‘Could the real reason for our poor tourism figures be the astronomical prices?’ Ouch!

They travelled primarily by rail and boat and the British Railways mailboats – before the days of the Caesarea and Sarnia there were the Isles of Jersey, Guernsey and Sark, along with the St Helier, the St Patrick and the St Julien (the first three had two funnels each and the last three just one), occasionally supplemented by the Falaise. They all disgorged their passengers on the Albert Pier.

There were even porters, each sporting an official metal badge, and the more affluent among the passengers would get taxis, while the others would either walk to their town guest houses or, if they were staying out of walking distance from the Harbour, carry their cases to the Weighbridge or Snow Hill and get the bus to their destinations.

They would spend most days on the beach or in the parks and most evenings in the pub or at one of the popular Crazy Nites or cabarets that the many entertainment establishments then provided.

During the second of their customary two weeks, many of them would go to the Broad Street post office and as well as mailing their postcards would also send back parcels of dirty washing, thus making room for the 200 fags (plus a flat tin of 50 cigarettes with one removed, on the basis that they could also legally take home one opened packet), a bottle of spirits and another of something like sherry that each adult was allowed as a personal allowance.

In many respects, that duty-free allowance was one of the principal reasons for them having chosen Jersey as their holiday destination, because there was a considerable difference between Jersey and UK prices, although in those days travelling to and from the Island by boat was reasonably priced and the cost of accommodation was about on a par with resorts in the UK.

Another reason for their choosing Jersey was that in league tables published annually and featured in the British national papers, the Island invariably topped the table by having the most hours of recorded sunshine and high temperatures.

This was not, as noted recently in the Guernsey paper by my Jersey-born mate who lives there, because their recording stations are above sea level and therefore it was cooler, whereas those here are at sea level, but simply because this place was sunnier and warmer, as it is today.

Such is the state of affairs in the much-changed tourism industry now that the powers that be who run the industry are resorting to any means possible to get a few bottoms on aircraft and boat seats. That includes moaning about the television stations which fail to put Jersey’s temperatures in neon lights on their weather forecasting maps.

Not surprisingly, the moan was taken up by the very same national papers which used to publish the sunshine league tables. But if something I read in one of them the other day is anything to go by, the publicity idea could well backfire spectacularly.

It was a letter in the Daily Mail, brief and straight to the point. It was from one C M Pearson, of Bedford, and it read: ‘Could the real reason for Jersey’s poor tourism figures be not so much the lack of mention in weather forecasts as the astronomical prices charged for everything?’

Ouch. That hurt. But then, more often than not the truth does hurt.

Presumably Consumer Council chairman Alan Breckon was counting visitors to the Island among those his organisation represents when he made his call to one of the bosses’ trade unions – this time the Chamber of Commerce – to come clean over its claim that it is more expensive to do business here than in the UK.

Clearly C M Pearson from Bedford is one of very many disgruntled shoppers – both local and visiting – who would support Senator Breckon’s assertion that there is a rip-off culture among retailers (not all of them, but many) who trade here.

Quite by coincidence, I referred last week to a letter on this subject from Liz Quérée, who watched a Jersey Tourism advertisement on television which told potential tourists that they should come to Jersey ‘where spending your time is less taxing’ – something I interpreted as being as clear an inference as ever I saw that somehow things are cheaper here than they are in the UK.

As Ms Quérée pointed out, what must the punters think when they arrive? Not only are they being charged prices which include a VAT element, but they are also getting slapped in the face with our own GST.

One must assume that the claim on which Senator Breckon made his criticism – former Chamber president Kevin Keen’s article in the latest edition of the group’s newsletter that Jersey firms had to absorb higher costs than those in the UK and that suggestions that they made excessive profits through higher margins were wrong – can be taken as a tacit admission that prices are in fact higher here than in Britain.

If that is the case, why hasn’t the Chamber of Commerce advised the Tourism department that the advertisement to which Ms Quérée referred just doesn’t hold water and should be withdrawn before someone complains to the Advertising Standards Authority?

AND finally . . . the news that yet another couple of French fishermen have been caught – not once, it seems, but twice – fishing illegally in Jersey waters comes as no surprise to those who follow such matters.

As I understand it, courts here have the power to confiscate not only fishing gear, but the vessels also in such circumstances.

A few thousand quid in fines is clearly not a deterrent, but the loss of boats could well be.