Tourism Industry Council Meeting
27th September 2017, 10:30am-12pm
Grimond Room, Portcullis House
Council Members
FIRST NAME / SURNAME / ORGANISATION / INITIALJOHN / GLEN / DCMS / JG
SIMON / VINCENT / HILTON / SV
TIM / ALDERSLADE / AIRLINES UK / TA
PAUL / ASKEW / THE ART SCHOOL, LIVERPOOL / PA
BERNARD / DONOGHUE / ALVA / BD
PIETER / HAMMAN / GLAZEBROOK HOUSE HOTEL / PH
SIMON / HUGHES / EVENTS INDUSTRY BOARD / SH
UFI / IBRAHIM / BHA / UI
KURT / JANSON / TOURISM ALLIANCE / KJ
ROBERT / GRANT / INTERCONTINENTAL HOTELS GROUP / RG
NATASHA / MYTTON-MILLS / AIRBNB / NMM
JEAN-PHILLIPPE / MONOD / EXPEDIA / JPM
HEATHER / REEKIE / RABBIES TOURS / HRE
SARAH / ROOTS / WARNER BROS. STUDIO TOUR / HR
SIMON / TARR / PEOPLE 1ST / ST
CHARLES / TROTMAN / CLA / CT
ALAN / WARDLE / ABTA / AW
JOHN / WATERWORTH / PARKDEAN HOLIDAYS / JW
DEIDRE / WELLS / UK INBOUND / DW
DAVID / WESTON / B&B ASSOCIATION / DWE
Council Observers and Guest Presenters
FIRST NAME / SURNAME / ORGANISATION / INITIAL (Only if referenced in minutes)THOMAS / ANELAY / GRAYLING / TA
SALLY / BALCOMBE / VISIT BRITAIN
FIONA / COOK / SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT
STEPHEN / DARKE / DCMS / SD
STEPHEN / EARL / MAC
CHRIS / HAYNES / MIGRATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ROB / HOLT / VISIT WALES
NIGEL / HUDDLESTON / MP FOR MID WORCESTERSHIRE AND PPS TO JG / NH
ALAN / MANNING / MAC / AM
CHRIS / MCKENNA / GRAYLING
JONAS / NEIHARDT / HILTON
ANTHONY / PICKLES / VISITENGLAND / AP
STEVE / RIDGWAY / VISITBRITAIN / SR
DARREN / SPRAGGS / DCMS
ALICE / STACEY / DCMS
ANTHONY / STOKES / DCMS
LAUREN / ZISKA / HILTON
Introductions
-SV welcome everyone to the meeting and introduced JG, NH, SR and AM (who would join the meeting later).
-JG thanked SV for the welcome and introduced himself. He explained his passion about working to the sector, acknowledging both the opportunities and challenges the industry faces. JG would like to see honest conversations at the TIC.
-JG recognised the tough decisions made in reducing the size of the Council and thanked the previous members for their contributions.
Industrial Strategy
-SD set out the likely BEIS requirements for a sector deal, which include clear leadership, a champion for the sector, a clearly defined sector and governance strategy. BEIS will expect the sector deal to both have a tangible impact on the sector and contain deliverable asks. The first wave of sector deals are likely to be announced in Autumn 2017. There is no guarantee that a sector deal will be accepted.
-SR – as the figure appointed to head up any sector deal negotiations – set out the areas that the sector deal is focusing on; namely productivity, skills, connectivity (both digital and analogue), and the concept of Tourism Action Zones.
-SR’s presentation covered the reasoning behind the four strands of the deal, the need to be precise about the core areas of the deal, and why some areas were not included (but the sector would continue to push for outside of this process).
-SR talked about tourism already being a strong industry and building on growth, and
explained that the sector could achieve the best results from this process if it worked together and spoke with one voice.
-Through the consultation with the sector, VB has had 500 interactions with businesses and trade associations. The overall aim of the deal is to increase the value of tourism to £268.3 billion by 2025.
Skills
-UI introduced the Skills section of the proposed sector deal. She highlighted the fact that a career in the tourism sector is not seen as attractive as those in other sectors and the turnover of staff in tourism is significant. The sector can increase productivity by retaining existing staff. In order to increase skills, she suggested that we need to focus on education and ensure tourism is included in the first round of T- Levels.
-DW supported the work being done in this section of the sector deal and emphasised that a lot of effort needs to be concentrated on the perception of careers in the tourism sector. DW also highlighted the issue of language skills.
-AW recommended that we include reference to the skills that the UK is world leading in, including health and safety, insurance and digital marketing.
-SR highlighted the fact that the sector needs to take into account how working practices have changed. Employees are looking to develop a portfolio of skills as part of their careers. Employers need to be flexible in how they accommodate these demands and how they provide employment opportunities.
-ST stressed that the industry need to be seen as a leader in T-Levels and as an industry it needs to engage with the IFA.
-PH advised on the need to focus on skills at a grassroots level. He suggested that it is important to show young people the different options that the industry can provide and the transferable skills they can develop.
Productivity
-KJ explained that originally the productivity section looked predominantly at regulation, including work on developing a primary authority. He suggested that – while we should continue to look at this – the most significant potential impact to the sector would be to increase levels of productivity by extending the length of the season.
-SH gave his support for the role Business, Visits and Events can have on extending the season.
-DWE supported the idea of a primary authority. He also spoke about Government having the ability to stagger school holidays and abolish daylight saving time, which would both provide opportunities to extend the season. Ensuring that the Package Travel Directive only included packages which include a component of travel, would encourage accommodation providers to work with attractions to develop more packages.
-JG reiterated the need for the sector to focus on key priorities. He also stated that DCMS are working with BEIS on the PTD.
-SR agreed with KJ and highlighted the fact that it is often difficult to get cooperation from local authorities. SR acknowledged that her business is one of few attractions not affected by seasonality, and the biggest benefit of this is to the customer who gets a better experience.
-DW suggested that the sector needed to conduct some research into seasonality and the ways in which we can incentivise businesses to extend their opening hours.
Tourism Zones
-CT said in the next five years the issue of digital connectivity will predominantly be resolved. Issues over digital disruption need to be examined and their impact on businesses. Transportation needs to be made easier for tourists to reach destinations outside London.
-JW highlighted the fact that over the last few years it has become increasingly difficult to engage with Local Authorities and LEPs. However, tourism is the key to growth in many rural and coastal communities.
-JG said LEPs often vary in their quality and understanding of the tourism sector. LEPs can be a driver for conversations in the local area and can enable businesses to build links. There are vast parts of country where tourism is the main focus of the economy and businesses should seek to engage with them.
-DW was positive about the idea of Tourism Zones, stating this was a good way of getting people excited about the sector deal. It also provides the opportunity for proper tourism management but work is needed on establishing how this fits in with the existing landscape.
-UI asked if other sector deals contained Action Zones. If so, she wondered how Tourism Action Zones would relate to these.
-SB talked about Historic England’s Heritage Action Zones and the proposed Creative Industry Hubs. These would not be competition but rather we should look at how different sectors can work together to amplify their impact.
Connectivity
-DW highlighted the two main areas of work on connectivity; firstly getting people to the UK and secondly enabling them to travel out of London to the rest of the UK. 70% of travel to UK is by air, so a clear focus needs to be on how to make arrival as smooth and efficient as possible. Two-thirds of tourists come from the EU, so she argued that it is paramount that we do not increase the barriers for them visiting after Brexit. We also need to examine how leisure transport can become a key consideration in transport planning. In particular, simplifying the cost and complexity.
-BD stated that the UK is regarded as unwelcoming and the complexity of getting visas does not help this impression. Work also needs to be done to on improving transport connectivity at a local level to enable people to complete the last part of their journey to an attraction. He suggested that rail works and upgrades need to consider their impact on tourists, as works at Waterloo had had a significant impact on visitor numbers this summer.
-KJ stated that Home Office ought to look at developing Electronic Travel Authorisation for low risk visitors and to make it easier for businesses coming for conferences.
-BD suggested that the narrative should be about how tourism is a successful industry, and the deal is about making the sector more sustainable and growing it.
-SR highlighted the importance of sticking together and the importance of working together towards a sector deal.
-JG asked the table if there was general agreement on the proposals for the potential Industrial Strategy Sector Deal. Attendees agreed that there was.
ACTION ALL: To send comments on the sector deal to VisitBritain by Friday 30th September. VB would then write a first iteration of the proposed sector deal to be submitted to DCMS for comment.
ACTION AP: To send the draft of the sector deal to Council members so that they could see the full detail behind the slides.
ACTION SD: DCMS to begin discussions with relevant Government Departments about the proposed content.
Migration Advisory Committee Call for Evidence:
-AM set out the role of the MAC which is a non-departmental public body, independent from Government. The role of the MAC is to provide evidence-based advice to Government on immigration issues. The MAC makes recommendations not policy, whereas Government decides policy and the government may not necessarily follow the MAC’s recommendations.
-The Home Secretary commissioned the MAC on the 27 July 2017. The commission broadly covers the Impacts of ‘Brexit’ on the UK labour market and how the UK’s immigration system should be aligned with a modern industrial strategy. The MAC has been asked to report by September 2018.
-The focus is on phase three, which is the immigration system post EU exit and post any transition period.
-Part one of the commission focuses on establishing current patterns and characteristics of EU and EEA migration, including sectors; regional distribution; skill levels; duration of assignments; self-employment, entrepreneurs, part time, agency, temporary and seasonal workers. It focuses on mapping the evolution of EU and EEA migration since 2000 and possible future trends.
-Professor Alan Manning set out some of the key points from the MAC’s initial analysis of numbers of EEA born nationals per sector and skill level. The charts used are in the MAC’s briefing note which show that there are significant numbers of EEA nationals in the food and beverage service sector and to a lesser extent in the accommodation sector. In the food and beverage sector there are high proportions of low and medium skill EEA nationals whereas the accommodation sector has a slightly larger amount of higher skilled EEA nationals.
-The MAC will be looking at the effect that migration trends have had on wages, unemployment and public finances amongst other considerations.
-The MAC are keen to receive evidence from anyone who wants to contribute (trade organisation, company, individual) and will take a critical approach to assessing evidence submitted. The MAC will also be organising regional visits.
-MAC studies have previously focussed on the welfare of the resident population and this commission also has to consider what difference migration trends makes to the quality of people's lives.
In discussion the following points we made:
-DW highlighted how finding people with the appropriate language skills is a huge challenge for tour operators contracting staff. 86% in a poll said they employ EU nationals because of their language skills. A lot of front of house staff in major attractions and hotels also have language skills which are an asset in terms of customer service, but not recognised in the tiered immigration system. Attendees agreed that some recognition of the importance of language skills would be helpful.
-The MAC confirmed that they are interested in the sector’s views on skills that cannot be sourced locally. They are also interested in employers’ views on how the devaluation of the pound is impacting international workers as the devaluation, combined with improving home economies and possible increases to wages in home countries are likely to impact EEA nationals decisions about remaining in the UK.
-UI emphasised that the way businesses define skills (including softer skills) is different to government, which is salary based. The KPMG/BHA report which was informed by the Migration Observatory found that 96% of current EU migrant workers would be ineligible to continue working under the current immigration system without freedom of movement. This is a grave concern for the sector both in terms of people here now and filling future vacancies. The same report stated that the hospitality sector requires an uplift of 62500 workers per year to address skills shortages.
-The MAC have been doing a lot of engagement with employers and no employer has told them that their jobs are unskilled. They are also interested in the sector’s views in which other sectors tourism and hospitality recruit from e.g. retail.
-SH and UI raised the DFE decision for the hospitality technical route to be delayed, which pushes the sector’s opportunity to train a pipeline of young people back three years.
-UI emphasised the need for greater definition of skilled employees as some chefs are not classed as skilled. The salary cap on chefs are meant to distinguish between specialist chefs (Tier 2) and other skills levels but UI emphasised that this approach doesn’t work for all businesses. She stated that some restaurants need 4-6 chefs skilled in a specific cuisine and would not be able to afford to pay the tier 2 salary requirement to all. The salary requirements can end up forcing small businesses to not be able to get the right staff and in a worst case scenario to close.
-A question was asked about how local the regional analysis will be. The MAC will not be able to cover all regions, cities and sectors so will have to extract the most important regional differences. Evidence submitted should draw attention to variations between regions and within (e.g. rural/city).
-JW noted that the agricultural sector has similar workforce issues and that if EEA nationals weren’t doing these roles, there is not a ready supply of local labour to take over. The same applies to housekeeping roles.
-JG stressed the importance of the sector providing a granular breakdown of skills levels to the MAC. The sector should provide an authoritative representation of their views. The MAC also said that some collation of views from across the sector would be useful, particularly given most MAC commissions in the past have been about one sector or another but this covers all sectors.
There was no further business.
Closing
-JG stressed the importance of the industry getting behind the sector deal and encouraged everyone to feed into MAC. He thanked everyone for coming and appreciate the process it took to get to this meeting.
-SV thanked SR, AM and everyone for attending. Next meeting will be in December 2017/ January 2018.
MEETING CLOSE
Darren Spraggs, Alexandra Brown, Alice Stacey.
1