To be frank, I must admit that the first press releases I read in several media about Jérôme Tourbier’s book “Tourism in Danger” (*) irritated me furiously . “… France remains the most visited country in the world (with its 84 million foreign tourists)…”, “tourism-related income decreases every year…”, “Paris is no longer the most visited city in the world… » ,… Only resumptions of disinformation which are based on incorrect statistics – however official ones – and victorious arranged announcements, as we have seen them wrongly in the press for years.

In short, writing a book based from the outset on false figures for French tourism (*) and explaining that France has lost its first place in terms of number of tourist arrivals, it’s like giving an astronomy course remembering beforehand that the earth is flat. It’s like building a house on quicksand; it inevitably ends up leaning and overturning.

(*) statistics on the number of arrivals and tourist receipts are quantitatively necessarily false by the method of collecting information which is very unsatisfactory from a statistical point of view and too fragmented to draw correct figures: surveys of tourists in areas motorways and border exits (80,000 questionnaires) and surveys of tourist accommodation providers, of which we know that the majority do not keep their frequentation accounts. This can be qualitatively interesting, but this methodology does not allow us to calculate how many tourists actually came to us. We also speak of “France, the first destinationworld of tourism ”while nearly 1 in 5 tourists only cross the country (for whom it is not a destination) to go elsewhere. See our analysis on the subject.

I therefore had a negative a priori serious about this book even before having read it. But this is to forget that journalists do not try to understand and readily trust official information from “France, the world’s leading tourist destination” . We must therefore serve it to them if we want to get an article or a report.

In fact, the data used to lure the press are mostly written on the 4 th of book cover – thank you to the editor. The author nevertheless casts doubt on the official statistics in the heart of the book, whispering that we make tourism figures say what we want (following a speech by Laurent Fabius). And also that INSEE had calculated that approximately 1 registered tourist in 5 was only crossing our country (reminder), which is therefore not a destination in this case, but was however counted as a tourist arrival. While you are enjoying the trip you could use a pair of k2 inline skates to see the city.

However, the author is not so sure, because he regularly cites our first world tourist place as a constant reference. What if we didn’t care if we were the first, the second or the fortieth? Isn’t the important thing elsewhere?

A list of grievances as long as an arm

After reading this book completely in a few short hours, in a pleasant and fluid writing style, with illustrative quotes from Sartre, Jaffelin, … I buried my negative prejudice , despite the somewhat presumptuous title of the book . Yes, I like my preconceived ideas to be confirmed or thwarted. It gives me the feeling of learning.

“Tourism in Danger” is a good book that I recommend reading to any professional and even to any elected official who is directly or indirectly interested in tourism.

We can only agree with Jérôme Tourbier, in his rants and also by his few favorites (especially on the action of Thierry Marx):

  • when he calls into question the cumbersome administrative millefeuille and the painful organization of the local authorities which pitifully frame our businesses and French tourism,
  • when he complains against France, “a  country of paperworkers never satisfied with new regulations” (and standards),
  • when he protests against the pathetic cascade of stupid and costly regulations that restaurateurs and hoteliers have been confronted with in recent years,
  • when he denounces the deficiency in the tourism strategy for France and the lack of real consideration of promotion and marketing,
  • when he deplores that we expect everything from the public authorities (which leads to being in a wait-and-see situation and to lose out – Editor’s note),
  • when he denounces the lack of support in the training of young people for our professions,
  • when he is alarmed by the devaluation of the service in general and of the room trades in particular,
  • when he is saddened by the image of France in terms of welcoming tourists, via our taxis, waiters and our passport control counters, insufficient in number at our international airports,
  • when he worries about the rejection by foreign tour operators of France of the post-terrorist attacks, who prefer to sell more secure destinations (according to them),
  • when he reminds us how much our policies have understood nothing about tourism and are still in fantasies of industrialization totally outdated,
  • when he feels sorry for junk food and the decline of French gastronomy (but is it real?) for the benefit of our global competitors,
  • when he laments the entrances to large cities where the ugliness of commercial and industrial areas are not in harmony with a quality and attractive tourist image,
  • when he complains of the contempt with which the tourism professions (and more generally manual professions) are the object of the elites of the Nation,
  • when he rebels to note that only the tourism groups and the CAC 40 have a voice when they are not representative of the tourism sector made up for the most part of micro-enterprises and SMEs,
  • etc.

