The Absence Of Tourism Strategy

“I think it’s better to have those drinking ghettoes, Playa de Palma and Magalluf, where people go, rather than these intellectual types of tourists who tramp over everything in their search for the untouched bit, the original Mallorcan, and the residential tourists, who buy up property, buy a car, usually two, swimming pools, and want gardens with plants and grass like at home but that need water.”

Who said this? It might surprise you to learn that it was a spokesperson for the environmentalists GOB. These are the words of Gerard Hau, quoted from an article in The Guardian in May last year. They are words which encapsulate themes of recent days and weeks and point to different extremes of Mallorca's tourism. At one end of the spectrum is the low-grade drunken tourism and its vandalistic in-resort tendencies. At the other is the high-spending luxury class and its own vandalism of the countryside. Within the context of the furore over the holiday rentals' legislation, residential tourism in the countryside has been largely ignored, and by residential tourism one means second homes that are both for rent and just for use by owners.

Among their objections to the legislation, Podemos were determined to put an end to a savaging of the countryside in the pursuit of the up-market rental. Ideologically, one would expect them to, but otherwise they are on the same page as Gerard Hau. He, however, was going at the issue from a different perspective. At the time he was quoted, Mallorca was in the grip of drought (or at least near-drought). His concern was resources: water, in this instance.

The Hau thesis, coloured by an unnecessarily all-embracing pejorative attitude towards tourists of the mass who go to the principal resorts (only some of these tourists are drunks; the vast majority are not), echoes the philosophy enshrined in the so-called Benidorm Effect. Establish areas of high-density tourism and they are very much more efficient in terms of resource use. Spread tourism with little control into low-density or virtually uninhabited areas, and the resource use is highly inefficient.

For Podemos, there is an obsession with eliminating provisions in law that the Partido Popular introduced in 2012. The Delgado Law (the 2012 tourism act) facilitated touristic development on rustic land: the territory which doesn't have a satisfactory translation in English. Rural is inadequate. But whether from a politically ideological perspective or from economic or environmental perspectives, the arguments about countryside tourism, about drunken tourism, about holiday rentals in general all arrive at the same point. What does Mallorca want from its tourism? And what overall strategy is there for this?

The simple answer to the first question is the vague notion of quality. The word is so loose and woolly as to be meaningless. And who, let's face it, ever advocates tourism without quality?

There are degrees and grades of quality. It has long been known that in Mallorca there is a type of tourism I have described in the past as social-services tourism. This isn't anything to do with the winter, sometimes subsidised tourism for senior citizens. It has to do with the tourism that is provided with a social service by the island. It commonly pitches up in an all-inclusive, extracts the social service benefits on offer, and then disappears, quite probably clutching a false claim form. The net result for Mallorca is a loss.

The evidence of this type of tourism has existed in rigorous academic research for almost thirty years. The drunken tourism of today's headlines is the inheritor of the past. All that time - thirty years at least - and it still has the capacity to shock politicians (and others) out of their complacency.

The degrees of quality are such that the principal tourism market sector - the family - can be stigmatised for being insufficiently wealthy. This is not a social-services or drunken category, it is a normal, regular segment of the market which might choose an all-inclusive on economic grounds. If the offer is there, then why on Earth shouldn't it? There may not be enormous splashing of cash, but there are none of the behavioural negatives that are dogging Gerard Hau's "drinking ghettoes".

More than ever, the current arguments reinforce the fact that there is so little coherence in terms of a strategic approach. The rentals' legislation highlights this. There should of course be some greater liberalisation. Not a free-for-all but regulation that recognises market dynamics and, yes, can generally permit a tourism of "quality".

But political flip-flopping, competing ideologies and competing favouritism (be it to hoteliers, the environment, whatever) erect constant barriers while at the same time shifting the sands of regulation without adequate regard for joined-up strategy. The arguments, one fears, will be the same thirty years from now.

The Incoherence Of Rentals' Control

It can appear somewhat contrary that leading hoteliers and left-wing politicians can share the same platform and, in principle, agree with each other. Such has been the result of the holiday rentals' dynamic. Two warring factions have joined forces, albeit they have become allies for different motives. The hoteliers have always had an issue with rentals because of perceived unfair competition and a lowering of standards (discuss), while the left have started to agonise over saturation and resident populations being deprived of places to live.

