Last Week Alone 24 Million People Planned Travel At Trip Advisor.com… And Now The Discussion Is About The Increased Barbados Car Rental Costs
It is a small world out there, friends – and when people plan their vacations and business trips online there is not much that remains hidden. This morning travelers at Trip Advisor.com are discussing the increase in car rental costs in Barbados due to the government’s massive one thousand percent increase in the price of a Visitor’s Driver Permit. There is no doubt that this discussion is also happening at other travel websites and forums.
IF the government wishes to reconsider the increase, it had better do so quickly. IF the PM reconsiders and lowers the increase, he had better get his tourism staff on it right away to mitigate the damage being done to our travel industry as the word spreads on the internet. Give it a few more days and the travel sections of the major newspapers around the world will be picking up the story.
46 Comments
July 9, 2008 at 1:33 pm
De Tourism shirt NOW begin to hit de fan, wid dis one!
No-one delivers a perfect budget. No-one.
but this one issue is where it went quite imperfect.
Anyway, the meeting at Yacht Club should sort a lot of stuff out.
In essence we should have NO VISITORS DRIVERS PERMIT AT ALL.
Find dat revenue somewhere else!
July 9, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Outrageous.
We got no other income except tourism which is hurting by rising gas prices and we announce big news to the world we gonna pick their pockets.
Thought our Prime Monster was smarter than that.
July 9, 2008 at 2:02 pm
what meeting at the yacht club?
July 9, 2008 at 2:15 pm
BFP you iffing around now, the Opposition leader deliver her speech yesterday and all you concern about is $100 fee.
*******************
BFP says,
We’ll get to the Opposition when we have time, but frankly Mia and her cabal had 14 years to do whatever they wanted with a blank cheque… and at the very least she kept her mouth shut while Owen Arthur and the gang stuffed their pockets.
But… we know something about Mia’s assets and we can’t believe that she declared all of them. We can’t believe it.
But in the absence of Integrity Legislation (which she could have introduced at any time during the past 14 years) the “declaration of assets” on her part now is cynical at best.
She and the BLP have little credibility at this point.
July 9, 2008 at 2:18 pm
this one is easily remedied by the BTA and PM, if acted on quickly, unlike the Cricket World 2007 Visa fiasco handled by Mia that went on for months and caused incalculable damage.
Deal with it!
By in large, the budget wasn’t bad considering the “larder” has been emptied and pilfered and we are broke broke broke!
July 9, 2008 at 2:19 pm
It’s not too late for Thompy to make adjustments. Let’s hope (in vain?) that he won’t be that pig-headed to do what is right.
He had a lot to say about ‘cushioning the rising cost of living’ but this Budget does not address this to any big degree. Instead of the Government seeking to put more money in its coffers it could perhaps have reduced the Govt tax on diesel and gasoline and on a wider ‘basket of food.’
July 9, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Redds,
Mia Mottley declared her assets in Parliament yesterday and hit David Thompson and BFP for six!
Give the poor fools some time to recover.
666!
July 9, 2008 at 2:30 pm
As a tourist told me in a Holetown restaurant last night, “Barbados should pay us $100 for risking our lives driving here from Fitts Village on this narrow, pot-holed, badly lit road with lunatics coming at you at full speed with full beam headlights.”
July 9, 2008 at 3:07 pm
““Barbados should pay us $100
for risking our lives driving here from Fitts Village
on this narrow, pot-holed, badly lit road
with lunatics coming at you at full speed
with full beam headlights.”
Now wunnuh gettin de idea?
…………….
The tourist forgot to mention the complete lack of road markings, particularly useful in nocturnal situations…helpful while navigating CORNERS…provides much help.
July 9, 2008 at 3:09 pm
10 a.m. THURSDAY
Meeting of all car-rentals entities,companies,persons,
persons interested, Press, TV, – anyone who gives a damn about killing the Golden Goose for its few eggs.
July 9, 2008 at 3:20 pm
£52 INCREASE ON CAR DUTY? THE STUPIDEST THING THEY COULD EVER HAVE DONE. CONGRATULATIONS BARBADOS, YOU’VE JUST ELECTED A REAL DINGBAT FOR A GOVERNMENT LEADER!
July 9, 2008 at 3:23 pm
A notice a quarter page ‘AD” in the Nation today
asking ALL Car Rental operators
to meet tomorrow (Thursday 10th July) 10am
at the Barbados Yacht Club.
C & B there!