We could have added the infamous restaurants on our motorway rest areas, the deceptive restaurants in the tourist areas of our cities and destinations, the 2-hour queue to visit the Eiffel Tower (7 million paying visitors per year) when the Germans arrive to show the Reichstag in Berlin (free of charge, 12 million visitors per year) with only a quarter of an hour’s wait, …

Unfortunately, the list is long of the grievances that we can undoubtedly develop against our country and its inefficiency in tourism.     

All of this is fair, all of this is good, but unfortunately none of this is new. I have heard about it for at least 20 to 40 years depending on the theme and it is probably even longer that we have endured without flinching this shower of insults and inadequacies in tourism and its trades. The only difference is that they evolve with the evolution of the world. Today the problems are linked to the Internet and its inventions. Yesterday was something else. And tomorrow ?

We are a handful of others, like Jérôme Tourbier – in this case, far too few in number – who have denounced for years through books and articles all these dysfunctions and these shortcomings of our tourist organization , in this France, supposedly the first destination. global tourism, but that we love.   

Personally, I got started with a first essay published in 1999, “Hoteliers, restaurateurs, if you only knew what your customers think of you…” . Then by the publication of two White Papers on Hotel and Tourist Modernization (2007 and 2011).

I also find in Jérôme’s book, a lot of criticisms and observations that I had already made up for 10 years by my White Papers , including by quantities of conferences that I presented or radio and of TV in which I intervened.  

Points of view that are debated

If this present work is necessary because we will never speak enough about this spoiled tourism, in a France however spoiled, there are many points on which I do not agree with “Tourism in danger” . Perhaps this could one day be the subject of an interesting debate …

• “Everything for tourism”: we do not give tourism a place in a country by doing it with a shoehorn or forceps. The population must first agree (I am speaking of course in our democracies). This is what the politicians have understood well, who first see her as voters, which tourists are not even if they relate to foreign trade.

Note that in dictatorships or “semi-dictatorships” open to tourism (Egypt, Dominican Republic, etc.), the leaders see first, and only, the income that tourists bring and do not care what to think. their tourism population and its drawbacks.

However, foreign visitors, here as elsewhere, are not liked by the inhabitants, the natives. Or rather, they see them as troublesome.

Of course, tourism is necessary for our economy and a provider of jobs, wealth and efforts to keep our magnificent historical monuments as they are. But, can we really expect a Parisian to smile at the groups of Chinese who jostle him in the stores he goes to or at the noisy Russians who invade his favorite restaurants? Reductive and derisory examples, but they are examples. The announcement of the removal of a lane on the A1 motorway, reserved to promote the transport of “tourists” (it was understood like that) between Paris and Roissy-Charles-de-Gaulle airport, n ‘ could not please Parisians either, mired in traffic jams morning and evening. And so on.  

Developing a pleasant living environment (embellishing city entrances, for example, as the author talks about) must first of all benefit the inhabitants of the country. This will then benefit tourists, if appropriate. To do so with the sole idea of ​​developing tourism would be like creating a new, larger Disneyland in a mock city imagined and therefore not real. It is enough to see what has become of the magnificent Venice: a museum city, deserted in its heart by its historic inhabitants. She becomes lifeless in the evening, when the tourists tired of their visits neck and neck between St. Mark’s Square and the Rialto Bridge, have gone to bed.

As we say in psychology “you will not be able to give happiness to others if you do not find your own first”.    

• GDP: the famous 7% of GDP from tourism referred to by the author have the merit of existing; but, nobody really knows how it is calculated (in other countries either) as tourism affects many branches of activity, directly and above all indirectly. This ratio is therefore free, but you must have one. Just like the first place of France on the world stage in tourism demand, as already said, announced year after year when we do not have any reliable figure to demonstrate it.

Certainly, it is nice to pretend that we are the first, even despite the economic crisis. And then, the world attracts the world and what is successful is attractive, reassuring. But by dint of saying that we are a leader, no one judges the effort to be made since anyway we remain the champions, no matter what. No effort to make in investments, promotion, training, … never questioning, either. This legendary success story, continual, even gives unhealthy ideas to the legislator always inclined to find new silly taxes to invent …

If we stopped talking about a global market to focus on the more serious, that would give our tourism a start. Just as we must stop the stupidities that we have read here and there in recent years: “foreign tourists do not spend enough here” (sic) on the basis of unfounded tourism figures. As if we were to prohibit access to our country to those who do not spend enough … 
• Contradictions: the book contradicts itself when, on the one hand, we defend the idea that our tourism growth is struggling, that we are seeing our market share decrease compared to our competitors, that we are losing hotel nights. And that on the other hand, the author declares that “this sector of activity (tourism)has experienced double-digit growth for thirty years  ”. In his defense, I know that it is not easy to navigate as everything is contradictory in the information we receive, proof that nothing is measured indisputably and correctly.    

• Germany: In “Tourism in danger” , it is said “that a tourist spends three times more in Germany than in France”,implying that we would be bad via this comparison, which once again, we would not know. not to spend their money on the generous tourists who do us the honor of coming to us.

It’s not that the Germans are really doing better than us. It is just to ignore the nature of the demand in this country which strongly relates to business tourism , where trade fairs, congresses, business conventions and seminars are abundant, also thanks to a rich and modern infrastructure in equipment and large capacity hotel industry. Where business is done through business travel. We sell by meeting. The business tourist spends on average 2.5 to 3 times more than the leisure tourist.

More broadly, if France was really the world’s leading tourist destination, is it really surprising that the others are gaining in demand and us less? It is said that a tree cannot climb to the sky. Germany would have received 33 million foreign tourists in 2014 against 84 million in France. I said “would have”. We can imagine that the more tourists there are, the lower the average expenditure per tourist.

• Rankings: Jérôme often draws on rankings and surveys to bring water to his mill. He likes rankings like sports journalists. To be honest, we can see that it gives them more importance and reliability than they have, like tourism professionals who run after distinctions and awards as futile as they do not have. valuable.

But, just as the official statistics from the UNWTO and the Ministry in charge of tourism are not necessarily correct and are the result of small political arrangements, rankings, such as The World’s 50 Best Restaurants cited, for example, have no more credibility. We know that everything is a matter of lobbying, without crying wolf for free. Besides, how can we name the “best of” on registers as subjective as restoration? Even Paul Bocuse, honored as the best cook in the world, is undoubtedly the best known; but the best: on what objective criteria? It’s impossible.

Even for the Michelin ranking, the author is sorry to note that it is no longer in France that we find the most 3 stars, but in Japan, interpreting it as a downfall for our gastronomy. This is forgetting or ignoring that many French chefs and restaurateurs no longer race for the stars , so much does it produce for them too many loads, constraints, stress and ultimately unhappiness, the moment of past pride.

Does this mean that our gastronomy is in perdition and in decline because some become philosophers and, while satisfying their customers with their first-rate service, are making life easier? Stepping away from the competition does not mean that you are good to throw in the towel. The refusal of the competition and the rankings, I find that magnificent when you are a great professional.

• Hotel classification: obviously, I am in a good position to say that, contrary to what Jérôme believes, the hotel classification (stars) is not (at all) a success on the part of Atout France . It’s even a first-class smoke.

Being at the origin of the launch of his reform that I obtained in 2006 by the Minister in charge of tourism of the Villepin team, then Prime Minister, I ended up opposing what he became. Corporate, developed without questioning a single hotel customer, criteria flush with the daisies and little in line with the expectations of travelers, system of verifications by private firms often clientelist, in conflicts of interest and who cheat, false move upmarket by a majority of hoteliers who have easily requested and obtained an additional star without enriching their offer, etc. See the article on the subject.

And what about the good occupancy rates of the 4-star hotels praised in the book, if not that a large part are former 3 stars having kept the same price positioning and the same clientele.

To illustrate this point about the false move upmarket , we think we are dreaming when reading on the Atout France website that there are 2,044 4 and 5 star hotels in France (February 2016) compared to… 898 in 2010 . There cannot be so many real high-end and luxury hotels there. This volume of easy upgrades obviously devalues ​​real hotels in these categories and blurs customers’ understanding of the system. Same thing in the lower ranges. The new hotel classification has not done French tourism a favor and does not deserve to be pinned on the honor roll.

Fortunately, only 16% of hotel customers take the stars into account, compared to 64% in 2009 (Coach Omnium studies). It is the Internet and the OTAs that have shaken everything up. The price is now used as a reference to get an idea of ​​a range of hotels.

• Hotel nights: The author of ”  Tourism in danger” suggests that according to INSEE, “over fifteen months, between May 2012 and September 2014, the hotel sector lost 4.5 million overnight stays”.

