Rumen Draganov, Chairman of the Supervisory Council with the National Tourism Board: Tourist areas should become commercial companies

raya.atanasova@klassa.bg


- Mr. Draganov, Minister of Economy, Energy and Tourism Traicho Traikov recently announced that a set of resort management rules would be drawn up. What will the National Tourism Board propose in this respect?
- Since the very establishment of the Board, we have reiterated that the Tourism Act should contain a special chapter on tourist areas, tourist sites and tourist points. Tourist resorts are tourist areas. Since they are extra-territorial units acting on the territory of the municipality, they should have their own management. First of all, their boundaries should be defined, and secondly, their status should be specified because these areas, unlike the municipalities, have no graveyards and no population. However, in certain periods they turn into big cities. In the Sunny Beach resort, during the peak summer season overall 90,000 tourists arrive, while their total number reaches 300,000 holidaymakers around the town of Nessebar. We are talking about a complex environment, which should have excellent organisation in case of disaster and accidents. The question is not only about who will pay the electricity bills of the operating garden paths, but also who will organise the security of the tourists since they need medical care, police servicing as well as safeguarding. Each tourist zone should have its own general manager or governor general.

- The Cultural Heritage Act stipulates that part of the cultural monuments should be transferred under the management of municipalities. What does this actually mean?
- This is a palliative decision, which is detrimental to the tourism sector, because in the EU the public state-run property is regarded as a tool for creating jobs. The state can open many new vacancies through its property management policy instead of paying social benefits. The town of Belogradchik remits social allowances to overall 1,600 socially disadvantaged citizens being entrusted with the duty to take care of the town. But regardless of their occupation, they only take the benefits rather than work in the toursm sector.

The state must understand that it is the real owner. The minister should be aware that he is the manager of the tourist attractions. Besides, he should be informed of the revenues accrued from these properties, as well as be notified of the number of jobs created as a result of this property management policy. Unfortunately, this is not the case. The situation coud be described as a deep conceptual management crisis in the tourism sector.

- But the Tourism Act actually envisages the establishment of tourist areas?
- The Tourism Act in its current form is ineffective, since it does specify who owns and manages the tourist attractions. In terms of the property status, the so-called public-private partnerships are established. But, in general, it is not typical for the Ministry of Economy, Energy and Tourism (MEET) to deal with this activity. It must be transferred under the umbrella of the Ministry of Culture, which is the natural owner and the most interested party in the development of the tourist attractions. They should be managed as a company or an undertaking. Therefore, they should be commercial enterprises. It is quite normal for the Ministry of Culture to acquire the funds allocated for national advertising. It is improper for the MEET to carry out this ads campaign since it manages no property in the tourism sector.

It is also inappropriate for the MEET to deal with the categorisation of facilities and the registration of tour operators and tour agencies. The tourist zoning of Bulgaria is following an archaic model, which is no longer used worldwide. The towns of Aitos and Shumen should not be included in the Black Sea region since they do not have a sea outlet and are actually situated quite far from it. The Tourism Act itself must promote the setting up of companies for domestic tourism. Each company can manage a given destination according to its corporate guidelines. This may be based on its product or global marketing policy. That is, the company could deal with all kinds of events and weddings, as well as with congresses and conferences along with cultural and rural tourism. The state and the municipalities could aslo participate with their private assets.


- The Tourism Act provides for the establishment of a state-run enterprise in the tourism sector. Do you think it will operate effectively?
- The state-run enterprise is a very reasonable solution but it cannot function in its current form. It is managed by a very complex Board, including the Minister. Besides, it is not based on commercial principles. The forestry agencies have been set up under these principles. In fact, this state-run enterprise should operate as a forestry agency, i.e it should manage the respective tourist attractions and sell tickets in order to accrue revenues. Ultimately, the scope of authority of the state-run enterprise is reduced and it is not entitled to accumulate incomes and incur costs. It is managed under a complex scheme and cannot operate effectively.

Прочети цялата новина

Свързани новини: