ADDRESSING concerns expressed by some of the most senior figures in the industry regarding the significant downturn in tourist numbers, the minister with responsibility for the sector, Deputy Kirsten Morel, said it was wrong to lay the blame on ferry operator DFDS. To a degree he is right. The late publishing of timetables and other delaying issues were due to the fractured path to appointing a ferry operator, which seriously overran its timetable and meant DFDS had an absurdly short time to get a service up and running. Deputy Morel must carry the can for the way the process was conducted.
He went on to lay the blame elsewhere, saying: “Globally, visitor numbers have fallen,” which serves to demonstrate how out of touch with tourism he really is. The fact is global visitor numbers have significantly increased to the extent that they are now 3% above pre-pandemic level.
World travel and tourism statistics are monitored by the United Nations World Tourism Authority and they report: “World tourism experienced significant growth in early 2025, with international tourist arrivals up 5% in the first quarter year-on-year. This follows a full recovery to 2019 levels in 2024 and reflects a resilient sector despite global economic and geopolitical challenges.”
Closer to home, Visit Britain published its 2024 annual report last month. Although last year’s numbers were still slightly behind 2019, tourism was up 6% on 2023. Tourist spending and bed nights were both up on 2019 (pre-Covid) and 2023 numbers. The UK is by far our biggest market and outgoing tourists also grew almost 10% last year. A very small percentage of that growth captured by Jersey would make a huge difference. Why aren’t they coming?
The UNWTA report paints an optimistic view of prospects: “The sustained growth highlights the tourism sector’s remarkable resilience in recovering from past crises” and it forecasts that tourism will increase 3% to 5% for the full year. So much for Deputy Morel laying the blame on a global tourism downturn.
The UNWTA also considered current challenges. “High costs for transport and accommodation due to inflation and volatile oil prices continue to pose risks, and tourists are anticipated to increasingly seek value for money.” This aligns with the local sector’s concern about the effect of spiralling costs in Jersey.
According to Deputy Morel, the solution to declining local tourism is long-term investment. Well, no argument with that, but it would sound better if it was against the background of recent and continuing investment. After 15 years of decline, Visit Jersey turned the situation around in just over a year when we saw growth of 2% and the direction of travel was positive. The pandemic was a major setback for tourism, not just here but everywhere. However, elsewhere it has recovered and we must ask why not here? Instead of investing in the sector our government froze Visit Jersey’s funding for a decade. This year it will provide a £2 million “top up”, not nearly enough to make up the shortfall. Inflation eroded about 40% of the government’s investment in marketing Jersey as a destination over the past decade. What is more, the so-called top up is only for this year and next. What happens then? It is much too little and far too late.
The minister, on behalf of government, talks up the importance of tourism. Last year his department produced a Visitor Economy Strategy in which it made growth a priority, “… a vibrant, sustainable and productive visitor economy, increasing export revenues…” and, “widening international awareness of ‘Brand Jersey’…”. Fine words, but failure to invest adequately in tourism marketing is not the way to increase awareness in the expanding world market or achieve growth in the local sector.
Although it is wrong to lay the blame for poor visitor numbers on DFDS, it is disappointing that they will be withdrawing the fast-ferry service to Poole at the end of next month. The news drew a sharp response from Chief Minister Lyndon Farnham: “The level of service delivered to date, particularly the decision to withdraw the UK fast ferry over winter, falls short of what was promised and what Islanders and visitors expect.” Deputy Morel appeared to contradict his boss by claiming the ferry company was fulfilling its contractual obligations. This led to calls for the agreement to be published. At the time of writing, we await the release of a promised edited version.
As a frequent traveller to Poole, I was unhappy at the news of a curtailed service, but one must temper disappointment with a dose of realism. The hard fact is that a fast ferry passenger and car-only service to and from the UK is not viable. It is freight which makes the service possible. Freight is served by slower conventional vessels out of Portsmouth. With lower tourist demand in winter the Levante Jet service to Poole would be loss-making. And therein lies the dichotomy. Efficient ferry links are vital in keeping Jersey supplied with essentials; they are also hugely important to tourism, but you can’t have one without the other. Which brings us back to government support for the tourist sector.
While acknowledging concerns, Chris Parker, of DFDS, hit the nail on the head when pointing out that the challenge is marketing the Island to make running routes worthwhile. In short, more visitors to Jersey mean a better service for locals travelling to the UK.
We face tough competition for visitors and need to raise our profile. That means significant investment in marketing the Island as a destination. Promoting the Jersey “brand” is the most important investment in our economy that government can make. Our hospitality industry is open for business, but we’re not shouting that message loud enough.
John Henwood is Jersey born and having worked in television, communications, finance, investment, tourism, marketing, publishing, aid, consultancy and one or two other things he would rather not talk about, he now concentrates his energy on important stuff, like writing and horse racing.
