nigelswift wrote:
Mustard wrote:
I cynically suspect that it serves their interests to milk the cash-cow of Stonehenge, so rather than discouraging coach-loads of visitors (which might well be better for the monument), they actively work towards pulling in the heads and thereby the money.
Having lost 30% of their funding the ticket sales are very important to them no doubt but that doesn't make them a bad quango, just one that's trying to maximise it's income to save thee and me paying via taxes.
I'm not sure they have the right or duty to be discouraging visits. They're there to make the place accessible I'd have thought.
I honestly don't know enough about EH at the current time to have an opinion about whether they're generally "good" or "bad".
It obviously needs to maximise income (although I for one would be happy to fund it through taxes), but that is not a justification in itself. Where do we draw the line? McDonald's and Burger King franchises at Avebury?
I agree they have a duty to make these places accessible, but to who, why and how? Does it serve any purpose to encourage coach-loads of visitors to troop round the monument for no other reason that the fact that it's on a "must see" tick list? I don't see that as making the monument accessible - I see it as maximising revenue.
