A forum on the recently unveiled Tourism Master Plan was organized this week at the Macau University of Science and Technology (MUST). During the event, several scholars from local universities voiced their doubts regarding the exact definition of the government’s goal of turning Macau into a “World Center of Tourism and Leisure.”
Zeng Zhonglu, a professor from the Macau Polytechnic Institute, questioned: “What exactly will it be after 15 years? The government did not explain it, which is a relatively big flaw.”
In Zeng’s opinion, “if the government carries on with this plan, then there will be many problems.” He gave an example of a probable future issue, saying that tourists will no longer appreciate the current facilities in 15 years.
He then said that the government should develop plans that avoid “spending huge amounts of money” and that won’t have tourists not liking the tourism projects funded with that money.
“Overall, our tourism structure depends strongly on the greater China area, with the portion of overseas tourists being relatively low,” remarked Zeng.
The Vice President of MUST, Pang Chuan, agreed with Zeng and enquired about “what exactly should a city have in order to be called the ‘World’s Tourism and Leisure Center’?”
The president of the Macau Civil Aviation Employees Association, Hu Gaohong, also wondered “whether there can be a criterion to [comprehensively define a World Center of Tourism and Leisure.”
When talking about Las Vegas, which Hu visited recently, the association head described how “the whole streets in Las Vegas are filled with people, and they are very happy. The whole city seems like a party is ongoing. However, although Macau’s revenue exceeds Las Vegas’s, I cannot feel a happy atmosphere. It seems that there are not too many people on the streets because they are inside the casinos.”
In Hu’s opinion, Macau can provide more air tourism related products, for example, taking the passengers to fly above Hong Kong or to fly to one of Zhuhai’s islands for a visit. Macau can “absolutely become an aviation training base.”
The deputy director of the Macau Government Tourism Office, Cheng Wai Tong, defended the Macau government, saying that “the tourism master plan was designed to coordinate with and reply to [the request of] the SAR government regarding building Macau into a World Tourism and Leisure Center. This positioning was given to Macau by the Central [Government].”
Another professor from the Institute for Tourism Studies, Zhao Weibing, indicated that Macau has been doing a poor job, compared to mainland China and Australia, in terms of making tourism plans.
The “mainland’s tourism industry develops rapidly and in good order, and Australia is the world’s pioneer in regard to making tourism plans. […] Macau’s tourism plan commenced a little bit late, and ended up missing a very good time, […] the first five years [after the handover] were a golden time for making tourism plans,” said Zhao. Zhao tempered his statement by adding that the government’s tourism master plan was issued in a timely manner.
No Comments