Mallorca is awash with associations for one thing or another, but there are few which command as much attention as Aptur. Defenders of holiday rentals, there is barely a day when the association isn't in the news.
This past week has seen Aptur accuse the environmentalists Terraferida of "criminalising" holiday rentals, gather the support of various other associations, hold a meeting with the hoteliers and announce its satisfaction at a court ruling on some islands in the Atlantic. Aptur is as ubiquitous as the Mallorca Hoteliers Federation and as prolific as the number of illegal rentals.
The attack on Terraferida resulted from the environmentalists repeating for Ibiza what they had done with Mallorca. They produced a map of Airbnb properties. Aptur said the figures which Terraferida came up with were not valid, as they didn't correspond to Airbnb. The environmentalists were engaging in demagoguery and using data which did not show the reality and were being used in seeking to criminalise rentals.
Whatever Aptur thought, Terraferida stuck to their guns. In Ibiza and Formentera, Airbnb has over 4,700 rentals with almost 27,000 places. The turnover on these last year was more than 92 million euros. Regardless of the accuracy or otherwise of its data, the presentation of these maps is an indication of how tense the arguments are and how divided opinion is.
One of Aptur's problems is that it doesn't currently derive a huge amount of support where it really matters. Despite the hoteliers criticising the planned rentals' legislation, it is evident that the government wants to curb rentals as much as possible. If it didn't, there wouldn't be the limit on the number of places which the legislation envisages making available, there wouldn't be the tight stipulations to be made on standards and there wouldn't be zoning (more of that below).
In addition to the government, Aptur also lacks the support of the unions. They may have their issues with the hoteliers, but they certainly don't buy the argument that rentals generate masses of jobs or secure ones. In an effort to show support, Aptur announced that various other associations are backing it: ones that would be expected to do so, such as the car-rentals' association.
Where Aptur can also count on some support is with the public, but the survey by the university found that there was only just over 50% support in Mallorca, while in Ibiza - with its great problems with accommodation - only 36% were in favour. Society is split, but it is an issue that is of vital importance to much of local society. There was, meanwhile, some evidence that society is taking note of the threat of fines up to 40,000 euros. It was reported that there is a "stampede" of owners removing property adverts from Airbnb and other websites.
Aptur countered this by saying that it is perfectly legal to rent to tourists. Which is true under the provisions of the tenancy act, but the very fact that Aptur mentioned tourists undermined its argument. Tenancy act rentals cannot be advertised as being for tourist purposes, yet this is exactly what they are and they are let out to tourists courtesy of what many now appreciate is a loophole that needs addressing.
The meeting between Aptur and the hoteliers was unusual in that there was an attempt to seek out some common ground. They agreed to try and define a tourism model based on quality and to create a working group for dialogue. As a first step, Inma Benito of the hoteliers has asked Aptur to make a proposal regarding the regulation of rentals in apartment blocks.
While this sounded all very reasonable, it was difficult to figure out the timing. Whatever either party suggests, the government is on the point of legislating. Quite what difference this working party will make is anyone's guess. Moreover, things weren't as conciliatory as this suggested. Benito repeated the threat of hoteliers converting hotels into apartments as a way of countering the threat from rentals. Implicit to this threat is that there would be job losses, hence why the unions are so concerned about rentals. There are some 150,000 jobs that rely on the hotel sector. Rentals of whatever type wouldn't come close to creating that level of employment.
Then came the ruling of the High Court in the Canaries, which annulled the concept of zoning for rentals in those islands on the grounds that it represented an infringement on freedom of competition and services. Even though the zoning scheme in the Balearics differs to that in the Canaries, the court's judgement does affect the principle. The Balearic government will surely have to take note, as its zoning will doubtless end up in court as well and an appeal against it will have the precedent of a decision in a different court.
With this ruling, Aptur may just have found a strong ally - the courts. And it can add to the courts the National Competition Commission, which is liberal on most matters, including Airbnb and rentals.
