We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.
In 14 years as both Vice Chair of two local Tourism Associations, a tourism route developer and the CEO of an inter provincial tourism property owners Association I have yet to see the TBCSA providing any quantifiable assistance to the industry!I am now busy developing a Tourism Security product along my route between Gauteng and Capetown, but, despite requesting to set up a meeting with TBCSA at their WTM stand I have received no feedback as yet.Between National, Provincial and District tourism departments, various Provincial Tourism Authorities, TBCSA and SAT (Plus the mandatory consultants) there are just far too many talkers and wish list planners who, apart from drawing huge salaries, can neither talk sense or plan constructively.For TBCSA to provide proactive leadership to this circus will take passionate and tourism savvy leadership,
I agree that the contributions to the TOMSA levy should be increased, but these levies should not be used to subsidise the activities of TBCSA. If TBCSA cannot grow its own revenue through membership fees, it is clear that the private sector does not see value in its activities.
When the TOMSA levy was introduced in 1998, it was meant to supplement SAT's budget for marketing. TBCSA received a 1% management fee and THETA (at the time) received 1% for collecting the levies. Subsequently, the TOMSA collections were brought in-house and TBCSA received 2% for administering everything.
Looking at the current TOMSA levy agreement for collectors, it specifies that "The purpose of the Tourism Levy is to grow the number of tourists coming to South Africa through International marketing activities." and that TBCSA can claim as "reasonable operating expenses and administrative charges shall not exceed 7% (Seven per centum) of the Tourism Levies collected". In 2016, TOMSA collected just under R148 million,of which TBCSA claimed R8 680 993. TBCSA's own membership revenue was a fraction of that at R1 467 488. Whilst I have no problem for the umbrella body representing the private sector to receive some sort of subsidy, this should be an open discussion in the industry.