in particular go out and enjoy what is there.
Dee Doocey (Chair): Do the boroughs have to pay a lot of money in order to get Visit London to
promote their attractions?
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): No. The majority of
Visit London is financed by the LDA so it would really be mainly top up because basically it is just
really the marginal costs.
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): We
encourage them to promote right across London and so that is our brief to them and they have a
member of staff whose role is to do that and go out and work with the boroughs. So it is certainly
something that we encourage.
John Biggs (AM): Do we do enough with things outside London, like Canterbury obviously or
Down House this year with Charles Darwin, tying those on to the tourist trail?
We are running out of time so there is a related question which is about the internet. I think it
would be quite important in a modern age to get maybe some of the more fuddy duddy attractions
to become aware of the internet and its power because if I am a more thoughtful traveller I will
want to google London and look for interesting things – trees, Charles Darwin or something – and
then find a link to it. Do you feel we have enough e-literacy in London apropos tourism?
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): We could probably do
more. But there is also a huge percentage that does not use the internet for that type of thing as
well. It depends on what your target audience is that you are trying to attract to some of the
events because some might be happier going to Time Out for example if they want to look at things
that are going on in London or even day trips.
John Biggs (AM): I think everyone under 30 these days; it is compulsory they have to go on the
internet before they go anywhere.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): But some people over
50 may have more money to spend.
Andrew Boff (AM): Concerning new venues can you understand that there are some places in
London that do not want to be on a tourist map?
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): Yes. That is why it is
really important for us to work with the local boroughs. If they do not want to participate it is
fine; it is their choice. They may not prioritise it.
16
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): Some
boroughs do not want to.
Andrew Boff (AM): I am associated with the local market and we fought to get out of Visit
London. We did not want to be in there because of the effect that it has on local prices and local
services. Some of us think that London is a little more than a theme park.
John Biggs (AM): Not many.
Dee Doocey (Chair): You do not have to reply to that.
Tony Arbour (AM): It is to do with your partners and there are some London-wide partners
other than London Councils, for example, Historic Royal Palaces and English Heritage, all of
whom are very big players in the outer London boroughs. They seem to have their own marketing
budgets completely separate from each other and completely separate from yours. Completely
separate even when they are doing Shakespeare at Hampton Court I do not suppose London
theatres are involved. How are you joining up with all of these people instead of having what
appears perhaps to be a scatter gun approach?
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): Visit
London does do joint promotions with their partners when it is appropriate to do so and do
promote the royal boroughs on their website so they do work with their partners, as I say, when it
is possible to do so.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): We do not think we
have a scatter gun approach actually.
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): No.
Tony Arbour (AM): I am looking at your list of partners.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): Sorry, which page is
that?
Tony Arbour (AM): I am afraid our version of the thing is not paged but it is key year one actions
and you simply refer to all these other things as local marketing consortia without identifying
them so one is hard put to do. You only have to go down to the Underground here at London
Bridge and you can see that each separate sponsoring thing -- the one that sticks in my mind
because it is as at the top of the escalator is the thing of Henry VIII wearing the armour -Dee Doocey (Chair): The Hampton Court one.
Tony Arbour (AM): That is the one. Just pointing at a single thing. One would have liked to
have thought that instead of just a simple one destination thing you could have had several
destinations -- because if you are going to Hampton Court you are going to be passing a great
many other things on the way.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): It does depend on the
attraction. If you go to Hampton Court by boat you are doing a day’s outing just getting to
Hampton Court and spending time there.
Tony Arbour (AM): You would be very eccentric to go from here to Hampton Court by river.
17
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): Well then I must be
eccentric because I have gone with lots of friends and we do it quite often -Tony Arbour (AM): It takes you hours and hours and hours.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): Yes, but you are
going through London; it is a day trip. People have these choices as to how they wish to enjoy
their time and spend their money.
I think the key point, as you have said, is that it is important to have the appropriate relationships.
It is not always a relationship with us or with Visit London and indeed, for example, if you take
Merlin; it runs a number of attractions throughout London and how it links up with the open top
bus that goes around and all of that. These are businesses that will do that to promote themselves.
Our role I think, with Visit London, is to make sure that the experience is a quality experience for
us. It does not mean that everything has to be joined up and perfect in that sense because it is
really down to individual consumers choosing how they wish to enjoy things. From an
administrative perspective it could be great and there is potentially more that we can be doing so
we will take that away from it.
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): Visit
London does produce a plan each year and it does get together with a load of its partners – as many
as possible – to say, “This is what we are going to be doing” and give them the opportunity to be
involved. So it does try to do that.
Mark Elliott (Managing Director, Time Out): I think as a Visit London partner we find that
there is quite a lot of energy that goes into trying to get that coordination going. It is not always
perfect but there is certainly no lack of intent I do not think.
Dee Doocey (Chair): I would support Tony. I should think the numbers of visitors who go to
Hampton Court from London by boat are quite low although I mean I know the visitor attraction
is quite high.
Can we move on and can I just ask you then; if you were going to have one key thing that needed
to go into the London Tourism Action Plan that you have got an audience here, what would yours
be?
Richard Pulford (Chief Executive, Society of London Theatre): I think mine would be what is
not to go into it rather than what is to go into it. We are very clear. There is a huge amount of
research that tells us why people come to London. We know why they come and I would not
spend too much time trying to encourage them to come for other reasons because I think it is
money and effort ill spent.
Helen Bull (Marketing Director, Merlin Entertainment): I think mine would be something we
touched on earlier about the flexibility of the changing market. I think it is going to change quite a
bit over the next couple of years and what I am not really seeing here is what is the plan for if the
overseas people do drop off even more and what is the plan for domestics to make sure that we
encourage more of those to come.
Simon Calder (Travel Editor, The Independent): There are about 20 million people every year
who come to London and do not stay; they are transit passengers. I would like to see them
captured. I am very often talking to people around the world, “Have you been to London?” “Oh
I’ve only changed planes there”.
18
Now if you take two extremely successful city states touristically, Dubai and Singapore; in Dubai
there is a current campaign with Emirates, “You fly in on Emirates Business Class and we will give
you two free nights in our lovely emirate staying at the Atlantis Palm indeed”. If you go into
Singapore and you have got more than four hours to change planes they say, “Right, have a free
tour. We’ll take you into town. We will show you around because we believe that you will see so
much that you will think “Oh I have got to come back here and spend some more time””. Very
cheap. Very easy apart of course from our rather arcane visa rules from people who are from
outside Europe.
Dee Doocey (Chair): Or indeed the traffic jams that is trying to get from Heathrow into London
in four hours let alone trying to get back again! But I really like that idea. As you say it is cheap
and very easily doable.
Mark Elliott (Managing Director, Time Out): I think for me it would be a set of simpler
messages about what the key objectives are that real people can understand. If it is about value or
if it is about amazing cultural heritage; those types of messages are not coming through very
clearly, I don’t think. Certainly not for the domestic market but also I think probably for our
overseas visitors as well.
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): Can I
just respond quickly on the stop overs. We are aware of that. It is something we have picked up
and we are working with the BAA and some of the airlines to do something with that and an
operator in the UK.
Dee Doocey (Chair): Sorry, and you have taken into account the visa problem as well?
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency): The
visa problem is an issue obviously. Yes, we are very aware of that and that will have to be played
into it.
The other thing is that we are aware that the world is changing dramatically so whereas with the
last Tourism Action Plan we went into detail for every single three years when we published it,
with this one we are doing detail for the first year then we are going to evaluate and review and so
we are really going to do one year business plans if you like within it. So we will take people’s
views as we go along and make sure we are shaping it properly.
Dee Doocey (Chair): So it can be more flexible and respond more quickly.
Carolyn Smith (Director of Global Competitiveness, London Development Agency):
Exactly, yes.
Sarah Ebanja (Deputy Chief Executive, London Development Agency): The other point I
would like to end on from our perspective is we are collating all the responses that we have got
now and obviously we will make them available to the other people that are here as well and we
would welcome thoughts back on that because we will be taking the papers through our Board
processes as well to be able to pull up a final Action Plan for the period.
Dee Doocey (Chair): Just before I bring John [Biggs] in can I just mention to the guests that if
anything occurs to you afterwards -- you know what it is like; sometimes you go out and you think,
“I wish I had thought of that” do please get in touch with officers because we will continue our
research and put in our report.
19
John Biggs (AM): I had a very nasty question for the LDA. Perhaps we could write to you and
you could respond with some detail on whether you think Visit London is fit for purpose because it
has had some bumpy times and it has been relaunched and I think, as part of our report or evidence
on this, we should understand what you are doing to sharpen it up if that is what needs doing.
Dee Doocey (Chair): OK. That would be very useful. Can I thank our guests so much? It has
been very, very interesting. It has been really, really useful. Thank you very much to the LDA for
your contribution.
20