Showing posts with label Canaries. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Canaries. Show all posts
Saturday, April 29, 2017
Thursday, February 05, 2015
Don't Go Near The Balearics Stand
Who would be King Felipe and Queen Letizia when you innocently get caught up in a political spat? Following the gathering of the great and good at the Fitur travel/tourism fair in Madrid, the media enjoy offering various Fitur perspectives - expectations for the coming season as revealed at the fair, general tendencies in the tourism industry, this type of thing. And there are also perspectives on who did what or who didn't do what, which is where the royals come in. Felipe and Letizia, regular holidaymakers in Mallorca, didn't drop by the Balearics stand at Fitur. This had never happened before: the Balearics pavilion is always graced with the presence of royalty. Cue, talk of some type of conspiracy.
As it turns out, there was another stand which the royals didn't go to, that for the Canary Islands. Two and two have been put together and the sum of four is that the royals had received orders from the ministry for industry, energy and tourism, José Manuel Soria, for them to not go to either of the stands. Orders!? A minister ordering the royals? Far-fetched though this might seem, a breaking with royal tradition had to be explained somehow. Hence, the Soria theory. And why would he be issuing "orders" to the royals? Because he wanted to punish both the Balearics and the Canaries owing to their opposition to oil prospecting. Remember that Soria does head a vast ministry with occasionally competing interests, such as oil and energy on the one hand and tourism where the waters are crystal clear and the horizons should never be sullied with the sights of oil platforms on the other.
In the Balearic parliament they were engaging in their own post-Fitur debrief (aka slanging match). Spokespeople from Més were convinced that there was no other explanation for the royals' apparent snub of the Balearics stand than the lousy relations between President Bauzá and Soria (indeed it had been reported that Bauzá was "furious" about the alleged veto of the Balearics stand). Clashes over oil prospecting aside, it was being suggested a year or so ago that Bauzá was after Soria's job, and they have studiously managed to avoid being photographed together ever since or even having to meet, as was the case at the large Berlin travel fair in March last year. Both managed to succumb at the same time to a dose of the flu which prevented their travelling.
Does it really matter if the royals give the stand a miss once in a while? Does it even mean a great deal for them to go to the stand? It probably does matter, especially for Balearics' promotion to the domestic tourist market, which is more likely to see photographic evidence of the visit than the international one. These little things might seem just that - little - but they do all add up. Moreover, it needs stressing that the Balearics and the Canaries combine with Catalonia in contributing 60% of all Spain's tourism. This is something which is deserving of royal acknowledgement and should indeed be deserving of political praise, but at present there is a tourism minister, Soria, who has fallen out with the Balearics and with his home islands of the Canaries, while there is a region - Catalonia - about which we are fully aware of governmental tensions. It isn't a terribly healthy state of tourism affairs.
Given that soundings off the Canaries, if not the Balearics as yet, have led Repsol to decide to discontinue exploration - the oil and gas is of insufficient quality to warrant actual drilling - it seems churlish that Soria might still harbour a grudge against the Canaries, one strong enough to issue instructions to the King as regards which stands he should visit or shouldn't. But then, who knows how far petty political vendettas might extend? Certainly not as far as the Canaries' largest hotel chain, Lopesan, which did receive the royals at its stand. And it was the large hotel chains in Mallorca to which Més also turned its parliamentary attention. These large groups dictate government policy on tourism, it was claimed, and so there needs to be a new "tourism model" for the islands. It is hard to disagree with the claim regarding hotelier power, but as for a new model of tourism, was this Més seeking to claim bragging rights on a change in direction after the next election?
They are lining up on the left of centre to be the initiators of such a change, whatever this might be. Should the large hoteliers be concerned? Not really, given the amount they invest in other parts of the globe. By Fitur 2016, will any change have been effected? Doubtful. But by 2017, you never know, Podemos might have scrapped the monarchy. Then no one could argue about which stands are being visited or not.
As it turns out, there was another stand which the royals didn't go to, that for the Canary Islands. Two and two have been put together and the sum of four is that the royals had received orders from the ministry for industry, energy and tourism, José Manuel Soria, for them to not go to either of the stands. Orders!? A minister ordering the royals? Far-fetched though this might seem, a breaking with royal tradition had to be explained somehow. Hence, the Soria theory. And why would he be issuing "orders" to the royals? Because he wanted to punish both the Balearics and the Canaries owing to their opposition to oil prospecting. Remember that Soria does head a vast ministry with occasionally competing interests, such as oil and energy on the one hand and tourism where the waters are crystal clear and the horizons should never be sullied with the sights of oil platforms on the other.
In the Balearic parliament they were engaging in their own post-Fitur debrief (aka slanging match). Spokespeople from Més were convinced that there was no other explanation for the royals' apparent snub of the Balearics stand than the lousy relations between President Bauzá and Soria (indeed it had been reported that Bauzá was "furious" about the alleged veto of the Balearics stand). Clashes over oil prospecting aside, it was being suggested a year or so ago that Bauzá was after Soria's job, and they have studiously managed to avoid being photographed together ever since or even having to meet, as was the case at the large Berlin travel fair in March last year. Both managed to succumb at the same time to a dose of the flu which prevented their travelling.
Does it really matter if the royals give the stand a miss once in a while? Does it even mean a great deal for them to go to the stand? It probably does matter, especially for Balearics' promotion to the domestic tourist market, which is more likely to see photographic evidence of the visit than the international one. These little things might seem just that - little - but they do all add up. Moreover, it needs stressing that the Balearics and the Canaries combine with Catalonia in contributing 60% of all Spain's tourism. This is something which is deserving of royal acknowledgement and should indeed be deserving of political praise, but at present there is a tourism minister, Soria, who has fallen out with the Balearics and with his home islands of the Canaries, while there is a region - Catalonia - about which we are fully aware of governmental tensions. It isn't a terribly healthy state of tourism affairs.
Given that soundings off the Canaries, if not the Balearics as yet, have led Repsol to decide to discontinue exploration - the oil and gas is of insufficient quality to warrant actual drilling - it seems churlish that Soria might still harbour a grudge against the Canaries, one strong enough to issue instructions to the King as regards which stands he should visit or shouldn't. But then, who knows how far petty political vendettas might extend? Certainly not as far as the Canaries' largest hotel chain, Lopesan, which did receive the royals at its stand. And it was the large hotel chains in Mallorca to which Més also turned its parliamentary attention. These large groups dictate government policy on tourism, it was claimed, and so there needs to be a new "tourism model" for the islands. It is hard to disagree with the claim regarding hotelier power, but as for a new model of tourism, was this Més seeking to claim bragging rights on a change in direction after the next election?
They are lining up on the left of centre to be the initiators of such a change, whatever this might be. Should the large hoteliers be concerned? Not really, given the amount they invest in other parts of the globe. By Fitur 2016, will any change have been effected? Doubtful. But by 2017, you never know, Podemos might have scrapped the monarchy. Then no one could argue about which stands are being visited or not.
Friday, December 19, 2014
The Sharing Lobby
The regulation or non-regulation of holiday lets has reached the highest levels of Spanish governmental administration. The national competition commission is addressing the issue, taking account of the explosion of the P2P phenomenon, i.e. web portals which place consumers in direct contact with providers, be they apartments for rent or other types of service. As the issue climbs towards the top of the regulatory heap, companies engaged in P2P in Spain have formed an association to lobby government. It includes the most celebrated of the P2P websites, Airbnb, plus other accommodation websites and, for example, car sharing sites. It does not include Uber, however. This taxi and transport network has been condemned in Spain for providing unfair competition. A judge has ordered Uber to cease all activities in Spain. The French are to ban Uber from the start of next year.