July 9, 2008 at 4:55 pm
It’s not the smartest move ever and, let’s hope that the government repeal it fairly rapidly once they realise that it will generate little additional revenue and cause some pain to car hire operators. But it’s not a total catastrophe either. Surely there are much, much bigger fish to fry ? Tourists do not choose destinations on the basis of the cost of a visitors license. If we really, really need to get worried about anything, it should be the cost of flights and on-island accomodation and, oh yes, the looming global recession. Some perspective please.
July 9, 2008 at 5:31 pm
Bajan fuh real says
“it should be the cost of flights and on-island accomodation and, oh yes, the looming global recession.”
Barbados is paradise so the global recession is not a problem.
As reported to be the words of Mia 3.5 Mottley
“She said there was nothing wrong with Barbados’ economy that could not be managed by strong economic leadership, ”
keep it real BFR
July 9, 2008 at 9:01 pm
Why should the fee be adjusted? The previous amount was too low. The rental car companies fees are too high, let them absorb it if they feel that strongly.
Road tax: $265 to $400, $330 to $450
$600 to $900 and we have to drive on the same roads.
July 10, 2008 at 7:33 am
Please settle all of you in the car rental business the PM will address the matter and being the sensible caring person that he is it will be addressed.
July 10, 2008 at 11:33 am
“Tax and spend Thompson”
Increasing the permit fee from $10 to $100 is outrageous! An increase to $20 or $40 would have been acceptable, but $100? The new permit had better be good for 2 years!
July 10, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Wishing in Vain,
I am sure you are right, sense will prevail, buts lets look at the bigger picture.
WHO on earth suggested or recommended a 1000% increase?
Clearly, its not a tourism person, as they would have weighed up all the implications.
The elimination of Car Rental for cruise ship passengers, the loss in VAT revenue, certain loss of employment (ie: car cleaners, mechanics, delivery drivers etc, etc), the inevitable damage it would do to our attractions, activities and restaurants.
I could go on, but any person that makes a living out of tourism would have know this.
Now it as placed the Prime Minister, Minister of Tourism and policymakers in an embarrasing position, where they may be seen not to have thought it through properly.
And will ultimately have to reduce the permit cost unless they wish to accept the responsibility of certain job losses.
I thought all the consultations would have eliminated this!
From a tourism perspective, apart from the $10 million BTA budget increase, there was very little (make that nothing) for us.
When there was in fact an opportunity to bring about real cost savings (electricity and water) and drive additional visitor arrivals on our doorstep, by reducing or eliminating departure tax for intra Caribbean travel in May, June, September and November.
I did suggest it at Illaro Court.
July 10, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Adrian,
1. There is now no such thing as “departure tax!” IATA collects Airport fees some of which are directed to government. The Minister of Finance no longer has the power to waive any departure tax. I thought you would have known this and your suggestion was impossible to implement by any Minister of Finance.
2. The $10 million marketing sum is in addtion to the normal BTA budget plus the $20 million Barbados has, as I understand it, to put into the regional tourism marketing programme. What say you now? $30 million more overall.
3. There is nothing magic about increasing taxes and fees. Some errors are always made and I heard the Prime Minister last night say the error would be corrected and the fee might be waived for short periods. If so this would be an improvement on what currently obtains.
You are making a mountain out of a mole hill Adrian.
July 10, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Adrain, Cockups do happen from time to time but more importantly the PM is aware and considerate of the situation and it will be addressed quickly, no problem at all.
July 10, 2008 at 1:13 pm
“Think not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country. “JFK
” Think not what your country can do for you but what you can do for YOURSELF and your country.”Hants
July 10, 2008 at 1:19 pm
OPEN LETTER TO THE PM
Dear Mr. Prime Minister
Thanks to you I will be much healthier by 2009 than I currently am now in 2009.
Now that you have raised diesel and gas prices, I find it much easier and convenient to take a ride on my recently purchased bicycle every now and then. Further to that, now that u have also raised the fee for vehicle road tax and bicycle licenses I find even much more pleasure in walking.
Food costs are so high that i have found it necessary to cut-out all fastfood from my diet as well as lots of meats and other items normally purchased from the supermarket.
You have made arrangement for the raising of professional fees as of next year. With this in mind I will be much more careful with aspects of my health so as not to have to visit a doctor, chiropractor dermatologist or dentist anytime soon, as visits are expected to cost more from January 2009.
My friends who normally visit at different times of the year also wish to thank you for raising the Visitor Driving Permits to $100, up from the current $10, as they too would be able to do alot more walking.
My cousins are all indebted to you for allowing the school children to travel free on the buses. The expected overcrowded anticipated onboard the buses will create a sauna-like effect which means that they would have a good sweat on the way to/from work.
All members of my family will now have a bit more money when we deactivate or cellphones. You have showed us that the cellphone is a luxury and not a necessity. Thanks for that $4 a month tax on cellphones.
I personally cannot thank you enough. Your new policies are certainly revolutionary, you have certainly put families first this time. My family and friends can all spend alot more time together as my stepbrother who until recently delivered cars to and from hotels in the Car Rental Business will soon be unemployed, my sister who conducts on ZR van and friends who work on Minibuses will soon all be able to congregate on the block from morning to night. Now that you have abandoned the Project Oasis (boys on the block) Program it has been one grand lime daily.
Thanking you
Mr. Small-Blackman
July 10, 2008 at 1:26 pm
The country is in shock. Once again we have a PM we can disagree with in public.
Enjoy the freedom.
Imagine Adrian attacking Owing while being a member of the BTA.
WIV keep the PM informed about what is happening on this blog.
He will respond to intelligent sound recommendations.
What a difference in Barbados today.
Hope you all enjoying de announcer song.nuff airplay on VOB
July 10, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Here we go again. ABajan who thinks Barbados is a planet somewhere in the universe.
bajan2nv says “you have raised diesel and gas prices.”
They did that in North America planet Earth too.
In fact they doing it every day.
“Food costs are so high ”
Same in Canada on planet Earth where I live.
“allowing the school children to travel free on the buses.”
Here on planet Earth we think that is a wonderful thing.
bajan2nv please Use Google and find out what is happening on planet Earth especially North America where I live.
July 10, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Dear Hants,
Dont miss the point. The point is not that food and energy prices have been rising steadily for 5 years. The point is that the government decided to remove almost the entire subsidy in one day – not phased over a year, not pre-announced to give time for people to make adjustments. All of the increase in one day. Plus the government decided to earn VAT on this increase in prices rather than put all of it back into support for poor families. Taxes have risen by $104m, energy costs by a further $100m and the welfare budget has goen up by $200,000.
Then if that was not good enough, the 5% average increase in administrative taxes will add further to the cost of living. The rise in inflation from 5% to a likely 10% this year is entirely due to the way the government has decided to handle higher global energy prices. The fall in growth from 2% to 0% is entirely due to the way the government has decided to raise taxes in a slowdown. Has the Canadian or US governments decided to deal with the crisis by raising taxes by 5% Hants? No. This have given a tax cut.
This budget makes no economic sense. It must have been cooked up in a rum shop a couple days before. Not thought through. Not worked through. This is a dangerous budget and we are all going to pay for it – except Hants, who is not living here.
July 10, 2008 at 4:54 pm
Hants
July 10, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Here we go again. ABajan who thinks Barbados is a planet somewhere in the universe.
Sorry to drop it so real for you Hants, however in just 6 months everyone- from the man in the street (on his bicycle) to CEOs of huge business’ pocket has been dented by measures put inplace by this new government.
The 6 month honeymoon seem not to be coming to an end anytime soon. Not even the odd “Men At Work” roadsigns have been seen since the Govt took office.
Who Feels It Knows….
July 11, 2008 at 11:49 am
Mea Culpa,
Fair and reasonable points but when you get a change, read the Miami Herald article published 2 July 2008 ‘Caricom leaders considering single tourism brand’.
It seems that many of our regional tourism heads are not aware there is a no longer a departure tax.
As I understand it, GAIA Inc. is wholly owned by Government (the taxpayer). Are you saying that our Prime Minister through Cabinet can not order the board of GAIA Inc, to lower or eliminate (selectively) the ‘departure tax’ ?
Yes! You are right, I did not know that our Government had already allocated $20 million to the regional tourism fund.
Our next board meeting is 25th July, perhaps we will be told then?
47 representaives of the car rental agencies attended a meeting yesterday and there was no doubt of the strength of feeling against the 1000% increase.
I am sure the Prime Minister will do the right thing, but what I regret is that he was put in this embarrasing position in the first place, absolutely NEEDLESSLY!
July 11, 2008 at 5:20 pm
Hants,boy…
You have to understand that
becoz Barbados is such a special place
we are exempt from all sorts of things that affect other countries
but should not affect us!
Despite the price of crude raising by 50% over the last 6-8 months,
Barbados is exempt from the global economic consequences thereof!
Despite umpteen thousand vehicles on the minimal roads
(and nowhere to expand said roads TO)
Barbados is exempt from the inevitable flyovers.
It is also exempt from all the anti-flyover workarounds/tech/procedures that other countries have devised!
Bajans are exempt.
They are not of this world.
They live in isolation.
The proof awaits you at North and South Points
where you can look across the sea and see NO OTHER LAND IN SIGHT.
