THE PRESS TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1987. Where the buck stops

Press, 1 December 1987, Page 22

THE PRESS TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1987. Where the buck stops

If encouraging more tourists to spend more of their dollars in Christchurch is viewed generally as a good thing, Christchurch will need to go out of its way to achieve the object The view of entrepreneurs, reported in "The Press” yesterday, that other South Island towns could cash in on overseas visitors who used Christchurch solely as a rest stop, is probably accurate and possibly even inevitable. On the travel circuit Christchurch naturally is more of a gateway than a terminus, a staging post rather than a goal. This was pretty well acknowledged by one of the entrepreneurs, Mr Jamie Tulloch. He said that Christchurch got tourists almost “by default” through its international airport, but as a dull, flat city with imitation English buildings it does not have what it takes to be a tourist attraction. Just how dull, flat Christchurch would be transformed into something appealing and exciting by viewing the flatness from the top of Mr Tulloch’s proposed tower was not explained. Nevertheless, enticing tourists to come here in bigger numbers, to stay here longer, and to spend more in the city while they are here, obviously requires greater inducement than offered now. Even rest stops need interesting diversions. Many stop-over points manage to offer things to see and do that encourage visitors to stay longer and spend a little more of their holiday budget in that place. The result need not be another Coney Island. Eating well and shopping advantageously always rate highly in surveys of tourists’ activities in such places. This points to a need for good restaurants that do not charge the Earth, and interesting shopping malls and

arcades that offer an array of good merchandise and cheerful, helpful service — at times that suit visitors. Half-day or one-day trips to genuine attractions nearby fit naturally into the pattern of stop-over tourist spots, where the visitor is filling in the time of the stop-over rather than arriving for a particular purpose. ' The fact has to be faced that tourists’ itineraries are not elastic, and that they will not add an extra day or two to their Christchurch stop-over just because it boasts a tower, or a gondola lift, or a fine Antarctic wing in its museum. If it is convenient, and fits their schedule, they might avail themselves of any or all of these attractions; or they might not. If Christchurch expects to capture a bigger share of the tourist dollar, it will have to cater to the tourists’ preferences; and diversions that might extend visits will have to be substantial or very special. - . At first' glance, neither Auckland nor Wellington conspicuously offer a lot more than does Christchurch by way of special activities that would demand an extra day or two for visits- Auckland provides excellent shopping opportunities and tourists are made aware of this. It also has such attractions as the Kelly Tarlton underwater exhibit — a brilliant diversion for visitors. Christchurch’s Arts Centre might one day become a highly recommendable feature of the city; it is already popular with many visitors. The entrepreneurs’ theories about advancing the city’s attractions are sound, even if their particular proposals are open to much criticism. Christchurch’s attractions should be enhanced to please the visitors as well as the host., .