Exceltur, the alliance for touristic excellence, is an exclusive club. Among its members are leading hoteliers, such as Meliá. It carries a certain amount of clout. Names like Escarrer have the ears of the nation's politicians. And it was the national government which received a unified message from hoteliers and mayors when they gathered in Madrid for their forum this week. The state is the only body which can control the situation: this situation being the proliferation of rentals and the activities of Airbnb and its kind.

José Hila, Palma's mayor who is president of the federation of municipalities and provinces, underlined this message by saying that it is the state which can stand firm against these websites. The state, however, and Matilde Asián, the tourism secretary-of-state pointed this out, cannot establish a single set of regulations. The responsibilities lie with the regional governments and, up to a point, with town halls as well.

Madrid, at least while the Partido Popular remains in control of the government, seems disinclined to involve itself with market regulation. Devolved responsibilities to the regions there are, but these responsibilities produce legislation which, in the absence of umbrella state legislation, bring the regions into conflict with an arm of the national government, the competition commission. Its ultra market liberalism has been rearing its head again this week. The commission's defence of a property owner's rights has meant clashes with the governments in the Canaries and Galicia. When the Balearic government finally publishes its legislation, you can be sure that the commission will be examining the small print in great detail.

The consequence of the state's lack of involvement is legal uncertainty, something which all parties seek. A further consequence is that regional authorities can be undermined if the commission (and the courts) challenge their legislation. The Madrid government, meanwhile, will know full well that anything it might introduce would be booted upstairs to Brussels. The European Commission is lumbering towards some form of directive, though how this can possibly take into account the diversity of needs down to very local levels is impossible to understand.

Meanwhile, though, the Balearic Tax Agency and tourism ministry have been enforcing what legal powers they possess. A campaign of inspections that was carried out prior to Easter has netted eight real-estate companies in Mallorca. The fines for promoting illegal rentals will amount to some 200,000 euros. These companies are based in Palma, Arta, Capdepera, Colonia Sant Jordi and Pollensa.

Back at the Exceltur gathering, at which not all the mayors, it might be noted, were from left-wing parties, there was some consensus that there is scope for growth from rentals. Palma and Barcelona, not represented at the meeting, seem exceptions to the potential for growth rule, but for cities such as Malaga, Valencia and San Sebastian, the issues are those of diversification of the accommodation offer and of its control. It is the latter which is the key issue, but so also is enduring legal certainty. The PP in the Balearics have this week made it clear that when it returns to government - it seems confident that it will in 2019 - it will repeal the holiday rentals' legislation that Biel Barceló will shortly introduce. 

As with the incoherence caused by the state's lack of involvement, so there is incoherence at regional level. Politics change and so also do policies.

Inundating The Tourism Ministry

Extraordinary story about the tourism ministry having been inundated by owners attempting to "regularise", i.e. register, their holiday rentals' properties (mostly apartments, it would seem). This followed the cabinet's approval of the rentals' legislation. This was either a case of people thinking that the legislation had come into effect or of wanting to pre-empt it becoming law and so trying to ensure registration. Whichever of these it was, they were wrong.

The legislation has yet to be passed by parliament, so it hasn't come into force, and indeed the suggestion is that it won't in fact be applied (not fully anyway) until next summer. This is logical because the town halls and the Council of Mallorca won't have finalised their decisions on the zoning of rentals until - at the latest - around February (assuming parliament passes the bill by some time in June). So, any registration (or indeed de-registration) will have to wait until the zoning process is completed. Only then will owners know if their properties may qualify. And may will be a big word, given the various stipulations, which will be - to say the least - fairly restrictive.

Those owners who thought they might be able to pre-empt the legislation were barking up the wrong tree. Which notices posted at the ministry made clear. Any apartment for commercialised holiday rental (in other words openly marketed as such) is currently prohibited, and has been not just since the 2012 tourism law but in fact since the older law of 1999.

The confusion and/or ignorance is staggering, certainly where the law as it currently stands is concerned. It's not as if this is a subject which isn't given a thorough airing and explanation. Nevertheless, there are obviously owners who are blissfully unaware of the legal situation or who are fully well aware and flout the law anyway.

The potential for confusion once the law is passed is just as great. The zones, the requirements, the standards will add to the confusion. Then there is the business with the government saying that any rental of less than a month will be considered to be a holiday rental, regardless of whether an owner is using the try-on of insisting that it is covered by the tenancy act. How the government will go about this in a practical way remains to be seen, but if the ministry and tax agency have details (which are very easily obtainable), then the least which might happen is that owners can expect a bill for the tourist tax.

There is then the additional factor of inspection if a property becomes eligible for registration (or may currently be eligible in the case of, say, a villa). The inspectors take months in getting round to checking that properties meet requirements. The fact is that there are so few of them - fifteen - that such delays are inevitable. Plus, the inspectors are more concerned (and will be very much more concerned over the summer) with identifying illegal rentals.

What all those people were doing, attempting to register, is beyond me.

Political Crisis And Holiday Rentals

There is a sense of history repeating itself. While the parties of the Balearic government agonise over what to do with the transparency and culture ministry in the wake of Ruth Mateu's resignation, there is also the tourism ministry. It was this ministry which set the Més contracts affair rolling. It could even yet spin totally out of control as more emerges.

It was tourism which was at the eye of the storm that engulfed the previous "pact" government, i.e. a PSOE-led one. This time a different party - Més - is involved, and while it may prove to be that nothing "irregular" occurred, the whiff of scandal has returned to the ministry.

The contracts affair couldn't have come at a worse time. The holiday rentals legislation was due to have been presented. It hasn't been because Biel Barceló and Francina Armengol are fighting fires, ones of Barceló's making, at least where one of the contracts (the largest) is concerned. The political vultures are therefore circling, and they don't come more predatory than Podemos.

The government, if it isn't very careful, is heading for the rocks. The political ramifications of the contracts affair could lead to a new election. While this seems remote, the inherent weakness of the pact is such that the opportunists which make it up can feel the time is right to strike. Podemos have been talking about directions being taken at the tourism ministry. They are not content with how the rentals legislation is going. Even before the contracts affair broke out they had the means to scupper the government if they chose to do so. Keeping the government afloat may now require Armengol bowing ever lower in the face of Podemos demands, with the rentals legislation at the top of the list. It is a key piece of legislation, and the political fallout could shape it in a fashion that hadn't been anticipated.

The legislation, moreover, is highlighting the differences which exist within Més. Antoni Noguera in Palma has revised his opinion and proposed an "Amsterdam" solution of a very limited number of months for approved apartment rentals, but his previous all-out ban was contrary to Barceló's thinking. The support he subsequently (more or less) lent to Noguera's proposal smacked more of ranks being closed than a thought-out policy decision. That proposal was very much more in line with Podemos in Palma. One can't help but feel that when Noguera and José Hila swap roles in June and Noguera becomes mayor, the "pact" in Palma will be locked in an endless battle. This assumes that Noguera survives. There could also yet be more about his part in the contracts affair.

Meanwhile, over at the Council of Mallorca things are calm, testimony in no small part to the presidency of Miquel Ensenyat. The Council is not embroiled in the crisis. It is said that this owes something to Ensenyat not being as tied to the Més mechanism as others. He is more independent therefore and not inclined to simply follow orders, if indeed there were any. The Council awarded no contracts to Jaume Garau.

Aptur, the holiday rentals association, has seized the opportunist moment as well. It has attacked what it considers to be the "belligerent" attitude of the tourism ministry and of Palma town hall (Noguera at any rate), while praising the willingness for dialogue shown by Ensenyat and others at the Council. Aptur needs all the political allies it can lay its hands on. Saying nice things about the Council may be its way of attempting to drive something of a wedge in the Més ranks and of hoping for a more favourable deal on rentals (the Council is responsible for setting the rentals' zoning agenda outside Palma). But in the same way that Ensenyat appears not to wholly bend to his party, he is unlikely to bend in a direction just because someone says nice things about him. He's far too savvy to fall for that one.

Processing of this all-important legislation now appears to be inextricably linked to a political crisis. For it go forward may require some (more) horse-trading, and its movement forward may not, as a consequence, be done with quite the same rapidity that the government had wished. It's almost Easter, the season (the real one) is looming. Rather like the tourist tax last year, new legislation appears destined to come into effect (if it does) slap bang in the middle of the season. This is no way to be supervising Mallorca's main industry.

The Frenzy Of Rentals' Colonialism

Another day, another survey. The Gadeso Foundation, which does a first-rate job in regularly surveying opinion on all sorts of topic, has been asking about holiday rentals. The fact that there is a survey highlights the importance of the subject to Mallorca and the Balearics. It has been remarked that it is one which attracts excessive attention, not least from the media, but the attention is necessary; this is a subject of fundamental importance.

Tourism, ever since the start of the sixties' boom, has raised a question about the way that people live in Mallorca. It is a question now seemingly being asked like never before, and there is a supplementary and just as important question - where do people live?

There are, it seems to me, some shockingly self-interested, patronising and ill-considered views regarding holiday rentals. They are held by those who can see no harm from unfettered development and availability. Holiday rentals are a part of the future, they give the hoteliers a run for their money, they generate greater revenues for certain business sectors. Agreed, albeit that they are the past as well as the future; holiday rentals in one form or another have always existed in the tourism environment.

But what is being experienced is a new form of touristic colonialism. If the development of resorts was principally a hotelier (and tour operator and bank) colonialism, both home-bred and foreign, then the current frenzy for rentals is a different wave, with the colonialists still a mixture of local and foreign. The owner of one or two properties is not really the issue; it is the speculative business and property acquirer which is. Nevertheless, and regardless of who the owner is, the frenzy is such that a wholesale distortion of the property market is being facilitated, leading to that supplementary question.

Colonialism implies some form of self-appointed interest, giving rise to a patronising view, similar to that which existed back in the sixties, that Mallorca should just be grateful for all these properties being available to tourists. That's one view. There is another which has it that workers can commute. So what if they have to, for example, live in Inca and travel to Alcudia each day? So what? Why the hell should they have to? The fact that people have to commute fair distances in places other than Mallorca is no argument. We're talking here not there. Moreover, we are also talking workers who aren't paid handsomely and who need to fork out more of their meagre salaries in order to travel on top of rents that are creeping up away from the resorts, a further consequence of the frenzy.

There was a time, and not so long ago, when I was in favour of pretty liberal regulations and when I sided with the view that the hoteliers shouldn't have things all their own way. This favouring still exists because it is only fair that an owner should at least have the option of how he or she chooses to rent out and also because there can be little question as to a benefit for the complementary sector, much though the likes of Exceltur (members of which include leading Mallorcan hoteliers) come up with reports suggesting that it is hotel guests who spend more on restaurants, etc.

What has changed my opinion is the frenzy, with Airbnb and others whipping it up and hiding behind the disingenuous argument that they are simply intermediaries. What? We're trading in holiday rentals? Not us, guv. What started out as a great idea now sucks.

The Gadeso survey reveals that just 29% of those surveyed are in favour of holiday rentals. There is a difference between Palma and the resorts. The greater opposition is in the city, which echoes a Gadeso finding about so-called saturation: it is felt more acutely in Palma than in the resorts. When it comes to type of property, irrespective of Palma or elsewhere, only 23% support apartment rentals.

The greatest drawback, according to the survey (59%), is access to housing for residents and workers. Half of the respondents consider that rentals are creating speculation and "gentrification", a word which has crept into the tourism lexicon in recent years. On the other hand, 47% believe that holiday rentals provide an important role in many families' finances. Which is true, but then ordinary families tend not to have whole portfolios of properties.

But it is ordinary families who might end up the victims of the frenzy. So much depends on how the government's regulations are finally worked up, on how zoning is determined, on how rigorously the tourism ministry and tax authorities then enforce regulations. And tax, now there's a thing. Gadeso found that 73% believed that obligation to pay tax should be the principal requirement for holiday rentals. Only 73%?

Madrid Discovers Holiday Rentals

Matilde Asián, the still new secretary of state for tourism, has got off on the right foot: where the hoteliers are concerned, anyway, for whom she's proving to be as good as her word. Soon into her new position she let it be known that the national government was considering a U-turn on holiday rentals. Having left regulation up to the regions, the time had arrived for Madrid to get involved.

This followed a meeting with the president of the Mallorca Hoteliers Federation, Inma Benito, who had herself been mentioned as a possible secretary of state. What has become apparent since that meeting is that Benito is playing a role broader than just representing the island's considerable hotel interests. Mallorca's federation is the most powerful of the hotel lobby groups, and Mallorca is leading the charge in Madrid for action.

Asián was at a gathering before the Fitur fair got under way which demonstrated the power of the Mallorcan/Balearic lobby. Globalia, Iberostar, Palladium, Piñero, Riu were all represented. Such is the strength of the hotel industry in the Balearics that an entirely different five could line up without any loss of power. She assured them that she will be pushing for state legislation that will not just remove confusion created by regional rentals' regulations, it will also control rentals.