But if Uber is a sort of black sheep of the P2P community, other web operators are craving legitimacy and have so formed their association - "Sharing España". Much of this sharing, holiday accommodation and so on, is considered by opponents to represent an underground economy, which this week was said to equate to 22% of the Spanish tourism sector. How such a figure is arrived at is unclear, but the secretary-general of the Spanish Confederation of Hotels and Tourist Accommodation, Ramón Estalella, asserted that 22% it was. The hoteliers want tough action on any form of what they see as unfair or illegal competition, but arriving at regulations is far from straightforward. As the director-general for tourism in the region of La Rioja has quite rightly noted, attaining uniform regulation in all regions of Spain would be "unworkable". She has thus reinforced the fact that the devolution of responsibilities for holiday let regulation to the regions by national government is itself all but unworkable; the consequence of this is that there are seventeen separate regulatory frameworks.
The holiday lets sector is now trying to fight back against the hoteliers and their claims. The association for apartments for tourist use (APTUR) in the Balearics has argued that holiday lets generate more employment than the hoteliers do, both directly, e.g. through cleaning services, and indirectly - car hire, restaurants, shops, etc. This lobby in the Balearics has, until recently, been fairly quiet, unlike in the Canaries, and the association for holiday rentals there held its first forum on Monday at which a video was unveiled. It is called "Holiday rental: the tourist decides" and features personal accounts by tourists as to why they opt for non-hotel accommodation. In addition, Homeaway, an online holiday rental marketplace similar to Airbnb, has teamed up with the university in Salamanca to create the first "barometer" of holiday lets activity in Spain and specifically in the Canaries, where the economic impact of the sector is said to have been worth 817 million euros over the past three years. The Canaries are, unlike the Balearics, edging towards a permissive form of regulation akin perhaps to that of Catalonia. And that region, the only part of Spain which has a tourist tax, anticipates generating 10% of revenue from the tax in 2015 from accommodation which has been regularised and which may legitimately form part of P2P sites' offers. Catalonia is looking forward to raising 44 million euros from tax next year, meaning that holiday lets will account for approximately four million. This is revenue which is used for tourism promotion purposes.
But if Uber is a sort of black sheep of the P2P community, other web operators are craving legitimacy and have so formed their association - "Sharing España". Much of this sharing, holiday accommodation and so on, is considered by opponents to represent an underground economy, which this week was said to equate to 22% of the Spanish tourism sector. How such a figure is arrived at is unclear, but the secretary-general of the Spanish Confederation of Hotels and Tourist Accommodation, Ramón Estalella, asserted that 22% it was. The hoteliers want tough action on any form of what they see as unfair or illegal competition, but arriving at regulations is far from straightforward. As the director-general for tourism in the region of La Rioja has quite rightly noted, attaining uniform regulation in all regions of Spain would be "unworkable". She has thus reinforced the fact that the devolution of responsibilities for holiday let regulation to the regions by national government is itself all but unworkable; the consequence of this is that there are seventeen separate regulatory frameworks.
The holiday lets sector is now trying to fight back against the hoteliers and their claims. The association for apartments for tourist use (APTUR) in the Balearics has argued that holiday lets generate more employment than the hoteliers do, both directly, e.g. through cleaning services, and indirectly - car hire, restaurants, shops, etc. This lobby in the Balearics has, until recently, been fairly quiet, unlike in the Canaries, and the association for holiday rentals there held its first forum on Monday at which a video was unveiled. It is called "Holiday rental: the tourist decides" and features personal accounts by tourists as to why they opt for non-hotel accommodation. In addition, Homeaway, an online holiday rental marketplace similar to Airbnb, has teamed up with the university in Salamanca to create the first "barometer" of holiday lets activity in Spain and specifically in the Canaries, where the economic impact of the sector is said to have been worth 817 million euros over the past three years. The Canaries are, unlike the Balearics, edging towards a permissive form of regulation akin perhaps to that of Catalonia. And that region, the only part of Spain which has a tourist tax, anticipates generating 10% of revenue from the tax in 2015 from accommodation which has been regularised and which may legitimately form part of P2P sites' offers. Catalonia is looking forward to raising 44 million euros from tax next year, meaning that holiday lets will account for approximately four million. This is revenue which is used for tourism promotion purposes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