We must actually take further perspective to avoid slipping into such alarmist conclusions. Hotel and tourism activity has been on a roller coaster since the onset of the economic crisis in 2008-2009. Moreover, it is unpredictable. And yet, occupancy rates in French hotels have been relatively stable in recent years, according to INSEE (the most reliable economic barometer in France, which surveys nearly 16,000 hotels each month): 59% in 2010 , 60.6% in 2011, 58.9% in 2012, 59.3% in 2013, 59.2% in 2014 as in 2015 (summer demand played a compensating role for the fall in demand after the terrorist attacks ).

In terms of overnight stays, the same thing: the French hotel industry recorded 198.4 million in 2012, 197.9 million in 2013 and… 198.4 million in 2014 (as in 2012). There was therefore no significant retraction, if we are to believe INSEE.

Let’s take this opportunity to confirm that the Airbnb effect has not had a negative effect, at least in terms of activity data, on the French hotel industry, contrary to well-established rumors.

• Junk food: it is necessarily good to promote good food made with fresh products and to encourage people to consume only that. But, you have to be honest or realistic. On the one hand, the majority of the population has neither the financial means, nor the time, nor even the education sufficient to embark on the adventure of “good food”. And anyway not on a daily basis. While the restaurants that pay attention to quality are certainly full, as Jérôme observes – but this remains true in the big cities because in the countryside there are pearls of restaurants that have difficulty finding a large clientele to get by economically.-, others which are in the patent junk food, expensive or not expensive, are also ultra full. It’s ugly, but it is so. To each his own bad taste!

The same goes for tourists. While there is a small slice of foreign visitors, with keen beaks, who flock to our great restaurants, the mega majority of tourists buy pizzas, sandwiches, burgers (and not in fancy bistros) and eat pasta. . They find themselves in these tourist restaurants, bad, expensive compared to what is served there and which sell the illusion of traditional cuisine. And these customers are not that unhappy.

Even the much desired Chinese tourists, who everyone wants to snatch away from, mostly go to low cost hotels in the popular suburbs of Paris and shy away from / distrust our cuisine. They don’t come for that, but for shopping. They buy en masse for their friends and family with a profit. Hence the famous average expenditure per Chinese of 1,200 to 1,600 € mentioned by political leaders and which gives them stars in the eyes.

To speak about our restoration while citing as examples in this book only the great chefs and their overpriced suppliers – as the media do, moreover – is a penalizing and incorrect choice. A bit elitist. Why limit yourself by using them as a standard bearer in order to explain what should be done in catering? They are so few in number and so little representative of our restoration. And in this case, why at the same time refuse the large tourism groups to represent tourism? Another contradiction.

Quality can be found everywhere and not only with Michelin-starred chefs, which I think we talk about too much and to whom professionals do not recognize themselves. One only has to see the failure of the Culinary College of France with restaurant owners to be convinced.

Finally, to put in opposition the agriculture and the small-scale breeding, so beautiful to defend, and the agrifood industry, so good to criticize, seems to me to be an easy shortcut and too Manichean. The first cannot meet the needs of the population quantitatively and never will. The second brings many guarantees and easy access to products for people who do not have the means (in money, time, knowledge, education) to afford the natural and cultivated / raised with love. .

The fight should rather focus on achieving more virtuous practices among manufacturers than on their general boycott, which remains a matter of dream.     

Ultimately, the problem with the restaurant business is that going to a restaurant is no longer a party, an exception, a rare moment as it was even more than 40 years ago. We are used to it. As a result, customers are jaded, difficult to surprise and therefore not easily charmed. Or rather, a particularly friendly waiter surprises when this should be the norm.  

• High-end tourism: Jérôme campaigns for the development of high-end tourism to restore France to its colors. This is good because it is also the dream of any local elected representative who would like to make his city a little Monaco. We get the impression that almost all mayors want at least one luxury hotel in their town (sometimes they dare not speak of 5 stars, but it’s just like) and a Michelin starred restaurant. When the hotel is not a chic boutique establishment, they want an international brand.

They never ask themselves whether there is a market in their city to make this expensive offer profitable, if it were to exist. Today we are witnessing an overabundance of high-end hotel projects  : above all 4-star hotels, the star of the moment. But, in the end, few cities , even large ones, that have them have hotels that sell at the right price in this category . The 4 stars actually have average mid-range room prices and fail to match them, with some exceptions.

Anyway, we no longer want mass tourism… ughh! We pinch our noses when we mention it. We want tourists who behave well, who spend a lot, who stay a long time, who are clean and who come back faithfully every year. In short, exactly everything that has not existed for a long time. The fantasy, I tell you.  

