LONDON, UK (4 Jan 2005) -- The week after Christmas is one of the busiest of the year for sales staff at Trailfinders' Kensington office, with people rushing to snap up early-booking discounts on their summer holidays. This year is no exception. The phones at the holiday company's head office have not stopped ringing since Boxing Day but the calls are not from people wanting to book holidays. They are from worried customers wondering if they should cancel their trips to Asia. The tourism industry has taken many knocks in recent years: 11 September, the Gulf War, the Sars epidemic in Asia, the terrorist bombs in Bali and, more recently, Hurricane Ivan which devastated parts of the Caribbean. But in terms of the sheer scale and scope of the disaster and the cost to human life, the tsunami which tore across the Indian Ocean on 26 December, destroying coastal communities in places as far apart as Thailand and Somalia, has dwarfed them all. Holidaymakers who are due to travel in the next few weeks to the worst affected areas, such as Phuket, Koh Phi Phi and Khao Lak in Thailand and coastal resorts in the south and east of Sri Lanka, are being offered refunds or alternative holidays by their travel companies or airlines. However, those who are due to travel later in the year or to other parts of affected countries may be wondering whether it is desirable, or even ethical, to continue with their travel plans. 'It is a very delicate question,' said Kuoni managing director Sue Biggs. 'Nobody wants to be perceived as voyeuristic or feel uncomfortable. It's up to the individual. I think some people will want to go there to show support.' Travel companies have expressed surprise at how many people have opted to continue with their holidays as a way of showing solidarity with the local people. Tour operator Tropical Locations said that several of its clients who were in Phuket when the tsunami struck had asked to extend their holidays to be able to help with the rescue efforts. While such gestures are well-intentioned, some members of the travel industry believe they are misguided. Stuart Britton, managing director of Somak Holidays, which takes 2,500 holidaymakers to Sri Lanka every year, believes that going right now might hinder the relief effort. 'It's a tricky one because many people want to show support by going there, but now might not be the best time. It's probably better to let the destination get back on its feet, rather than having tourists taking away resources. Relief planes have to get in to take supplies, and I'm not sure we want holidaymakers arriving at the airport, taking the focus away from that.' Some hotels in resorts badly affected by the disaster are insisting they are open for business, but Britton said he was not comfortable sending holidaymakers there for the time being. 'The hotels might be open but we need to know that the rest of the infrastructure is in place before we send people back there,' he said. However, even areas which escaped the tsunami face the prospect of being boycotted as tourists write off the whole region as a disaster zone. At Huvafen Fushi, a luxurious new resort which opened in the Maldives recently, it is business as usual. On Wednesday a spokesman for the resort said the sun was shining, guest morale was high and that only a handful of people had opted to cut short their holidays: 'In the Maldives, resorts tend to be very self-contained. Most are on their own island and, provided the electricity generator is working, there's no reason why they can't continue to operate,' he said. | | Thai rescue workers carry away a dead body from the devastated Thai island of Phi Phi. Thailand's confirmed death toll from the tidal wave disaster approached 5,000, including more than 2,400 foreign holidaymakers, and bodies were still being found a week after the tragedy. A spokeswoman for the Association of Independent Tour Operators urged travellers not to abandon the region totally: 'Even if you aren't able to go to your original resort, there's no reason why you can't go to other parts of the country that were unaffected. That way you'll be able to enjoy your holiday but you'll still be putting something back into the local economy and doing something to help.' In the longer term, there is reluctance to predict what the impact of the disaster will be on a region whose economy is so heavily dependent on tourism. Seven years ago Egypt's tourism industry stood on the brink of collapse following a terrorist massacre of 58 foreigners in Luxor. Now Egypt is one of the year's success stories attracting increasing numbers of British visitors including Tony Blair and family who have holidayed there for the last three years. And in Bali, where 203 people were killed in a terrorist bomb attack two-and-a-half years ago, visitor numbers are back up to 70 per cent of what they were before the blast, according to the Indonesian Embassy. 'Memories are short. The British market is always the first back in a destination after a crisis,' said Sue Biggs. She added that, in terms of perceived danger, a natural disaster is potentially less damaging than a terrorist attack as people will see it as a one-off event. Meanwhile, tourist offices claim that things will be back to normal in the major tourist resorts within a matter of weeks. Faced with the scenes of devastation in Sri Lanka and parts of Thailand, it's impossible not to see these predictions as wildly optmistic. Derek Moore, of travel company Explore Worldwide, said many of the affected areas would not see any significant income from tourism before the end of the year, particularly as the peak tourist season finishes in April and does not start again until October. But he added: 'The importance of tourism to these economies is such that the private sector will probably move swiftly to return to business. The need for tourism will doubtless breed resilience and determination.' Whether the tourists are so resilient remains to be seen. |
