A number of readers have come forward to express their views in reaction to my column last week (“Finding a Tourism Champion,” August 15, 2011), some about the need to fill the vacancy that will be left with the resignation of Tourism Secretary Bertie Lim, others about tourism problems. Let’s hear from them.
One reader, Jos Ortega, has raised some interesting points. Here are excerpts of his letter.
“I just read your Philippine Star column on "Finding a tourism champion." I totally agree with the points that you made. Tourism, indeed, can be the primary driver of economic growth, including jobs creation.
“I have a build on your ideas. I believe that the only way tourism can flourish and achieve its full potential is for P-Noy to become the tourism czar. He personally took on the crusade of anti-corruption, which is good. That will bring about savings that will allow for more funding for other priority projects.
“The next question is, what will be his flagship program for revenue generation? From what I am reading recently, it looks like tourism is it. And if it is, then P-Noy must commit himself to make it happen.
“You stated the problems facing the industry. I don't think that the DoT secretary will have the power to command his fellow secretaries to focus on tourism. Only P-Noy can mandate that. The DoT secretary can only request.
“Coming from the business world yourself, you know that when the company needs to make a dramatic move or change, the CEO steps up to the plate to personally establish the mission and the roles that his VPs need to fulfill to achieve the objectives. This is the moment when I believe P-Noy should own the tourism movement as tourism czar.
“Yes, he still needs a DoT secretary to handle the promotions, work with the tourism congress, etc. as prescribed. But P-Noy must be at the forefront of this major income generating program.
“Think Branson at Virgin. Think Fernandes at Air Asia. Think the CEOs of Shell.”
Another reader, Jerry Quibilan, sent an e-mail where he wrote on the subject bar: Manager not boss, Finding a tourism champion & The new tourism chief must unite the industry. Following is the body of his e-mail:
“The tourism industry is close to my heart for reasons that you and many of my regular undisclosed recipients of my 'sharings' know.
“I have read many articles written in the newspapers, tourist magazines, airline publications and IMHO, the common denominator for a tourism program is to have a person at the helm with the full support of the CEO and the other stakeholders.
“A marketing person would fit the requirements which other media practitioners have written.”
‘Mighty’ Tourism Congress
We get a glimpse of views regarding the Tourism Congress from two readers next. The first one is from Marciano C. Ragaza III of Travel Enterprise. Here is his letter.
“The mighty Tourism Congress you are referring to is a product of a wrong implementation of the law and has convoluted membership. Look at the membership and you will find nothing mighty about it. Noisy, perhaps.
“I can send you list of those who participated in the first Tourism Congress. No less than the Committee on Tourism confirmed that it emanated from an IRR that was against the law in a hearing conducted under House Resolution No. 857.
“Their principal spokesman, that Tourism Congress vice-president for Luzon, is not even a tourism industry stakeholder. He was a former president of CREBA. I liken his membership in the Tourism Congress to a non-lawyer being in the Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
“The Tourism Act [or RA] 9593 was very clear. Membership is for accredited tourism enterprises. The IRRs promulgated by the previous Secretary effectively changed membership from accredited tourism enterprises to ‘aggrupations’ and even took away ‘accredited.’
“A reading of Section 104 of RA9593 vis-à-vis Section 68 of the defective IRRs will show this serious discrepancy which disenfranchised thousands of industry players from participating in the Tourism Congress.
“Sec. Lim was poised to call a new Tourism Congress in compliance with the instructions of the Committee on Tourism when the Tourism Congress led by instant tourism champions started attacking Sec. Lim. This, despite the fact that they declared in the House of Representatives their willingness to cooperate.
“Their claim that Secretary Lim ignored them is belied by an article that came out in their own newsletter where they even gave Sec. Lim a plaque of appreciation. It was only when it became clear that they would lose their congress and more importantly, their positions that they went into full attack mode, that even after Sec. Lim resigned, they were still relentless in their vicious attacks. Perhaps to warn the next secretary what extent they would go, if he dissolves their Tourism Congress.
Finally, the president of the Tourism Congress, Alma Rita Jimenez, gives her piece.
“First, thank you for the mention of Tourism Congress in your column. We heard that your ‘unfortunate’ choice of adjective (“mighty”) incurred the ire of the so-called ‘industry leaders.’
“For the record, we did not even think for a moment that it was an apt description of TC, not after a ‘bruising’ one-year episode that left us also battle-scarred.
“We know that you are busy and we will not presume that you have the time to go through lengthy ‘position papers’ and letters that will explain in detail these ‘differences in view’ with the Secretary and his friends.
“In case you have the inclination to go through these supporting documents however, please let us know and we will be glad to furnish you with copies. Suffice it to say that we are in agreement with your opinion – indeed we must find a tourism champion.”