Of course, luxury pays more than economy, as is recalled in the book. But, it is a calculation that is done client by client. We are always and still making money by volume, by weight.

Finally, focusing only on the top of the range will in no way allow French tourism to reach the 100 million foreign visitors desired in its time by Laurent Fabius … (smile).

• A fully-fledged tourism ministry: it is certain that the fact that Laurent Fabius, Minister of State and former Prime Minister, took tourism under his wing, was a positive shock for the sector. He surprised everyone, when we were so used to having only secondary Secretaries of State or at best a Deputy Minister (“grade” between the Minister and the Secretary of State) but at the protocol rank uncertain, sitting on a government folding seat. We have also become so accustomed to the fact that these little people have had several ministerial portfolios since 2007 and are therefore dispersed in their priorities.

If the speeches of Laurent Fabius were well and truly heard – old cador of the policy to whom one does not make it, he knows how to speak to people and how to please them -, they are still only speeches . As before, we will hurt ourselves as much by falling as we will have been high in the sky of illusions. From words to deed, we see nothing coming, except micro actions that do not change the face of tourism and do not thwart its deep evil.

In this sense, I am not so elated and enthusiastic about the author of “Tourism in Danger” . Politicians (senators, deputies, presidents of regions and departments) and ministers in charge of SMEs and tourism, I have met quite a few, during hearings in particular, at their request or mine (as as president of the Committee for the Modernization of French Hotels and Tourism ). I have come to the puzzling conclusion that apart from their very pleasant courtesy, all are waiting for a direct and immediate political interest (they always reason on the short term); they don’t do anything if it doesn’t pay off for them personally. So, Fabius or others, it remains the same. Alas.

We can add that the effectiveness of a minister depends less on his protocol rank than on his personal abilities and his desire to do (well), and therefore to find support in the government and in the majority to act.

• VAT: I found in Jérôme’s book, who is a hotelier and restaurateur, the same surprising and erroneous refrain about VAT that I had heard during the entire campaign orchestrated by the unions on this subject. He writes: “… I resold with 19.6% VAT the products that I had bought with 5.5% VAT. This amounts to saying that I collected 14% of taxes for the State! Is it the role of a restaurant or a hotel to fill the tax pot? “. The answer is yes. It is even the principle of VAT instituted in 1953, which replaced the 15% tax on production: companies play collectors in return for which they keep this VAT money in their treasury while waiting to transfer it to the tax every month.

They also fundraise for a whole bunch of administrations and pension funds. As the life of the entrepreneur would be easier if it weren’t for all this to do, I readily agree.

Jérôme is also indignant that the VAT has doubled in the CHR in the space of two years (between 2012 and 2014), adding “are there many professionals in this country capable of supporting a taxation that doubles in not much time ? “ .

It should undoubtedly be remembered that VAT is not a charge for the company (balance sheets are exclusive of VAT), but of time spent, and that it is paid by the consumer and not by the merchant who collects it. for the state. Of course, the general public (final consumer) buys TTC and therefore sees in a repercussion of the increase in VAT only an increase in prices. But, we must admit that the VAT at 10% has replaced a VAT which was long fixed at 20.6% then at 19.6% in catering. And as far as I know, prices had not gone down when VAT did the same in 2008. Double weight, double measure. I find here a dogma with a trade unionist color that does not agree with an honest truth.  

• The 35 hours: that a restaurateur-hotelier gets angry with the 35 hours in a job that does not count his own, we can understand. Young people who look at their watch at work are annoying. But, Jérôme says that “the decisions of the banches (on working time) are suitable for large hotel groups but not for small independent players” . This is notwhat will encourage young people to accept a job in small companies in the sector if an agreement fixes more hours worked there than in chains.

In any case, the chains have always provided better working conditions to their employees since the 1970s, in return for minimum wages (we said Smig at the time). The self-employed have followed the wage chains without giving the same working conditions. Look for the error, which is obviously explained by lower profitability, but which has led to social exclusion, as well as an impoverished quality of service.  

• Selective indignation: The author of “Tourism in danger” does not hesitate to point out the culprits, including by name, in what happens to us badly in our French tourism. It is courageous because few protesters do it. But his indignation is still selective, and it’s human. We have to preserve some relationships.

For example, we cannot explain the difficulty in recruiting and retaining staff without inevitably mentioning the incompetent bosses in the CHRs and worse, the many Thenardiers who plague them again and again. Jerome is careful not to. These are largely at the origin of this problem which discourages young people from working in these trades in the hotel industry and especially in catering.

