This week’s Candidates' Viewpoint topic was inspired by the Douglas Economic Development Group (DEDG)'s September 2013 Report on the region's economy. 

We asked Council candidates to comment on the DEDG's findings, including tourism dependency, comparative spend on tourism marketing, and the business community’s interaction with and participation of the major representative groups.

During interviews, a number of Council candidates spoke of prioritising financial responsibility, and the importance of the tourism industry and small business. As we approach the November 9 election, the DEDG’s report findings are more salient than ever.

Richard Lavender

The effort of DEDG has been exemplary. A well thought out presentation justifying an increase in funding for the TPDD.

Council and tourism should work closely together focused on profit generating endeavours. Candidates who offer a half million dollar and above annual payment to the Tourism Association without negotiation or review of a new contract is unacceptable. The pledge might gain votes but it's not what a councillor is elected to do. It is reasonable for Council to discuss, review and reach understandings prior to making the commitment. Council should be run as a business not as a community organisation.

Many Shire businesses believe that Tourism is the life blood of the area. I agree that Tourism is one of the biggest industries in the Shire. I believe that Council has an obligation to look for ways to be supportive to the industry. Council supplying quality services is one method. Other methods include developing campaigns with local tourism and business associations.

Funding will be required. And as with any government funding, accountability and measurements are required to ensure achievements. I believe that a fair and balanced way of reviewing and disbursing funds to enhance tourism should be established by the new Council.

Michael Kerr

Firstly, thank you to all those involved in producing such a detailed report, a lot of work has gone into this and I am sure the new council will refer to this document when making decisions in relation to the funding in these areas.

This next two years will be a balancing act that must be completed successfully. I believe that it is extremely important to market the region, but it is also important to have a product worth marketing.

There are large sums of money that need to be spent to bring the shire up to scratch so when these marketed guests arrive, they are not disappointed with the infrastructure we have in place. We are always compared to other holiday destinations and to ensure return custom, this to me is also a priority.

I believe council would be neglecting its duties by not looking at the whole picture rather than a segment of; such as marketing. Whilst other tourism shires may have a much bigger marketing budget they also have a much higher rate base and population.

The immediate future predicts that funds being given out by council will be and should be strictly scrutinised to ensure the best results for all our rate payers that are relying on us to build them and their children a future. Any rate payer generated funds granted by council including TPDD should be by application and assessed on the merit of the application and measured on results made for future grants.

Mal Phillips

Thanks for the opportunity to respond to this economic strategy report, this group has spent a great deal of time collating all this important data.

It is not surprising to read the results and as Queensland’s soon to be premier holiday destination, we must take up the challenge.

My policies list the reintroduction of the tourist levy as a given, not just because we have to, but it is clearly shown by this report that if we don’t step up we will get left behind.

I would like to see all rate notices with a levy applied - not just those properties used as holiday lettings. One way we could do it relatively painlessly is by eliminating the separate water rate notices that CRC loaded us with - and which we never used to pay under DSC -  and applying this money to support and promote our beautiful region. Clearly, if our opposition destinations are spending millions, our promotional expenses must be raised to a competitive level.

It’s no use saying things like "we aren’t part of the tourist industry" - almost 90 per cent of all income for the Shire is derived from tourism. If the industry starts to go into decline through the reasons described in the report, we will all suffer. Speaking as a one-time property valuer, all our property values will decline with them. Obviously, none of us would put their hands up in favour of this.

There are other ways of increasing the advertising kitty. Most unit owners pay their onsite managers a 4 per cent adverting levy each month, yet rarely get advised as to where this money is spent or if it has been. I’m sure that if they sat down with their managers and asked them to direct some of these funds into one central agency for the overall benefit, the amount available would rise up into the levels needed for serious promotion and the whole shire will enjoy the benefits.

Roy Weavers

The two major industries in this region (Tourism and Cane) need more support to ensure their future growth and economic sustainability.

Planning expertise of the calibre that the Economic Development Group (EDG) has to offer will be a great asset to the new Council. Already, the EDG has identified how crucial increasing funding for our Tourism Body is going to be. Having operated at the same level of funding for over six years is a tribute to their expertise in marketing our destination. However, the EDG recommends a review in the overall focus of the body’s activities from destination marketing to destination management.

I want to see our tourism body armed with adequate funds and tools to perform even better. Tourism represents 80 per cent of this regions income and generates much of the current (and future) employment.

With Mackay Sugar increasing production at Mossman Mill in 2014, generating more jobs, I am confident that the new Douglas Shire has a very positive future. Minister Crisafulli’s prediction of the Douglas Shire being highly unlikely to be sustainable is not an option.

