PBCA (Peregian Beach Community Association) understands that, at the General Meeting of 14 April 2025, an item for discussion will be the continuation of funding for TN (Tourism Noosa).
PBCA is asking Councillors to vote NO to any proposal to continue the funding grant to TN.
In the lead up to the last Council election, most, if not all Councillors made a commitment to “put residents first”.
As you are all too aware, residents’ amenity and liveability are being degraded as result of Noosa’s popularity as a destination.
According to TN’s Annual Report 2023-24:
“Tourism Noosa is an award-winning, not-for-profit, membership-based destination management organisation that works with local businesses.”
In other words, it is a locally based tourism industry association which, in PBCA’s opinion, should be financed by its 583 members.
It is not usual for industry associations, which are advocacy bodies, and which in the case of TN is an advocacy body to Noosa to Council, to be financed by Council to this extent.
Noosa Council funds TN with $2.52 million annually which amounted to 94.39 percent of TN’s “revenue” in 2023-24 and 76.5 percent of its total income. In other words, the members of TN are getting a “free ride” on the backs of ratepayers.
In contrast, Membership income amounts to only $178,885 and it then spends $31,915 on Membership.
In addition, TN spent $1.086 million on marketing which means that it only spent 43 percent of Noosa Council’s funding on marketing with the rest presumably spent on services required by the industry association including $500,000 on “sundry expenses”, $229,760 of which relates to unexplained “other corporate costs”.
Many members of the Noosa community consider that, if marketing is required, it could be better directed and paid for by the members of the industry association who predominantly receive the benefits.
TN should move to a membership based funding model.
Currently the community pays the piper, but the piper plays an unpopular tune.
Noosa is suffering from the impacts of over tourism. This is no longer a seasonal event. As Queensland’s population increases, this problem will continue to increase. Noosa no longer requires marketing.
While it is acknowledged that tourism industry premises now pay a commercial rate rather than the Tourism Levy, PBCA considers that the funds raised from rates could be better applied than funding TN.
The Noosa community, due to the imposts of tourists has a need for greater expenditure on such things as beach and other infrastructure, the provision of off-street parking and reducing traffic congestion.
Noosa Council ratepayers should not be required to pay for TN to train its members’ staff or for its members to socialise at events in the name of marketing.
TN could be more transparent about separating out the benefits to its members and identifying and justifying any alleged benefits to the community.
Such services as Plastic Free Noosa which are provided by TN could still be provided to Council by TN under contract with transparent performance indicators.
When Noosa Council sought to consult the TN members about the Destination Management Plan, apparently less than 20 members attended. Members show little interest in the Noosa community needs and sustainability as opposed to industry profitability.
Councillors need to consider the priority needs of the Noosa community when considering the funding of TN.
PBCA requests that Council discontinue the funding of TN and reallocate the current funding to actual community priorities.
Barry Cotterell,
President, PBCA