There’s your proof positive that Barbados is a complete galaxy within the universe of our tiny insular minds!
We are special -we are exempt!
Trust me.
July 12, 2008 at 1:28 am
I work in the tourism industry and am close enough to our visitors on a daily basis to know that to charge $100 for a visitors driving permit is not helping on any level to our overall product.
Many visitors choose to buy car rental for one, two or three days and slapping an excess of $90 on top of the rental, will make many customers shy away from hiring a car – period. And please don’t suggest that the rental car companies absorb the cost, because they are running their businesses as stringently as they possibly can as we speak.
But it isn’t just about car rental – today if you check http://www.tripadvisor.com you can see a comment from some visitors who were held up at Bottom Bay by gun and knife point just a week ago.
You may have heard that a local couple had a similar experience at Sheraton within the last ten days…………
The point is, that our tourism product encompasses many areas, is sensitive and I think we need to take better care and judgement.
At the end of the day, it is a big deal for all of us.
July 12, 2008 at 6:03 pm
I must say I agree that the steep increase in the fee may be more than the backs of most tourists may wish to bear…. But given Barbados is a high cost destination. I wonder why the Government has never tried to use this to an advantage for example and seek to add global luxary hotel brands? E.g. The Ritz-Carlton Hotels, The Waldorf-Astoria Hotels, or the InterContinental Hotel types???
July 15, 2008 at 9:03 am
‘Mountain out a of a molehill’
Mea Culpa said
‘Plus the $20 million Barbados has, as I understand it, put into the regional tourism marketing programme’.
Please explain Mea Culpa WHY the Barbados Government would contribute BDS$20 million towards a total of US$21 million that the 15 Caricom countries are putting up towards this fund?
Is Barbados likely to receive almost 50% of the total additional long stay visitors generated from this initiative?
You gave the impression that you had privileged knowledge concerning how Government (taxpayer) funds were going to be allocated.
Could you please clarify?
July 15, 2008 at 12:38 pm
J. Payne,
A Four Seasons and Banyan Tree are currently under construction.
July 17, 2008 at 1:00 am
Here is another issue from the Tourism section of the Budget that deserves thought and comment. Condominiums.
A study found that properties built for tourists generated a lot more foreign exchange earnings as visitors rented cars, went to restaurants, etc compared with condominiums built for owner occupiers. I have not seen the study, but this conclusion is intuitive. As a result, government policy used to limited concessions on developments to those where the properties were put in a rental pool for at least nine months every year.
The government announced in this year’s budget (page 56) that they were doing away with this limit. This means that if a developer builds a block of condominiums on the west coast for the winter birds and they live in it for 6 months of the year and have it empty for the next six months that this block will receive the same tax incentives as is it were a hotel, with a higher occupancy rate through the year, of tourists, who spend more. Does anybody think the decision to scrap the limit makes any economic sense? Will it not encourage the wrong kind of overbuilding of our scarce coast? Is this not the kind of “selling off of our real estate assets” that the government prioviously voiced concern over.
I wonder if we would have this policy if we had ITAL? It is of course in the interests of the developers who are a very powerful lobby.
I am keen to here Adrian’s thoughts on this, but others too, including my faithful sparring partner, Brutus.
July 17, 2008 at 11:11 am
Thomas,
There is so much mis-information put out there by either people who should know better or people who simply don’t know any better and have not done their research.
In todays Nation for example (page 6 – ‘Watersports operators urged to unite’)
A spokesperson for the Intimate Hotels of Barbados is quoted as saying their ‘members represent 75 per cent of the hotel sector in Barbados’.
The truth is they represent 41 registered accommodation providers out of 147 and only 14.5% of the total hotel room stock.
The trouble is many policymakers base their actions on these silly statements and not on the facts.
With regard to the condominiums.
FACT: We have lost 28 hotels over the last 15 years.
FACT: 2,000 tourism sector jobs were lost between 2002 and 2004.
Are these two FACTS related?
July 17, 2008 at 11:29 am
Dear Adrian,
Thanks. Do you think that the rise of condominiums is related to this. I think that is what you are saying, but not sure.
If it is, why is the government increasing the attractiveness of condominiums versus hotels/tourist villas by dropping the condition of putting rooms into the rental pool if you want tax concessions. It would appear that we have just given tax concessions for condomiuniums which would encourage further switch from hotel rooms and tourism sector jobs.
Is that how you woud read this policy shift? Now that you have some official capacity, is this a policy you would be suggesting in policy circles should be re-thought like the $100 tourist license?