Certainly, successful cooking TV shows have created vocations to become a cook. But how many young people who get into it stay in the business once they see how badly they were treated by (little) barking bosses, in every sense of the word? At the same time, 5 years after leaving hotel school , only 1 in 5 former students is still in the profession. This is a statistic that has endured for several decades. And yet, it is young people who have been trained. So, before thinking about training, it is necessary to set up an efficient and ennobling reception framework.

There is nothing either in Tourisme en Peril on hotel unions , which are nevertheless to be seriously questioned by their ineffectiveness in defending the image of the CHR sector (they have rather tarnished it), their patent passivity in the face of imbecile regulations, their inability to help small establishments which are dying, their rivalries which weaken the sector, etc. (the list is long, too). 
Jérôme is not protesting against Atout France either., in its promotion of French tourism, while the majority of tourism professionals agree in denouncing the imposture of this zinzin and its notorious shortcomings. Asking for more money for Atout France by comparing the budgets of Spanish Catalonia or others, joins all of these complacent parliamentary reports that were dictated by the CEO of Atout France himself . But always more, we would always prefer the better. And already that a true independent audit explains to us what Atout France really does, beyond a long catalog as a day without bread of presence in trade shows, with a simple poster on the stand… The quantity does not have never replaced the quality.

No complaints either to the current ministry in charge of tourism . But here too, it is normal when we have met political leaders. The dog who wants a caress, avoids biting the hand of the caressor. I say this without irony. I understand.

As for the Assises du tourisme and its thirty measures , a vast demagogic joke, Jérôme sees nothing but good, or almost. The same goes for the Tourism Promotion Committee , whose conclusions make people smile at each performance, including the famous suggestion “put up a thank you and see you soon  ” sign at each exit. It is sure that it will bring back tourists.  

• Hôtel du Château-fort de Sedan: on page 146 of the book, it is indicated that the hotel at the Château-fort de Sedan would employ 121 employees (to which are added the induced jobs)! This is obviously not possible / plausible with its small restaurant and its 54 4-star rooms (in reality a service positioned in the middle of the range). Otherwise, he would have been in bankruptcy for a long time. Especially since I have audited this hotel twice for one of its investors and I know how it works. Finally, taking the Hôtels & Patrimoine group as a model of excellence is not what I would have done for many reasons that I cannot reveal here …  

In conclusion: if once again this book“Tourism in danger”is a good thing because it recallswhat many would like to hide under the carpet, I see it above all as a letter to Santa Claus. Sorry to say so. The few solutions suggested by the author are nothing that we do not already know and which does not succeed, or so badly. In short, there are observations and recommendations that have already been strongly seen. But can we throw stones at its author? No, of course.

Inventing and innovating, over and over again, is utopian when the fundamentals are still lacking. However, this is the case with tourism.

Finally, and this is undoubtedly what marks the most when reading this book, we see an author led by a rather elitist view of tourism , anchored in the high-end : luxury, great chefs, artisanal agriculture, … Which, however, concerns only an infinitesimal part of supply and demand, even if the media mainly mention this. Jerome too. Can we talk about tourism, solutions for the sector and observations, taking as examples and mainly causes only the top of the range and Michelin starred? This is undoubtedly my main criticism of this book.  

But what annoys me the most is that this book, however useful, will be useless. It will end up on shelves. Because we do not throw a book in France. It’s cultural.

And it’s not Jerome’s fault. Apart from putting its author in the spotlight in the media for a few days / weeks (which I sincerely wish him), this book will bring nothing more than all the reports laid on tourism by various public entities or by parliamentarians, including the he existence ended in the cupboard as soon as it was published. It will be no more useful than all the manifestos published in recent years. It will experience the same fate as our two White Papers on Hotel and Tourist Modernization , which will have served no purpose. Except to pass a few quickly forgotten messages. Or slyly despised.  

The public authorities will not seize the subject and in the best case, some (politicians, employers’ unionists,…) will pump out some ideas to appropriate them without further form of trial. Anyway, arguing that “Tourism (is) in danger” does not agree with the official tourism figures imposed by policies. Amazing numbers and continuously increasing. To contradict them is therefore doomed to failure and inaudible.

We are therefore condemned to remain powerless spectators in the face of the wanderings of French tourism and its actors. The politicians know this and will not budge an eyelash to change this. Nor the others.  


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *