THE Tourism Congress of the Philippines (TCP) is batting for a more independent Tourism Promotions Board (TPB) to make it more flexible and responsive to the needs of the industry and the times.
In a paper submitted to the Tourism Oversight Committee of both houses of Congress for the ongoing review of the Tourism Act of 2009 (Republic Act 9593), the TCP said: “TPB must be the lead agency for promotions for two key reasons. One, it is to devolve those functions to an attached agency that would have more flexibility in responding to market changes (especially disasters) without having to go through the lengthy budget and appropriations process.
“Two, with TPB having a strong private-sector representation on its governing board, the national branding strategy can be formulated with the inputs of those who will be tasked to convey the message of that branding to the country’s various tourism markets. Proceeding also from this, it ensures that, even as administrations and their priorities change, tourism promotions can continue and remain consistent.”
The TCP noted that Section 25 of the law reorganizing the former Philippine Conventions and Visitors Bureau into the TPB, puts two bureaus in the old Department of Tourism— Domestic Promotions and International Promotions—under the new promotions agency. “Reconciling the DOT’s planning mandate with TPB’s promotions mandate, the DOT should perhaps focus on a framework promotions strategy, in the context of the National Tourism Development Plan, but leaving the details to be defined and carried out by TPB.”
Under the present setup, the DOT still creates and adopts promotions and marketing campaigns, but focuses it on the so-called developing markets (e.g., Israel, Soviet Union, Germany, France, etc.). TPB, on the other hand, sells the Philippines to the country’s 12 key strategic markets (e.g., South Korea, China, United States, Japan, Australia, Hong Kong, India, among others).
In an interview with the BusinessMirror, TCP President Jose C. Clemente III explained, “ideally, the DOT provides the framework for marketing and promotions as a policy, while TPB will promote and market the Philippines to all destinations, whether they be key markets or developing markets.”
This way, biddings for the government’s tourism advertising campaigns will be transferred to the TPB, instead of the DOT undertaking the process itself, he said.
This doesn’t mean the TPB can implement whatever advertising and promotions projects its officers have thought up. In fact, Clemente stressed, “the DOT still maintains its oversight functions over the TPB, as its secretary sits as its chairman.” Also, he said, “the private-sector representatives on the TPB board should ideally also have inputs to the promotions and marketing program of the firm.”
He underscored that under the Tourism Act, even Section 6e, regarding the powers and functions of the DOT with regard to “market development,” can and should be seen and understood as a “strategic planning function, and not an implementation one.”
He said portion of the law says the DOT shall “provide an integrated market development program to attract people to visit the Philippines and enhance the prestige of the country and the Filipino people in the international community.”
The TPB is still recovering from a spate of bad publicity following revelations last year that its board hastily approved the P320-million Buhay Carinderia project without going through any bidding. About 85 percent of the funds allotted by the TPB to the project were also found to have been released to the proponent, Marylindbert International Inc., even before the project was formally launched.