By Robert Surcouf
HAVING just enjoyed the evening parade at the Battle of Flowers with many excellent floats and seeing for the first time in many years all the parishes involved, it got me thinking on how should our government support such events that both attract tourists, but also provide entertainment and opportunities to residents?
We used to have a very transparent process with the Tourism Development Fund (TDF), which replaced the Tourism Investment Fund in 2002, where applications were assessed, not only by the Economic Development Minister, but by third parties who had real-world experience within the local tourism industry.
Having made past applications to the TDF, it did give constructive feedback to all applicants and, due to the nature of the board, it evidenced a real-world understanding of what the projects were trying to achieve for local tourism and if they were viable.
For the taxpayer, whose funds supported these projects through the TDF, there was some level of transparency. The TDF accounts and minutes of the meetings that tabled the various projects that had been considered and either accepted or rejected were made public.
In addition, for all successful applicants, there was a requirement to not only provide accounts but updates on performance against the intended outcomes, especially where a multi-year grant had been agreed.
With the TDF being allowed to lapse, the decision-making process for funding now seems to sit purely with the Economic Development Minister and the civil servants with far less transparency.
If we consider the funding to the now defunct Jersey Reds, it is hard to recognise the true benefits that level of investment of taxpayer’s money could ever deliver. This is especially so when you see the amazing achievements the amateur club is now making without such heavy investment. This is a perfect example of the need for transparency and for meaningful assessment of the proposed benefit and the underlying business model for any projects that are to receive government funding.
The benefits will need to be assessed depending on what the desired outcome is, and for tourism that surely has to be to attract tourists or promote the Island as a destination.
But should funding be targeted solely on developing or promoting an event in those areas or to support the wider running of the event? Which events should receive continual funding and why? Do events not need to evolve to try and attract other funding and income sources? Should there be a differentiation between funding successful events run by volunteers and those that have paid executives whose income is part taxpayer-funded?
I was part of the team of volunteers that obtained three years of TDF funding for the Jersey International Motoring Festival (JIMF) in 2014.
The main aim was to grow the event from three days to four and to increase the number of bed nights. This we did, but we also developed our income sources so that we could continue to be self-funding, (and remain so to this day) and actually increase attendance numbers.
My view is that this type of evolution of events must sit alongside any public funding. Otherwise, it builds complacency and when the tap is eventually turned off, an event is at risk.
In 2023, we did make an approach for funding for JIMF in 2024 and part of this was to allow us to run the entire event on sustainable fuel to support the carbon- neutral road map.
But here again, we presented this on the basis that making such a move would increase our ability to attract sponsors in future years who now have more of an eye on the environmental sustainability of such events.
We also had the opportunity for an entire episode of the Richard Hammond Workshop to be recorded at the June 2024 event to be broadcast this autumn/winter on Discovery+. But we were told that there was no funding for that even though it would have given the Island a lot of publicity at a time when people start making their travel plans for the next year. It looks like those eggs might have gone into the Bergerac basket!
Looking back at the successful JIMF application, the Ports of Jersey also made a successful application at that time for funding so they could assist the Air Show.
The plans were to work with the organisers to develop other income sources and sponsors and to eventually be self-funding. But for whatever reason, this does not seem to have been as successful and now urgent steps are required or the event is going to be lost. How do we – government and organisers – learn from these issues?
We need to revisit how funding for events is allocated and where and why support is given.
For JIMF, we continue as a small team of volunteers putting on a four-day event that is free for locals and visitors alike. We will try again at getting funding but, like others involved with tourism events, we are not convinced that there is the desire to support many events…unless you’re failing.
-
Robert Surcouf comes from a Jersey farming family, though his mother was Spanish and moved to Jersey in the 1960s. He became an accountant and now specialises in risk and enterprise management. A father of two school-age children, he still helps organise and participates in local motorsport events and was one of the founding members of Better Way 2022 before the last election. The views expressed are his own.