Thank you
July 17, 2008 at 11:29 am
Dear BFP, could you please release my post. Thanks
***********
BFP says,
Hi Thomas,
I don’t know why it picked on you. Sometimes there is no reason and it is after all is said, only a stupid PC.
I’m off to work now and George comes on at noon, so there won’t be anyone here for a few hours unless Robert checks in from “over there”. Bottom line: if it grabs your comment again it will be a few hours before it is released. That’s life!
Cheers,
Clive
July 17, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Thanks Clive,
Have a good day.
Thomas,
July 17, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Thomas Gresham,
You may not have read page 57 of the budget which states that:
“To this end the staff of the Ministry of Finance will be meeting with members of the Ministry of Tourism to design a special package of tax incentives for this category of investor bearing in mind that the concessions to be granted will most definitely not be as extensive as those presently available under the Tourism Development Act.”
However I agree with you in principle and I am not convinced that such developers need to be offered any concessions at all. However we need to wait and see what the concessions are.
The condominium development on the west coast has been allowed to reach distasteful proportions. This government has shown it is willing to take bold but necessary steps to change Barbados regardless of the initial negative impact, so it should be bold enough to take some steps to prevent further destruction of the west coast due to excessive development, even if it affects property values and future property sales and investment.
To this end they should prohibit any further condominium development on the sea side of the west coast and permit only hotels or mass tourism based developments. They should also move to plug the loopholes that permit ownership of properties to pass offshore without any property transfer tax or foreign currency coming into Barbados. I am sure the PM and some in his cabinet are well aware of the tactics used by developers and local lawyers.
July 17, 2008 at 12:48 pm
Re the $100 permit, I think we often underestimate how resilient the tourism industry is to price increases. I am not sure the $100 will have a significant impact. It may be argued that a tourist who can not afford the $100 is probably not going to spend much in Barbados anyway.
However I would ask the government to relate what they propose to charge ($100) to the cost to the government of providing the permit and administering the system. If the $100 can not be justified on the basis of what it costs the government then perhaps the fee is arbitrary and unjustified and some smaller fee should have been levied on a broader category of visitors, or on all visitors.
To be honest, I would have preferred to see them tackle the issue of increasing taxes on cruise ship visitors which we know has been a thorny issue.
July 17, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Sorry, I forgot to put my handle on the last two comments – posted as .133 and anonymous.
July 17, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Dear .133,
So, it is OK to give new concessions to Condominium developers, even though we do not need to encourage more Condominium development. That is not logical to me.
Concessions to be given to encourage things that need further encouragement and are struggling without the concession. Is that how you would describe Condominium development?
Sounds like pandering to special pleading.
July 17, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Dear Brutus, thanks for letting me know. I wouldnt have thought it was you.
July 17, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Let me add that the government believes it is desparately short of cash and that is why it needs to raise $104m in extra taxes. Sounds to me that in these circumstances you should be very stingy with tax concessions and only give them where they are strictly needed.
I have no problem with extra taxes if they are spent wisely – though I like any other economist, I would not raise taxes in a recession year and I would not raise them through administrative fee increases in an inflation year. But taxing, which is a drag on growth and jobs, to give concessions that are not required and to build a second airport that is not needed (and without study) is just irresponsible. Dont you think?
July 17, 2008 at 1:06 pm
Thomas,
Don’t get me wrong, I am not against condominiums. Its what they replace and where they are built.
As someone has already pointed out.
Yes! in theory you can only apply tax concessions to Condo owners who make their property availablle for rent six months of the year. But already, they really have to do is make the rental rates so high, that few or no-one is likely to rent them.
There is absolutely NO doubt in my mind that the loss of 2,000 tourism jobs is directly related to condominium construction.
Brutus, brought up a very good point about an increase in cruise ship passenger tax.
Once again, they have not been hit all all.
They can still buy all their alcohol duty-free and don’t have to worry about liquor licences.
Trust me, though, if the ridiculous $100 drivers permit is implemented it WILL effect business and not just the car rental companies.
July 17, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Dear Adrian,
I agree with you on the permits.
It is quite clear to me that we do not have a problem that we cannot get people to build condominiums. Policy is expensive and troublesome to implement, so policy solutions should directly fit problems. What is the problem that this concession is trying to fix?
I wound not ban comdominium developments, but why transfer Barbadian tax payers money into the off-shore profit margins of their developers? I cannot see any economic reason why the government would want to do that.
August 6, 2008 at 12:45 pm
I have heard from a car rental agency that effective Aug 1 2008, the visitor’s permit for driving will remain at BDS $10 (US $5) and be valid for 2 months (down from 12 months).
IMHO, a good compromise.