What sort of legislation might emerge? Given some of the talk in Madrid, not least by former foreign affairs minister Abel Matutes, the boss of Palladium, one target could be Airbnb and its ilk. For Spain to introduce legislation that controls the collaborative economy (if only for accommodation) would be a giant step. It would be a far from easy step as well. There would be Brussels and the National Competition Commission to answer to for starters.

There again, no one surely disputes the rights of websites to promote accommodation, so long as it's legal. Tough legislation targeting illegal offer is a different matter. The weight of a state behind it would go well beyond regional efforts to tackle the illegal supply.

It is curious that the right and the left are basically in agreement on all this. They come from different points of view - in simplistic terms, defending the hoteliers or defending residential communities - but the objective is the same. Airbnb can defend itself all it likes by applying definitions, e.g. it doesn't offer "tourist" accommodation because it is merely a form of go-between, but if this is the case, then why did it announce an intention for business development in tourist resorts and not just in cities? Fundamentally, if it (and others) permit the promotion of illegal properties, they deserve anything that might come their way.

Although Asián says she's keen to remove confusion, it's debatable how much she will do this, given that regions either have legislated or are in the process of doing so. The Balearic legislation, the draft for which has received a bombardment of objections from all sides, will not just establish a framework for the regions it will also devolve powers for implementation to the island councils.

So as and when Madrid introduces its legislation, how will it impact on what's already in place? Biel Barceló says that it will be important for Madrid to clarify what powers the regions have, which is a reasonable observation, as the result of Madrid becoming involved could have precisely the opposite effect to that which Asián intends.

The Rentals' Controversy Coming Our Way

The upcoming holiday rentals' legislation and its implementation has the potential to significantly alter the tourism accommodation landscape. A headlining aspect of the legislation, thus far, has been the provision for communities to vote - by majority - in favour of or against registered lets in apartment buildings. It has raised concerns, not least among communities of owners who have fought over the years to keep their buildings purely residential, or as residential as they can. These concerns may, however, not be put to the test, as a crucial element of the legislation's implementation will be the principle of zoning. This hasn't captured the headlines in the same way, but it will do.

The government is working on the basis that there will be a limit to the number of holiday rentals' places, by which one takes it that these will be places that are in addition to currently registered and legal lets, such as villas. The limit of 43,000 places is for the whole of the Balearics. What this doesn't mean is 43,000 properties. If an apartment, say, has three bedrooms, that will equate (probably) to six places.

The implication of this is that the number of properties will be relatively small, and these properties are set to be permitted in accordance with how each zone is mapped out for holiday rentals. In Mallorca there are nine zones, one of them being Palma. The northern zone encompasses a vast area: all of Pollensa, all of Alcudia, all of Muro and all of Santa Margalida, plus non-coastal parts, such as Sa Pobla.

The Council of Mallorca, which is charged with defining these zones and the allocations within them, has said that the task will not be conducted on a street-by-street basis. It would take them forever, were it to be. There will therefore be general areas within zones, and a further principle will be to ensure that residential areas are not overrun by holiday rentals. Additionally, there is a hint that areas which currently aren't especially touristic will be looked upon favourably when it comes to the allocation.

There is yet another factor to take into account, also with the potential to create headlines and an enormous amount of controversy. Tourism minister Biel Barceló has more or less said that properties that are currently registered and legal may be "de-registered" if they fall outside the defined areas within the zones. Add to this an apparent aversion to holiday rentals on rural land (a reversal of the attitude and indeed legislation of the Partido Popular), and the total picture is highly complex and highly combustible.

No one has a clue how this might all pan out just yet, but there are issues which stand out, such as the unique situation in Pollensa. The recent confirmation of what we already knew - that there are more holiday rentals' places than hotel places - is completely different to the situations in Alcudia, Muro and Santa Margalida. It is also different to any other main tourism centre on the island. Might this current weighting in favour of holiday rentals mean that the municipality is overlooked? If there are already as many as there are, then why would more be needed?

This may not be the thinking, but when it comes to determining areas for holiday rentals within the municipality, might it be that properties are de-registered? The implications of this legislation are, as I say, potentially very significant. Pollensa's tourism councillor, Iliana Capllonch, said at the weekend that she hopes the process will prove to be "good", and there will be others hoping the same.

One also has to take into account the attitudes of the town halls. Three local mayors are with El Pi - Toni Mir (Alcudia), Biel Ferragut (Sa Pobla) and Joan Monjo (Santa Margalida - sort of El Pi in his case). El Pi has nailed its colours firmly to a liberal application of rentals' law, so much so that it has held joint press conferences with the Aptur holiday rentals' association. Mir has spoken in the past about the beneficial effects of rentals without expressing any dogmatic line on the subject. Ferragut represents a drive to create more tourism for Sa Pobla, and the only way this can be done - accommodation-wise - is through rentals. Monjo is bound to have his say, and it's typically a forceful one. A specific case for Santa Margalida is Son Serra, where there are no hotels but are apartments, if not big apartment buildings, in addition to the chalets and villas.

And what of Muro and Pollensa? In Muro, it's reasonable to say that the town hall has long been hotelier-friendly. Pollensa is something of an unknown. Gone are the days when Tomeu Cifre was fighting the rentals' corner. What might Miquel March stand up for?

The Council of Mallorca is bound to take town halls' views into consideration. It can't undertake its zoning exercise without town halls' involvement and, to a degree, guidance. But ultimately, and given the area, containing as it does four tourism centres, how many places might there in fact be? And once all this has been done, how many more places will continue to be illegal or to be offered under the provisions of the tenancy act - in a spurious way or not? There's something else to consider. The government wants Madrid to amend the tenancy act and apply a minimum of a month to tenancy agreements. Madrid might just do so, as it has a new tourism secretary of state who's inclined to adopt uniform regulations for the whole country.

The Legal Nightmare Of Holiday Rentals

Have there ever been two pieces of legislation more complicated than those for the Balearics tourist tax and holiday rentals? Quite probably, but for the most part they do not pass into the popular consciousness. These legislative initiatives most certainly do, and they are of course linked.

The most complicated aspect of the tax is the way in which the spending decisions are being made. With holiday rentals it is the implementation, which no one ever said was going to be easy but which has all the potential of tangling the government in knots that courts will be only too willing to attempt to unravel.

The zoning concept for accommodation places to be permitted as holiday rentals in theory has some merit, but it will be the practice which decides how meritorious. A lack of clarity is emanating from the tourism ministry and the Council of Mallorca (the latter charged with determining the zoning, except in Palma, which is its own zone) with regard to what impact the zoning may have on existing legal rentals. Biel Barceló has intimated that some of these could be "de-registered". If so, then it would be an outrage.

An indication of the complexity of what is being envisaged can be found in the way that Palma is proceeding. The legislation has yet to be approved, but the town hall is pre-emptively studying the zones within the city. Assisted by the university, it is considering - neighbourhood by neighbourhood - how authorisation is to be granted for rentals in apartment buildings. A key element of this is to ensure that certain areas - the old town most obviously - are not turned into tourist accommodation "theme parks". The guiding principle is that there should be a mix of uses so that blanket authorisations (or prohibitions) will not apply anywhere.

The federation of residents' associations, which seemingly can't keep quiet for a minute just at present, has railed against the legislation, the potential for communities to be taken over by holiday rentals and the speculative nature of property acquisition with rentals in mind. The federation has a legitimate point, but the Palma study - what one can make of it - may well end up spoiling the ambitions of speculators. If it were to do so, then the government can anticipate seeking to make nice returns on the fines. The illegal supply will not magically evaporate, and one only needs to look at the situation in Barcelona to know that it will not.

Palma's approach may well act as a template for the Council to consider, but it has an even more complex task, given that the nine zones involve different municipalities, some which have tourist resorts and some which most certainly do not. Then one comes to how many properties will end up being authorised. The 43,000 places imply some 10,000 (possibly fewer), which doesn't seem like an awful lot for the whole of the Balearics. Ibiza will probably reject any, as the council there doesn't want them, whereas Menorca is keen, but divvying them up according to the zones (and Palma) sounds an administrative (and potentially legal) nightmare.

The government, apart from anything else, wants these places authorised so that it can add to the tourist tax kitty. Yet Barceló has been saying that regardless of a rental's legality or not, the tax will apply. This therefore includes rentals under the tenancy act. Legally, it is hard to see how this can be done, given the non-touristic definition that can be permitted under the tenancy act. It may yet be, though, that the Balearic government (and others) can persuade Madrid to amend the tenancy act and impose a minimum of a month on tenancy agreements, which is what Barceló is wanting.

We should have an initial idea of what Palma is proposing by the middle of the month, around the time that the period of submissions for the rentals' legislation comes to an end. Greater clarity may then begin to emerge. Or will it?

Everything Changes ... Ideologically

Regulatory change is the normal state of affairs when there are changes of government. But the extent of this change will depend on how different parties A and B really are. If ideologies are set to one side and there is a pragmatic centre ground of only minor fluctuation, then change will be slight, which has the advantage of mostly everyone knowing where they stand. Institutions, organisations, societies generally abhor upheaval and uncertainty. They like things as they are, but they don't always stick to this line of thinking. Change is deemed necessary.

In football, to use a trite example, you can get situations such as Crystal Palace. Upheaval, essential in order to keep the filthy lucre of the Premier League flowing in, means the booting into touch of an Alan Pardew fannying around and going nowhere (except down) by the heavy boot of a Big Sam. He may unfairly be characterised as a Route One advocate, but let's accept that he's sort of Route One and a Half, whereas Pardew was Route M25, going round and round in circles and unable to see light at the end of the Blackwall Tunnel.

To return to politics, ideologies do of course hold sway. Party A adheres to its set, as does Party B. Ne'er the twain do they therefore meet. Which would be simple enough to understand, except when there are Parties C, D, E, F and possibly G to take account of as well. Among this array, there will be voices which insist that they are not engaging in ideologies and are being pragmatic. Which is a load of nonsense. It is pragmatism that suits the party which is declaring it, as also does the constant cry of consensus. This is fine so long it's my consensus and not yours, which doesn't make any sense but can do when one or other parties are browbeaten into finally giving up arguing and going along with the consensus for the sake of a quieter life.

This is the situation which exists within the Balearic government, in the Balearic parliament, at the Council of Mallorca and at the town hall in Palma (as well as some other town halls). On the ruling side there are PSOE, Més and Podemos, with Podemos either formally part of the administration or not. Each has its ideologies, with Podemos having the oddest. They are, as often as not, ideologies of putting a spanner in the works just for the sheer hell of it. Normal rules of political protocol don't apply.

On the opposition side, there are the PP, El Pi and the C's (plus Party G in the Balearic parliament, the Gent per Formentera, all one of them). Each of them, with the exception of the Gent who ideologically aren't anywhere near the other three, occupies territory of varying degrees of right of centre. Of them, El Pi can be the most contrary. It does rather depend on which part of its regionalist-nationalist inner ideology happens to be dominating on a given day.

Which brings us to how change comes about. El Pi sided with the left in pushing through the change to Mallorca Day by the Council of Mallorca. Yet previously, when its chap was heading the Mallorca Day committee before he resigned because no one was listening to him, it had been on the side of keeping 12 September. There must have been a realisation that on ideological nationalist grounds there could be no alternative but 31 December, so the votes were duly cast.

The PP, also divided on inner ideological grounds, has said that it will change the day back again. And why would they do that? Well, because they'll be able to, one supposes. Because they've opposed 31 December, there's no better reason to later revert to 12 September. Personally, I believe 31 December makes complete sense, but sense is not what we're talking about. It's ideologies which matter along with the impulse to change things just because you can. Més say that 31 December will be better because the citizens will take more interest, which is further nonsense. The citizens won't. Theirs is a justification raised so as to disguise ideological motives.

What else is batted across the political ping-pong table? The name of Palma is one. The PP, aided and abetted by the C's, will add "de Mallorca" once more. Why? Well, because it's practical to do so, which may be true but is also right-wing speak for saying we don't like what the left are doing.

And so the list goes on, no one ever quite knowing where they stand. One side says Catalan, the other side says Castellano, so changes the rules only for them to be changed back again. Everything changes because it can be changed, even current governmental agreements for change. Just ask the ideologues of PSOE, Més and Podemos.

Creating A Minefield: Holiday Rentals' Legislation

The draft text for the law governing holiday rentals in the Balearics has been published. The actual legislation is scheduled to be in place for the start of the next tourism season, whenever that is, given that the government is congratulating itself on shunting the season backwards to an ever earlier start; let's assume that the start means 1 May.

A great deal of choppy water will pass under the incomplete bridge of the draft before the legislation can be enacted. Of various interested parties - the Mallorcan hoteliers, the Aptur holiday rentals' association, GOB the environmentalists, Podemos, the Partido Popular - there is unanimity in that they all disagree with aspects of the draft. Not, as most say, they have had time to study it in detail; they object to parts of it anyway. Par for the course. Others will also chip in with their two centimos' worth: the island councils, for example, and some town halls - expect mutterings to come from Palma.

The headlines are: limiting rentals to buildings of ten years of age or more, so as to prevent speculation; allowing communities' owners to vote (by majority) against there being any holiday lets; increasing the minimum fine for illegal renting to 20,000 euros; insisting on certain standards, such as provision for those with reduced mobility (which could include lifts, the removal or adaptation of architectural barriers, kitting out bathrooms in an appropriate fashion); limiting the total number of places in accordance with the so-called "bolsa" of free tourist places that currently exists; allowing island councils and ultimately town halls to define where rentals might be and how many; prohibiting rentals on protected "rustic" land.

Straightforward the legislation will most certainly not be, but then we knew that anyway. How much it might prove to be an absolute minefield - of the legal variety - will become clearer over the next few weeks. One of the provisions - to do with communities' rights to veto lets - may well find itself in court. The government says that its legal experts and other experts at the university reckon that this will not constitute a violation of owners' rights. There will doubtless be other experts who argue differently. But the government wants to establish in law what has not until now been covered by legislation. Communities may already have been deciding against lets but they haven't had the power of law. Tourism minister Biel Barceló wondered a few weeks ago whether this would be possible; he now seems convinced that it will be. Moreover, he will be pleased to learn that fines have been going up because neighbours have been snitching. The government is anticipating a tenfold increase in fines' revenue next year, and the increased minimum tariff is only aspect of that.

It wouldn't in all cases be a shoo-in that communities would veto holiday letting. The decision would clearly depend on the profile of owners. But would a veto be effective, or will owners just carry on renting? The legislation, unless there is some appropriate wording, will surely clash with the national law on urban leasing.

Dealing effectively with this absurd loophole needs to be a priority. Let me cite an example. A rentals' operation in Pollensa (there are others of course) mentions holiday accommodation on Facebook but on its website does not; websites are what the inspectors tend to look at. All properties are rented in accordance with the urban leasing law, it says. Even if they are for a couple of weeks. Total farce. Plus, it is well understood that the non-provision of services (as required by the urban leasing law, meaning also that IVA - VAT - isn't charged) is abused. The tenant is given contacts to provide services. And who might they be?

As for the total number of places - those available in the "bolsa" - there are some 42,000 of these, ones that have not been taken up or made available to hotels. It is these free places that have some opponents in a lather, as they believe they will merely increase the level of tourist "saturation". The argument isn't that strong, as obtaining places legitimately via the bolsa would replace at least some of the currently illegitimate. But the issue of places is going to be fundamental to how this legislation proceeds and is implemented. Where will these places be?

There is a sense of the cart before the horse, and that is because the island councils will have their say-so and will do so in line with their PIATs - the plans of intervention in touristic areas. The Council of Mallorca, as an example, doesn't have one. It will have, but not until the end of next year at the earliest, and the Council isn't the main driver of this; the Balearic Tourism Agency is.

But the Council, as with the other islands, is to assume greater powers for tourism organisation. It is working with the agency on the development of the PIAT, but this seems the wrong way round: it should surely be the Council taking the lead. Assuming they agree on it, what then happens? The town halls - obvious ones like Alcudia, Calvia, Son Servera, Pollensa - will be affected and must be involved. Alcudia told me in the summer that there hadn't been any discussions.

The point is that the legislation will come in, and an owner could register a property fully legally to only then find that it falls outside the provisions of the PIAT. Something else for the courts to get their teeth into. And will these owners have handed over cash in order to acquire places from the bolsa? The rate for hotels is 4,000 euros. Barceló suggested a while ago that this charge would be waived but that it (or a lesser amount) could be established at a later date by the Councils.

The minefield, one suspects, is in preparation.

Complex Problems: Rentals' Legislation

Is it possible that politicians genuinely don't know what they're talking about and don't know what they're doing? One does suspect that this may be the case, although one is also inclined to cut them some slack. Hopefully, they do know, and after all we voted for them (depending on who we are and whether we are enfranchised or not).

A view that was expressed recently apropos holiday rentals' legislation in the Balearics drew into question whether the regional government knows what it's doing. Specifically, the suggestion was that, because this legislation and related law on housing which is to be introduced presents such a complex problem, politicians disguise their inabilities to grapple with it adequately by indulging in bluster. In other words, they say a great deal in order to mask their inadequacies. Which may be unkind. Finding even adequate solutions to certain problems may be beyond anyone.

This particular legislation is far from straightforward, and one begins to appreciate why the Partido Popular were so averse to regulating in a more liberal fashion. