It’s wonderful to know that tariff liberalization did not happen. The wisdom of our elders is still warm and that makes Bhutan unique. Our gratitude goes to the cabinet’s decision. Till date the role of a coordinator in tourism has been played by the tour operators. It should never be tour operators’ job but it happened. This coordinator thing should be with the authority appointed by the government. But then we only saw the coordinator’s name being changed from BTA to BTC to TAB to DOT and to TCB. Have these past authorities thought of tourism business from a national perspective? I found that much has been left to ground stakeholders mainly tour operators and hoteliers. After almost three decades we now see a broader initiative with TCB (Tourism Council of Bhutan) to spearhead the project.
TCB must thank its lucky stars because a liberalized tariff will not tune tourism to the music of GNH. Anyway, this $250 scheme is just the replica of the old system and the same bottlenecks will haunt us. The future of the tariff system has only two roads: one is letting the market force take its toll and the other employing a government regulated tariff by categorisation. The first one can be called the way of capitalism and has damaging impacts for present day Bhutanese. The second can be called “GNH-ism”. Why ‘GNH-ism’, because under this system we can have better policy that gives equity to socio-economic opportunities. We can preserve and promote our cultural heritages and the environment can be preserved for sustainable harvest.
Under tariff by categorisation, the minimum will automatically be for tented or bunker nights as on treks. The maximum will be for those utilising the five star and other upgraded services. My view is that government levy (my preferred name for royalty) should then come on the gross payment. All payment flow (both in and out of the country) should be monitored by TCB. This system on the payment flow is currently practiced eclipsed with several loopholes. There is lack of understanding about tourism within ministries and other autonomous bodies. Tourism is a national resource and we need to view it that way. The biggest loophole is the taxation in the tourism industry. Introducing a transparent tax system in tourism will revitalise the rest because everything is inter-related.
The growth must comprehend the awareness of tourism benefits. People must fully understand the ethics and values of our culture. We should not be drugged by materialist goals alone. We must prepare and set the capacity of the environment. Stakeholders must also understand the FDI policies well before we join hands with them. Under present circumstance, as a tour operator, I am happy with the new resolution. But at a national level we must find a way going beyond the $250 proposal.
Popularity: 36% [?]
Sir/Madam,
To me, a regulated pricing will always benefit Bhutan in the long run. The important issue championing the effectiveness of application and monitoring of the policy.
Our government shelved the liberalization not because of popular opposition. It is done with wisdom. I am sorry that the op-ed on which my column appeared seemed less credible to bhutanese blogger. Please visit my column of 21st Jan 2010 , “On tariff liberalization”. It might enthuse you a bit.
thanks
Sir/Madam,
This opinion column was contributed by T.Sangay Wangchuk
Tshering Wangchuk –
Why is more regulation/price setting better for the tourism industry? You imply that liberalising the tariff would have affected the industry and Bhutan negatively. Can you please elaborate? Just a mere assertion and the popular opposition to a more liberal tariff are not good reasons. And it is solely because of the popular opposition that the Government had to shelve removing the minimum tariff.
A newspaper purported to be reporting on the state of economy and business in Bhutan ought to carry a better researched, well analysed and more credible op-eds.
Thanks