By Isle of Wight Observer
Out of respect for those involved, this isn’t a warts-and-all exposé on why I’ve quit as a director of Visit IOW. Alongside 12 other Island businesspeople, a year ago I was elected to the tourist board. If I had your support, thank you. Being elected is always humbling. Our task then seemed blindingly obvious; Visit IOW had lost its way, and we were under pressure to fix it from the get-go. We only had 12 months to convince bid-payers that their support for another five-year term was vital to the Island’s visitor economy. There was no plan B.
Sticking your head above the parapet is always risky, but I was reassured by the other new people joining the board. All of us were determined to restore faith in the organisation. None of us was paid; not a penny of expenses was claimed. We were simply putting in a shift for the good of the Island.
As constituted, the Visit IOW board is complex, with the council, ferry operators, and others getting a seat at the table. Some of the structure and rules in place were frustrating, and having up to 20 people present inevitably leads to very long meetings.
Day-to-day management of any business is always best left to the person heading the organisation. It’s not practical to endlessly consult 20 people.
I couldn’t guess how many Visit IOW emails I’ve read in the past year, and I tried to miss as few board meetings as possible. After all, if you’re not there, you have no say in what’s being decided. Directors are there to ask questions and make the big decisions, and at times I found that difficult.
With so many people involved, splinter groups form. Truthfully, at times I didn’t feel in the loop; not all directors seemed equal.
I’m delighted that we won the bid, but the way we won was disappointing. The ballot method seems designed to frustrate smaller bid payers. Votes are weighted in favour of big organisations, those who pay the most business rates.
“Incredibly, I now suspect the IW Council wasn’t as supportive as we were led to believe and that’s massively disappointing.”
Incredibly, I now suspect the IW Council wasn’t as supportive as we were led to believe and that’s massively disappointing.
On social media, it’s embarrassing that so many people now claim they didn’t get a ballot slip or had a spoilt paper. It’s worrying that so many ballot papers were not returned.
I sympathise with business owners who see Visit IOW’s bid levy as just another tax, or believe the supermarkets should pay up too. On balance I’m sure winning that bid will prove to be in the long term best interests of Island businesses, big and small.
Other than pride at winning a new term, I was delighted that the board voted to substantially increase the contribution made by the ferry operators.
One of them strongly resisted our proposed hike, much preferring to spend its marketing budget itself. Inevitably, one or two other decisions were made that I disagreed with, including the substantial budget for a new website. As a director, you accept the majority view. I’m not a marketing specialist, but as an owner-manager in various sectors, I do understand the issues involved. I couldn’t support an American-based venture capitalist building and running the Island’s tourism website.
At one meeting, it was proposed that we collect the bid levy in 10 instalments rather than as one lump sum every January. That seemed a great idea, but no one seems to have thought through the cashflow implications, and now that could be a problem.
I believe the directors will find a way through, but I felt uneasy about being responsible for an organisation in which I felt I had insufficient knowledge and little control.
I wish Visit IOW all the best. Perhaps if I were less busy and 20 years younger, I might have hung on a little longer.