Might Mallorca Follow Barcelona's Airbnb Lead?

While we await with great interest what the Balearic government will be proposing with its holiday rentals' legislation, tourism minister Biel Barceló must be keeping a close eye on what is going on in Barcelona. That city, which some time ago opened what amounts to all-out war against accommodation websites, has caused a stir that captured headlines a few days ago - fines of 600,000 euros on both Airbnb and HomeAway. But there was more lurking behind those headlines. Airbnb are accused of having 3,812 advertisements for unlicensed accommodation; HomeAway of having 1,744. Mayor Ada Colau is blunt in her opinion: "It is unacceptable to have thousands of tourist apartments without licences and in an illegal form, without paying taxes and with causing harm to resident communities."

Both these websites, as far as Barcelona is concerned, have failed to collaborate with the town hall (a neat take on the so-called collaborative economy they profess to represent), but it isn't only the town hall which is taking aim at them. Activist groups are openly accusing Airbnb of pretending that profiles of hosts match those of people who rent out in order to make ends meet and pay the mortgage. However, the great majority of adverts are for large owners, the activists claim, and they reckon that Airbnb is also giving instructions on how hosts can avoid inspections.

Activists' accusations about Airbnb in Barcelona aren't new. These groups can now, though, feel bolstered by the latest fines that the town hall has dished out and the size of the fines. The Colau administration and the activists are basically singing from the same hymn sheet.

Airbnb will be appealing against the fine (as will be HomeAway). It appealed when it previously received a 30,000 euros fine, but given that it is now - as it were - a serial offender, Barcelona has slapped the maximum fine that Catalonia's tourism law permits. The Airbnb response, which almost acknowledges that there are no grounds for appeal, has sought a defence by saying that Barcelona is the only city to be fining it. While it then goes on to speak of the economic value derived from the "collaborative" accommodation economy in a city such as Barcelona, it doesn't - as has been observed - mention the absence of benefit, i.e. tax that isn't being paid.

Belinda Johnson, Airbnb's chief business affairs and legal officer, was reported the other day as saying that the company looks to work hand in hand with local authorities - by collaborating with them, in other words - but in Barcelona this isn't the case. The attitude of the town hall may not be to Airbnb's liking, it may not be like other cities, but the town hall has every right to adopt the measures it is. Colau is putting all sorts of tourist noses out of joint, but on this there is clearly a great deal of support for her action. And more websites are finding out that Barcelona is brooking no argument: TripAdvisor is one of nine to be levied with the basic 30,000 euros fine that Airbnb had appealed.

All this will not have gone unnoticed by the Balearic tourism ministry or, one fancies, by Palma town hall.

Bringing All-Inclusives To Account

Biel Barceló told parliament's tourism committee earlier this week that sixteen fines had been handed out to all-inclusive hotels. Quite what they were fined for was not made clear. Was it simply for having been offering all-inclusive when the hotels were not on the ministry's all-inclusive register? That wasn't the implication. Eighty all-inclusives had been "reviewed", he said, and they had been reviewed for that very reason - not having been on the register. Why not just fine them all? What is the purpose of a register? It's not meant to be voluntary. If a hotel hasn't registered, what has it got to hide?

Barceló was self-congratulatory in having been able to announce the sixteen fines. Sixteen. Hardly a princely sum. Where he was more deserving of congratulation was in being able to say that there hadn't been inspections in either 2014 or 2015. His government can be partly forgiven for 2015 as it didn't come to power until high summer was more or less upon it, but why no inspections the previous year? And what about inspections in years before that?

Another tourism minister called Barceló, Joana, was the final of the four incumbents of the post during the Antich government of 2007 to 2011. I can well recall her answering a question about all-inclusives by saying that inspections were made and that her government was being strong in this regard. Strange, therefore, how we never heard any more or from the subsequent government. All-inclusives, we were being led to believe, had a clean bill-of-health.

Let's be clear, there are different types of AI. It is a package that can be either total (it's the only option) or just one of the forms of board on offer. It is not by any means solely something from the economy end of the market. There are good - very good - hotels with AI, and the standard of the offer is also good. Service is good, the food is varied, there's no watered-down beer and there are no dodgy local brands of spirits. Should we assume that the sixteen fines were not directed at any of this class of hotel?

At the economy end, anyone with the slightest knowledge knows what the deal is. And part of that deal is the on-arrival upgrade (which may also exist with better hotels). Then there is the daily deal. Bringing in people who aren't guests. When this offer was explained to Pilar Carbonell, the director-general of tourism, at a meeting in Alcudia this time last year, it was clear that she was unaware of such a practice. And she's the director-general.