I've made it clear that I want to be part of a Douglas Shire Council team that listens, that takes advice and takes responsibility. The availability, through the EDG, of such respected advice, innovation and guidance on business development, diversity and business growth is a huge asset.

We are about to have a new fresh council; let’s make sure it looks at issues with a new fresh approach. It’s time to get positive.

Abigail Noli

I agree with the DEDG when it says that just because we are a small population, we shouldn't think small.  

Tourism is a huge factor in the Douglas region today, and many residents depend upon it. It provides financial help to both a stable and transit population in the area, and allows the community to achieve other aims through it's injection of cash. 

In saying this, it is also interesting to note however, that even with relatively small investments of cash from the local council we still have one of the most profitable tourist areas in Australia. Over the last few lean years, Port Douglas has done quite well from the tourist dollar - even when the council hasn't really increased their funding since 2005.

I point this out because as a potential Councillor, I refuse to bleed the residents dry by increasing rates to raise money for a tourism levy if rates seem to be already too high. I am deeply concerned about the budget and how Douglas residents will be made to pay to get things back on track (incidentally, I am happy that the Councillor wages are low for this reason). 

Maybe the budget will come up better than anticipated, but if things are difficult then I highly recommend using caution in extra expenditure with avenues such as a tourism levy for tourism promotion.

I attended the presentation by Douglas Chamber of Commerce and thought very highly of it. Their ideas to improve the tourism industry and ways of raising funds to do so was discussed. I see the merit in everything that was suggested and I was excited also that we have such talented residents living here to do this research. 

Saying this however, I think that maybe the first few years is not the time to impose levies on the people of the shire and we should exercise a little further restraint until we are certain we don't choke people with fees.  

Ken Dobbs

The Economic Development Group's report relies heavily on the conclusions of the Melbourne Business School study released in March 2012.

Whilst I agree that Tourism is our major industry and would account for 80 per cent of the total Douglas economy, some of the data was taken out of context and incorrectly concluded that the downturn on tourism income since 2005 was greater on a percentage basis than other Queensland destinations.

This is not the case and Douglas, like all destinations in Queensland, suffered from the impacts of the GFC and exchange rate. Douglas, in fact, fared better than most other destinations but felt the pain greater because of our high reliance on tourism.

The key, I believe, is increasing the size of the pie not just our slice of it. TTNQ budget is about $6m pa and Douglas represents about 25 per cent of the TTNQ room  capacity - so in effect, we are already spending $1.5m in regional marketing for Douglas.

TPDD spend about $0.5m on marketing and I think the important thing is to maintain this level of marketing to ensure we maintain or increase or slice of the pie. Success is not just about how much money we spend. Sunshine Coast as referred to in the EDG report spends considerably more on marketing but 2012/3 visitor nights increased by 0.1 per cent, Douglas with a smaller spend had an increase of 3.3 per cent and Northern Beaches which have no spend other then TTNQ had an 8.7 per cent increase. 

The whole issue of how we organise our marketing, how much we should spend and how we raise the funds needs lots more attention and the work done by the EDG group highlights a number of key areas for further investigation.

David Carey

At the outset, I will point out that I support the new Council continuing annual funding for the TPDD indefinitely into the future.

This support should be at least the current monetary amounts plus an annual incremental adjustment to account for the effects of inflation. I also accept that funding to TPDD for destination marketing/management is grossly inadequate at present.

The DEDG economic strategy report is a discussion draft for further consultation at community level. It proposes increasing funding for destination marketing/management to $2 million per annum. The draft proposes some options for raising this sort of money.

There are reportedly 1400 businesses in Douglas, only 150 of which are members of TPDD. One of the challenges for TPDD is to encourage the other 1250 businesses to become members. At $500 each that’s potentially $625,000 per annum.

I am conscious, however, of the fact that huge increases in rates have been applied by the CRC in the last 5 years to most properties in Douglas. (CRC revenue from rates increased by 44% between 2008 and 2012). Some of the licensing and other fees applied to businesses by the CRC have increased by several hundred percent in the same period. In such circumstances I am very conscious of the capacity of our businesses to pay more.

Nevertheless there is now the opportunity the opportunity for all in our community to be involved in further discussions about the report. Our new Council should take on a leadership role in this regard as economic development and sustainability is clearly a key local government responsibility in the 21st century.

If elected, I will look forward to the opportunity to participate in community discussion about the report and determining the most appropriate way forward.