The
Director of Inward Investment and Place Marketing, Mr Mark Oakley, has been
invited to attend the meeting and he will provide a presentation as part of
this item (slides attached).
Minutes:
The Commission
considered a report of the Chief Executive which provided an update on the work
of the Place Marketing team for Leicester and Leicestershire. A copy of
the report marked ‘Agenda Item 10’, is filed with these minutes.
The Commission also
received a presentation from the Director of Inward Investment and Place
Marketing, Mr Mark Oakley. A copy of the slides forming the presentation
is filed with these minutes.
Arising from
discussion and questions raised, the following points were made:
(i)
The Tourism Advisory Board was
a public/private sector partnership that comprised of representatives from a number of different organisations such as the City and
County Councils, district councils, the LLEP, accommodation, sport, and
transport businesses, the national forest, Twycross Zoo and the National Space
Centre. The Board had been in place for 3 years and gave a good steer on
tourism opportunities across all areas of the City and County.
(ii)
As a result of Covid 19, alongside the LLEP, the Inward Investment Team
had considered those businesses that could best be supported during this
difficult time. The Investment Team had worked with space and live
science sectors which were considered key to the area, providing a source of
great strength and opportunity to attract new investment. Such businesses
also generated employment opportunities, particularly for younger people
leaving higher education or university who had been particularly hard hit by
the pandemic.
(iii)
Raising awareness and promoting
opportunities both in the City and County was considered critical to both
secure visitors in the first instance, but also to ensure they made the most of
the area as a whole. Members noted that this was
largely done through website promotions and social media, but
expressed concern that this relied on people choosing to research the area and
did not actively reach out to new potential visitors. Members noted that a
new Place Marketing Manager was being appointed and their role would be to
raise awareness of what Leicester and Leicestershire had to offer.
(iv)
Leicestershire was seen
as an attractive area for businesses to invest in due to its central and well connected location. It also provided great value
for money as high quality venues were often priced
slightly lower than those in surrounding areas. Business tourism was a
very competitive area and it was suggested that this was worth promoting further.
(v)
The PMO (Place Marketing
Organisation) worked closely with district councils building on and utilising
their local knowledge to promote each area at a strategic level. It did
not dictate activity but worked to support what was being done locally.
(vi)
Concern was raised about the
lack of detail as to how funding had been split across each district area and
how this translated into increased visitors to those areas. A member
further expressed disappointment that the report did not provide
quantifiable evidence of what promotion activities had worked well and what
hadn’t and suggested that without
this information local areas would not know where or how best to improve their
local offer.
(vii)
Members noted that performance
was measured using STEAM data, a tourism economic impact modelling process, but that this varied across areas and
could often be out of date which made it difficult to make comparisons.
However, Members were advised that some data was collected and provided to
Visit Britain by the PMO every 2 weeks and assurance was provided that this
along with the information collected through STREAM could be used to provide a
clearer picture in the next annual report to the Commission.
(viii)
Covid 19 had had a significant impact on Leicester
and Leicestershire particularly as a result of the
local lockdown and it was acknowledged that building confidence to bring people
back to the area would be critical.
(ix)
The PMO provided support to
tourism businesses and helped them develop their businesses plans in light of Covid 19 following
advice from Visit Britain. Also, the County Council had introduced a
recovery grant fund of £750,000 to help businesses survive and protect
employment during the pandemic which had been very well received and already
had provided much needed help to all types of business including those in the
tourism sector.
RESOLVED:
(a)
That the update now provided be
noted;
(b)
That a further report be
submitted to the Commission in a year’s time, detailing how funding was split
across each district area and how this translated into increased visitors to
those areas, together with quantifiable evidence of what promotion
activities had or hadn’t worked in the preceding 12 months to guide future
activity.
Supporting documents: