Dan Anderson of town regeneration consultants Tribal, stressed the need for whatever is created to be for the people of the Isle, more than tourists. "Financially, one resident is equal to 2,500 tourists"
Is that correct? Or is it a 'Bobism'?
Using that as a basis, for Margates population(60,000 approx) it means that this financially equates to 150 million tourists, right?
It also values tourism down at around only 4% of the economy. I thought it was around 20%.
I don't really know by what yardstick they use to accurately measure the value of tourism, all I know is that it expands way beyond just the 'hotel industry'.
I also cannot see how you can completely separate tourism from the attractiveness of a town. I imagine that many of Margates residents were not actually been born there and were attracted to live there at some point in the past (many of them during it's heyday I expect).
OK so it may be important to attract more 'money men' to live/work in Margate but they have got a hell of a lot of work to do around the seafront area.
The Council and the Developers should be doing more towards creating or maintaining SOME sort of tourist attractions. Many have disappeared recently (ie the Margate Caves). OK, it may not be their priority number one, but to turn your back completely on your tourist industry (which they appear to be doing) just appears to be very foolish to me.