When there was some rumpus about self-service alcohol in Magalluf AIs last year, Barceló seemed surprised. He was then scandalised by the level of apparent drunkenness. And he's the tourism minister.

What tourism worlds do politicians inhabit, because it clearly isn't the one that is right at the coalface of Mallorca's economy-class tourism. Good luck to Barceló with his "regulations" of AI, but what are these going to be? Improving quality standards, we understand. Yes, and the 2012 tourism law already makes provision for this. It's never been enforced and nor has it been made clear what these standards are or should be. Are we going to find out next year? Perhaps so. In which case, will they include staff-guest ratios to ensure no queuing or only short queues? Will they stipulate what's on the menu, what drinks can be served, what type of treatment guests receive?

It's high time that some AIs were brought to account. They cannot be banned because the market will not allow this, but requirements can be made tough enough that the AI model ceases to be viable. If Barceló, as seems evident, wishes to impose tough standards on private accommodation to be rented for holiday purposes, then he should do likewise with the standards of AI. Yes, there are some poor-grade tourists who go to certain economy-class AI hotels, but when they are then treated as poor grade, you get what is too often the case: a vicious circle of unedifying tourism.

The Holiday Let Takeover In Mallorca

One headline this week has announced that "for the first time the majority of tourists in Mallorca are staying in non-hotel accommodation". The news that Son Sant Joan has been beating records in terms of passenger numbers since May and is likely to continue beating them during the summer has led to the conclusion that these passenger numbers are the result of tourists staying in non-hotel accommodation. The numbers don't tally with hotel occupancy numbers.

Well, whoever would have thought it? Why has Son Sant Joan been getting the passenger numbers it has until now? Not just because of hotels, that's for sure. If there is indeed now a majority of tourists staying in non-hotel accommodation, then this should come as absolutely no surprise. Mallorca cannot possibly have the number of tourists it gets and put them all in hotels because, despite the high number of hotel places (some 280,000), it is impossible for hotels to get anywhere near meeting tourist demand. It's been said time and time again that this is the case.

Nevertheless, in the quieter months of the summer season such as May, visitors could, in theory, all be accommodated in hotels. That they are not should not be a reason for government and hoteliers to attack the non-hotel accommodation sector (included in which is the so-called illegal offer). It should be a reason for asking why this is so. And there are several reasons. Choice, price, quality in some instances, and of course supply, both legal and illegal.

The passenger numbers will, as ever, be used by the Mallorcan hoteliers federation to ratchet up its attack on the non-hotel sector. They will be used by the government to justify more inspections of properties. It says there have been 3,000 such inspections since January. Aware of the need of the political support of the hoteliers, it will do whatever it can to try and demonstrate that it is acting tough.

But the government, and it knows it, cannot and will not eliminate illegal supply. As the level of non-hotel accommodation is as high as it apparently is, then the pragmatic route - one which the government steadfastly rejects - should be the one it adopts. Permissive regulation, therefore.

Catalonia, with its permissive regime, still faces a sizable problem with illegal accommodation. But having taken the decision to permit registration of the hundreds, thousands of properties that it has, it has also taken a very strict approach on accommodation which contravenes its regulation. So, it is permissive but also restrictive in an appropriate way. It has opened up the market to private property owners but it isn't about to tolerate the ingratitude of those owners who do not play by its perfectly reasonable rules. Unlike the Balearics, where tourism minister Martinez talks tough but where he presents little evidence as to what the consequence of the 3,000 inspections has been, in Catalonia it has processed under a half of the 284 actions it has so far taken against illegal properties. Till now it has realised a total of over half a million euros in fines.

MALLORCA TODAY - Hire-car firms receive huge fines for price-fixing

The Spanish National Competition Commission has imposed fines amounting to 35 million euros on seventeen hire-car companies and two associations. The fines relate to the operation of a cartel in respect of price-fixing and of conditions for various "extras", e.g. baby seats, and refer specifically to companies in Catalonia, Valencia, Andalusia and the Balearics. The largest fine - almost 15.5 million euros -has been imposed on Goldcar, while the second and third largest (respectively 5.5 million and 4.8 million) have been applied to Centauro and Record.

See more: Diario de Mallorca

The Strange Case Of The Muro Bullfight Protest

I have had cause to mention protests on many an occasion. Apart from the large protests, those connected with major strikes or the "indignados", there have been more local affairs. Recently, and just to take one example, there was a protest in Puerto Alcúdia against the new beach path.

The Spanish Constitution defends the right to protest, but Spanish law places certain limits on this right, these limits being not dissimilar to other countries. A plan to stage a protest has to be given in advance and permission sought. The minimum period is ten days, the maximum is thirty days. In the case of what is called "emergency", the period can be as short as 24 hours, and I can think of one example of when permission would have been granted very swiftly - the protest against terrorism that followed immediately after the Palmanova bomb and the death of the two Guardia Civil officers.

This permission has to be sought from the government's delegations, so in the case of Mallorca, this means Teresa Palmer and the government's delegation in the Balearics. There are reasons why a demonstration can be refused, and they are pretty obvious ones - incitement to cause crime and the carrying of weapons, the presence of those wearing paramilitary uniforms (so, by implication, extremist groups), and the potential for there to be a risk to members of the public or property.

This sounds perfectly reasonable, but then one comes to protests which, for whatever reason, don't go ahead and to protests which do go ahead but without having complied with requirements. In Muro town, there has been an example of both of these, and they both relate to the town's bullfight.

PACMA is a political party that defends animal rights. It was due, as it has in the past, to have staged a protest in Muro against the bullfight during the recent Sant Joan fiestas. It didn't. As I understand reports (well one, because there has been little obvious other reporting), PACMA cancelled the protest, as opposed to having had it cancelled. I am not entirely sure why it cancelled the demo. Its website and Facebook page seem to make no reference to the Muro bullfight this year, to a protest or to its cancellation. It is said, though, that the original request for the protest was put in as it should have been, i.e. in accordance with the time frame.

For whatever reason, PACMA pulled out, which is something of a mystery. In its stead, another organisation, ICA, decided to stage its own protest. However, it didn't receive permission. Indeed, the day after it did stage a protest, it received notification that the protest had been denied. Because the protest was not approved, the Guardia Civil deemed it to be illegal, took details of four protesters and they will be subject to fines (which will probably be 301 euros; and no, I don't know why it is 301 euros).

There is due to be a music benefit event to raise funds to pay these anticipated fines, assuming they are levied. An example of a 301 euros fine for an unauthorised protest in Mallorca was that handed to the then president of the local television and radio station IB3 in December last year (which is why I know the 301 euros sum).

A number of issues arise from all this. One is why PACMA apparently cancelled its protest. A second is why ICA went ahead with its, knowing it was not authorised. A third is why the protest was subsequently found to have been refused, and a fourth is why fines might be levied. As far as the latter is concerned, well this is the strict letter of the law, but one must ask: have there been other unauthorised protests of a different sort which have escaped sanction? Perhaps there have been, but then one comes to the second point. Did ICA go ahead with its protest expecting what has resulted?

In the past, there has been evidence of different animal-rights groups not singing from the same hymn sheet. This happened, for instance, with a protest in Fornalutx against the bull run. So, might it be that there is some sort of battle between these different groups?

While ICA's protest might, I say might, have been a publicity stunt, one that was undertaken with full knowledge of the consequences, there is still the matter of the government's delegate having refused permission. On what grounds? Yes there have been incidents in the past, amounting to little more than insults being hurled, but could an anti-bullfight protest be truly looked upon as posing a safety risk?

It's a strange one. On the face of it, and despite the lack of authorisation, sanctions against the protesters seem a bit harsh. But otherwise, there is much about the whole affair that doesn't quite make sense.


Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.

Sandcastle Wars

At the start of last month, a storm caused pine trees to be uprooted along Puerto Pollensa's pine walk and Pollensa town hall to ask the Costas Authority to pay rather greater attention to the pine walk than it had been. An aspect of local government in Mallorca that some may be unaware of is that land which is in the proximity of beaches and sea (and some land which isn't right next to the coast) is ultimately the responsibility of the Costas, i.e. the Balearics division of the Costas, itself a part of the national environment ministry and so therefore part of the national government. The town halls work in co-operation (usually) with the Costas in managing this land as well as the beaches themselves, but it is the Costas which have the final say.

Whether the Costas have taken any notice of the request for better maintenance of the pine walk I don't know, but they have addressed a matter in Puerto Pollensa that is obviously far more urgent. In a manner to which many have become accustomed in understanding how the Costas operate, they have marched in with their heavy boots and, metaphorically if not physically, trampled all over the elaborate sandcastles that are built on a tiny part of beach near to the quay which leads to the yacht club. They have fined the bloke who builds the sandcastles. Fined him just over two grand.

The justifications for the fine are that the chap has no permission to build the castles and that they occupy public space, thus denying other beach users the use of this space which is, in any event, the property of the state. The Costas also suggest that the sandcastle man has benefited financially. The fine is said to equate to what the Costas believe he has received. The sandcastle man says he has not received a single euro.

Whether he has received money from admiring tourists or whether he hasn't, the Costas action is heavy-handed to say the least. Though the sandcastles endure through the summer, they are not, by their very nature, permanent structures. They are in fact quite marvellous pieces of art and skill that have become something of an attraction in their own right. They do not deny beachgoers the use of beach because there is plenty more beach to go around. The fine is an utter nonsense.

In British newspaper cliché style, the Costas action is an example of "the world going mad", a cliché I would normally avoid like the plague, but in this instance it is probably appropriate. It is jobsworthyism of the highest order. Pollensa town hall, for its part, says there is nothing to stop the building of sandcastles and that, in any event, their building is not included among those activities that the Costas demand the town hall to rubber-stamp (like, for instance, contracts for managing the beaches, a subject about which we are only too familiar). All one can say is thank Heavens there isn't a procedure which requires permission to build sandcastles; the whole matter is totally ridiculous.

There is, however, a further aspect to all this. One that has not, as far as I am aware, become a factor in Puerto Pollensa sandcastle building, but which is elsewhere on the island and is one that would also be of interest to the Costas but which is of even greater interest to police forces.

Over the summers of 2010 and 2011, a sandcastle war developed on Playa de Palma. It was one that elements of the local Spanish media delighted in reporting, as they could wheel out the M-word (mafia) and state that the war was all the work of Romanians, and Romanian "mafias" specifically. (The local press appears to take special pleasure in being able to single out certain foreign nationalities.)

The war involved extortion, as sandcastle builders were clearly receiving a financial benefit and a pretty reasonable one at that. It also involved the destruction of rival sandcastles and the castles being the centre for other activities, for example the sale of drugs. The problem got so bad last year that Palma town hall instructed the beach operator to level castles when it was cleaning beaches each evening. The operator had to have police accompaniment. Even this didn't do the trick, as the castles would be re-built.

The story of Playa de Palma's sandcastle war serves as a warning. Not because of what the Costas might seek to extract as a fine (which is an absurdity) but because of how sandcastle building, an innocent activity one would think, can turn into something that is rather more sinister.


Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.

MALLORCA TODAY - Costas fine the Puerto Pollensa sandcastle builder

Well, is this absurd or is it the rightful application of the law? The chap who builds the large and complex sandcastles on the Albercutx beach in Puerto Pollensa is to be fined over 2,000 euros by the Costas authority, the reason being that the sandcastle infringes rules on the occupying of public space on a beach.

See more: Diario de Mallorca

MALLORCA TODAY - Alcúdia bullfight promoter fined

The promoter of the Alcúdia bullfight during the Sant Jaume fiestas has been fined 6,001 euros for allowing under-16s to attend the bullfight. A fine has also been issued for the same reason in respect of the Palma bullfight.

See more: Ultima Hora

MALLORCA TODAY - Calvià police have issued 600 fines for beach massage

The local police in Calvià have brought to an end their summer season security operation on the town's beaches during which 600 fines were issued to Chinese people offering massage on the beaches.

See more: Ultima Hora

MALLORCA TODAY - Fines for illegal beach sellers

In a co-ordinated effort by police forces in northern Mallorca, 37 people have been issued with fines for the sale of fruit and goods and for offering massage on beaches in Pollensa and the bay of Alcúdia.

Update: The total number of those dealt with under this co-ordinated police activity has risen to 65.

See more: Diario de Mallorca

MALLORCA TODAY - Pollensa PSM member fined over Bauzá protest

The former secretary of the PSM (Mallorcan socialists) in Pollensa, Miquel Amengual, is one of those who has been fined on the instruction of the Balearic Government's delegate for actions during the protest staged against President Bauzá in the town. He has received notification of a 3,000 euro fine but rejects claims that he acted violently and says that he gave his name to police (he is charged also with not identifying himself). Meanwhile, opposition parties in the town have been swift in supporting Amengual and condemning the fine.

MALLORCA TODAY - Pollensa terrace law and Bauzá protest fines reactions

The more serious issue, that of fines issued to those who protested against President Bauzá when he visited Pollensa, has attracted condemnation from various political parties in the town, the Alternativa having said that it shows that repression of dissent is all that is available to a government which is incapable of tackling economic crisis. More or less all the parties have condemned the violence that occurred. Meanwhile, the ongoing saga of the size of terraces in Pollensa's Plaça Major has led the PSM Mallorcan socialists to dub the square "Terrassa Major".

MALLORCA TODAY - Fines for Pollensa Bauzá protesters

The Balearic Government has issued fines ranging from 300 to 3000 euros to protesters against President Bauzá when he visited Pollensa last month.

See more: Ultima Hora

Publicity Seekers: Leafleting in Sa Pobla

You may have noticed that there are certain things that you have to do according to what date it is or what period of a month it is. One such thing is where you can park on some streets. During the first half of the month, it is one side, during the second half, the other. Why is this? If someone can offer a sensible explanation, I'd love to know. I guess I know the answer - street cleaning - but when does this happen?

There is to be something else that is to be determined by day and time of the month and even by the hours of days. This something else is to be introduced in Sa Pobla and it concerns the distribution of publicity material. The town hall is introducing a local by-law which stipulates that such material can only be distributed between the hours of eight in the morning and two in the afternoon on the first and third Tuesdays of each month. Seriously, I'm not making this up.

The publicity material concerned is, or at least I think it is, the type that gets deposited in letter-boxes, or not as the case may be. It could, therefore, be the I'm Pedro, I'll paint your house for 200 euros type of thing or the I'm Juan, I'll perform house reforms (sic) and then not charge you when the place collapses because I forgot to put an RSJ up.

What actually is the problem? According to Sa Pobla town hall, there have been many complaints because of the lack of control regarding the distribution of such material. It is perhaps understandable. Wander past an apartment-block entrance and the letter-boxes will be stuffed with literature and the entrance itself is likely to be littered with it. Most of it isn't of the type by which local builders, gardeners, painters or whatever are trying to get some work; most of it is for shops, electrical ones or supermarkets in particular.

But as I neither live in Sa Pobla nor in an apartment block, I can't personally say I have any complaint about the distribution of publicity material. Indeed, so little is there, that what there is does tend to grab my attention. And it seems harsh if local people trying to drum up business (of the Pedro and Juan type) should be penalised because of severe limitations as to when they can distribute publicity, as will be the case in Sa Pobla. And of course penalties there will be. Up to six grand for the worst offenders.

Sa Pobla isn't confining its clampdown on publicity to what gets delivered door to door. It is also going to prohibit that which uses the likes of lamp posts and also prohibit display units on the "public way". Is there really an overabundance of all this in Sa Pobla? What harm is there if a display stand is stuck on the edge of a pavement? You just ignore what's in it or not. Don't you? Of course, there is a further reason why the town hall would object to this type of display. Public way means belonging to the town hall, which in turn means you should pay the town hall for the privilege of using its space; it was this argument that Alcúdia town hall once used to stop people parking cars with damn great for-sale signs in the windows.

Sa Pobla town hall is justifying its move in part on environmental grounds and on account of the cost of collecting the rubbish that all the bits of publicity create. It may have a point, but one reason why there is so much rubbish from promotional literature is because so many houses don't have letterboxes. Perhaps the town hall might consider insisting that they do.

While I am not in the slightest bit concerned about publicity distribution, there is one example that I have long wondered about. It's probably not an issue in Sa Pobla, but have you ever seen those leaflets for excursions that are often just left on low walls under stones. Some Scandinavian thing. How does this work exactly? As in, how is it possible to just place the leaflets all over the place and then let them fly all over the place when the stone gets dislodged and the wind gets up? Like the monthly parking restrictions, if anyone can explain to me how this is permitted, I would dearly like to know.

To come back to Sa Pobla, my guess is that the town hall is sensing the opportunity of an earner. Its burka ban having been a failure in that it hasn't been able to issue a single fine, it's been on the lookout for other sources of income. First it was the introduction of the plainclothes police doggy-doo patrols and now the publicity seekers. And the town hall will need some seekers. Won't it? I mean, how does anyone know if a leaflet gets placed in a letterbox at one minute past two on the first or third Tuesday of each month?

More than this, how many businesses will be aware that they should only be delivering between eight and two on these days each month. Sa Pobla town hall will hope that it won't be many. A six grand fine, anyone?


Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.

Balcony Diving: Blame Tom Daley

I'm taking bets. When will this year's first balcony dive be registered? And if you fancy an accumulator, when will this year's first balcony-dive death occur? There's no point in running a book on whether there will be a balcony dive or whether there will be a balcony-dive-related fatality, as the odds are odds-on.

If you need help, 8 April was the date of last year's first registered balcony fall. But doubts were cast as to whether it qualified as a dive, as it was probably an accident, while no pool - usually an important factor in the balcony dive (indeed, it is essential) - was involved. Nevertheless, this incident in Alcúdia got the balcony-diving pre-season underway and promised a good year, which it proved to be. The first official dive with consequences, i.e. either injuries or worse, was on 24 April. So, let's see if this can be beaten this year, shall we, and see which resort can claim the first. It was Palmanova last year.

The publicity afforded to balcony diving has been a valiant attempt to make Mallorca the undisputed world leader for the sport. But unfortunately, Mallorca has some serious competition. Australia for example. It has even had something of a celebrity dive, if the world of BMX riding can be said to produce celebrities. Champion rider Dane Searls went headlong into concrete last November (without the aid of his helmet it would appear). Great Dane is sadly no more.

The Balearic Government, presumably aware that Mallorca can't really compete with a place the size of Australia, is instead meant to be considering measures to stop balcony diving. It may well, therefore, be looking with interest at a local law to be introduced in Lloret de Mar. This resort, lauded as being the most drunken in Spain, is seeking to shed a balcony-diving reputation by fining hotels.

This is rather harsh. Is it really a hotel's fault if someone decides to clamber onto a balcony railing and aim for the pool? Short of totally enclosing a balcony or making railings so high and running barbed wire along them, there isn't a great deal that hotels can actually do to prevent a determined diver.

Fines are used to try and deter the practice elsewhere. In Florida, it isn't the hotel that gets the ticket but the diver him or herself. Might there be similar fines imposed in Mallorca? Well, there could be, but the chance of them being paid is another matter. The Lloret hotels could be in for as much 1500 euros per dive. Me laddo on tour tends not to stretch to such a budget.

If a fine were not paid, or even instead of a fine, what about banging up a diving miscreant? Possibly, but the last thing the local authorities need is a whole bunch of diving tourists clogging up cells when they've got better things to do with the space, such as filling them with looky-looky men or ladies of the night. Moreover, in the absence of a new law, what offence would have been committed?

Other ways of tackling the diving phenomenon might include kicking the offender out of the hotel, always assuming he or she is in a fit state to leave it and not either in a body bag or in ICU in Son Espases, adding to the cost of a local health service with so little money that motorists will soon find themselves having to pay a tax to help fund it.

Another might be to blacklist the offender, so if he tries coming back to Mallorca, he would be turned away at passport control. This would still require an offence having been committed though. There is no actual law to stop someone diving from a balcony.

A problem is that, even if the law is used, it wouldn't necessarily prevent diving. In Lloret, unless there is an accident or a death, how would police get to know? The hotel isn't going to tell them, unless they plan on handing over 1500 euros while making the statement. Will there be a diving dobbing-in hotline for other guests to use to contact the police? One positive for any police investigation is that dives tend to be on film. And on YouTube. Evidence isn't that difficult to find.

The regional government will be hoping that incidents don't become, as spokesperson Rafael Bosch remarked last August, more "unfortunate". But there is one added factor this year. Tom Daley. Does he realise how much damage he's potentially causing by popularising diving? God forbid he does well at the Olympics, because this August will indeed be more "unfortunate".


Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.

MALLORCA TODAY - Muro beach fines

New regulations pertaining to Playa de Muro make clear the sort of fines that could be levied for a range of unacceptable behaviours. These includes fines of up to 1500 euros for urinating on the beach or in the sea while others cover such matters as domestic animals and musical instruments or players.

No Hope: Private holiday lets

Justin in Paris has made 90,000 dollars. Daren in London has raked in 100 grand. In Mallorca, you can expect to coin in 2003 euros per month.

An advert on a Facebook page demanded a damn good clicking. Make money in Spain, it said. Rent out your place to travelers (all American travellers, therefore, as they are lacking an "l") and make 75 euros+ per night. Interesting, I thought. Not because I want to rent out to travelers or even travellers, but because it is quite possible that anyone wishing to - in Mallorca - shouldn't.

On the site, there was Daren, relaxing, sound in the knowledge of the 100 grand he had made. Novi from San Francisco was smiling, thanks to her 30,000 dollars. Justin looked suitably satisfied with his ninety thousand.

The 2003 euros was the calculation for a month to rent out an apartment in Palma or Pollensa. I went and had a look. Was anything actually available in Mallorca? Yes. Not much, but there were some places. By the night or longer. Some with photos, some without. Not having a photo doesn't really "sell" a place, but there might be good reason for there not being a photo.

It's kicking off again. The periodic wielding of the holiday-rental stick. The tourism ministry and friends at the tax authorities are spending their days in earnest perusal of websites, mainly British ones, seeking to identify properties for holiday rent. An announcement was made last year that web pages in particular would come under scrutiny, and a similar announcement has been made this year as well.

John Lance, in his letter to "The Bulletin" (Saturday, 2 July) made the point well enough, as he has in the past, about the lunatic situation in respect of holiday lets in Mallorca. The "grey area" he referred to isn't really all that grey. Want to now license your property for holiday rental? You can't.

There are plenty of properties which are licensed but they date back to and before the registration of, when was it, three, four years ago. Even then, however, there was massive confusion, and the dice were heavily loaded against apartment owners. The greyness of the situation is especially so with apartments, but it isn't so grey if you accept the version which states that you cannot rent out private apartments as holiday lets at all.

The tourism ministry has wielded its stick. In February, there were reports relating to action taken against owners of apartments in Santa Ponsa, to what was being offered, and to the fact that the apartments were being advertised via a UK website. And then there were the fines. Up to 30,050 euros.

We know the arguments in favour of more relaxed rules on holiday rentals: not everyone wants to stay in a hotel; tourists in private apartments and villas tend to spend more; a mix of accommodation types reflects the diversity of the tourism market. We know the hoteliers' arguments against: they have the hoops they have to go through; they invest heavily; they are a key source of employment. Like the endless all-inclusive debate, none of the arguments are new.

The hoteliers can, however, be somewhat disingenuous. When the Santa Ponsa reports were coming in, the head of the local hoteliers' association said that the competition from private apartments was unfair. Yes, but turn it around. Owners could argue the case of restriction of trade and of unfair competition that denies them the chance to properly register and market their properties.

As John Lance remarked, this could all end up with Europe getting involved. But for property owners, the problem is the lack of any co-ordinated voice. The hoteliers know this, and so, as importantly, does the Balearic Government.

It might be remembered that the hoteliers, well before the elections, expressed concern as to the appointment of Carlos Delgado as tourism minister. Now they express contentment, and Delgado, who one might hope might be more willing to throw off the shackles of trade restriction, has announced his intention to collaborate with the hotel sector in making the tourism law more flexible. And one aspect of this is the residential use of tourist establishments. Owned by the hoteliers, I think we can assume this to mean.

Just as is the case with its dealings with the major tour operators, a government in the Balearics, be it PP or PSOE, cannot afford to alienate the hotel sector. If there was hope that the private rental market might be treated more favourably by the new government, then I'm afraid it was probably a forlorn hope. And it will remain one.


Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.

MALLORCA TODAY - Fines for speeding in Spain

With the introduction from tomorrow (7 March) of the new motorway speed limit, penalties for speeding have been adjusted. For driving between 111 and 140 kph, there will be a fine of 100 euros. Between 141 and 160 kph, the fine rises to 300 euros plus, if the speed is more than 151 kph, a loss of two points on the driving licence. The fines increase to 600 euros for going over 191 kph. But such excessive speeds can also attract potentially more serious sanctions.

I'll Be Watching You

Watch out! I'm watching you. I'm watching you in a bar. I'll be coming but you won't know me. I'll be sitting there, watching. I am the eyes of the government, the tax office, the social security, employment. I'll be in your bar.

The tax office, along with the other departments, is stepping up its efforts. "An aggressive plan" against the black economy, the absence of papers or the papers not quite right. More inspections. Checking on those claiming dole, but receiving a wage. Checking on everything, including the importing of goods from Asia and elsewhere.

When the money's tight, the government does what it can to ensure its revenue stream. Quite reasonably so. But when money's tight, the propensity for rule-bending increases. It is the vicious circle of crisis.

The checks are not out of the ordinary. They happen all the time. Just that they're going to be increased. That "aggressive plan". Watching and waiting.

The watching happens in different ways. There's the watching on the internet. For some time, websites with accommodation to rent have been paid particular attention to, especially websites of British origin. The tourism ministry has netted some apartments in Calvia. The fines can be as high as 30,000 euros. The ministry's inspectors paid a visit to one apartment, all perfectly well turned out, cleaned, with the use of pool and garden. 4,500 euros to rent. Except it wasn't quite legal. Others offer even more, such as transfer to and from the airport. Who's doing the transferring?

This watching of websites and of accommodation intensified a couple of years ago. The checking of apartments and villas for quality, safety and tax was not new, just that the level of effort increased and the technology was made greater use of. You wondered whether it would have much effect. It would appear that it has. There is the vicious circle of renting, though. The hoops and obstacles of trying to be legit, only to come up against the impossible barriers. Not everyone wants to do it improperly. But not everyone can do it properly. So the watching continues and becomes more intense.

There's the watching on the roads. The director-general of Tráfico was in Palma not so long ago. More controls are planned. More promotion of the risks of speed and of being distracted, but more potential for revenue, you would have to imagine. Again, not unreasonably though. And then there is also the automated watching. The new radars. They're not watching. Not yet. More investment is needed to make them work.

They need to step up the controls, not just to stop speed, drink-driving and "distractions" (playing with mobiles, sat-navs etc.) but also to compensate for the loss of revenue during what was something of a work-to-rule by traffic police last summer. The number of fines fell by 15% along with a reduction in the number of vehicles that were stopped, albeit, however, that during the first half of last year as a whole the number of drivers caught for drink-driving went up by a staggering 114%.

Watching employees, watching the number of chairs on terraces, watching the needle on a music limiter, watching the PRs, watching the space occupied by sunbeds on a beach. Now watching the smokers. Maybe there are even detectives watching the detectives.

All this watching has its value. Calvia, when setting its budget for this year, placed an amount on what it anticipates coining in through fines. Maybe local authorities all do this, wherever they are. Maybe it is a part of "good" public financial management. I confess it had never occurred to me that local government or any other government income might actually take into account what comes in by way of fines.

Revenue from fines, you might think, would simply be the jam on the other revenue. The bonus. It would seem not. But by formalising the outcomes of all the watching, giving it a number in the accounts, it is as though it institutionalises wrong-doing. The expectation is to break the law. Human nature being what it is, then maybe this is a pragmatic approach. Yet it is a system which appears set up for social failure as it undermines the psychological contract of reciprocity between authority and citizen, the latter afforded the role of the unscrupulous, whoever the citizen might be.

And all the while, the citizen does his or her own watching. That of the politicians and others in positions of authority or in positions within businesses with close connections to these authority figures doing their own fiddling.

The whole world's watching. Each other. In Mallorca, at any rate.


Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.

Breathe More Easily? Traffic police

Here, especially if you have just polished off a decent bottle of red and are about to uncork a second and then intend to drive home, is something that might make you think twice about switching on the ignition. You know all those controls. You know the ones. The chaps in green, arms folded and staring menacingly from under the shade of a tree at a roundabout. They do actually do something. Not all just light up a fag and chat to their mates. Oh no.

During the first six months of this year, Trafico collared, get this, over one hundred per cent more drivers in Mallorca for drink-driving offences compared with 2009. This offence inflation does rather concur with what I was told some while ago that Trafico was one arm of the government being deployed as a revenue-generator. "Excuse me, sir, would you mind blowing into this, and do you have six hundred readies available in the event that ... ?"

I have never quite got it with all the controls. If you want better driving, then might the police not be better served, as in the UK, hanging around in bushes with a speed trap or cruising along the roads about to blue-light a speeding Seat? The thing is that they do this as well. And there are, by the way, some unremarkable vehicles which look as though they have been picked up for a song from a car auction spluttering along the main roads, their only distinguishing features being a couple of antennae stuck on the boot; antennae not designed to aid better reception for RNE radio or to act as mobile WiFi. They are speed cops.

The numbers of traffic plod have been increased, and so - one has the impression - have been the controls. Fines, for a government reduced to using a torch to hunt down the back of sofas for any lurking billions with which to bolster a bankrupt economy, are relatively easily-generated national or island dosh. Part of the thinking one might imagine, and they could of course be right, is that most drivers will have fiddled their tax returns, so they might as well cop it in some other way, via the traffic cops.

However, not everything is rosy or light green in the world of the traffic police. They're none too impressed with current pay. All those fines, and the government's trousering the moolah for itself. As a consequence, while the first six months might have produced some record bounty, the second half of the year might find the piggy bank less than flush. Plod has been more inclined to do nothing or just tick off a Jaco-m'chico tanked up and oozing a smell of Saint Mick combined with the gallon of Hugo Boss in the neck area. Trafico is its own bit of the Guardia, and this is another slight bone of contention. Traffic plod don't earn as much as others. They're not allowed to go on strike, so they're being less assiduous in pursuing lagered-up drivers. But don't, for God's sake, let this be taken as a hint that you should empty the local bar and head off for a good burn-up down the local carretera. Oh no. I, for one, actually applaud what they do. Oh sanctimonious me. Drink and drive? Nope.

In case you're wondering, the legal limit is 0.25 milligrams. Fines for exceeding the limit are 600 euros plus four points on the licence, but sanctions can of course be greater, depending on the levels and the offence.


Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.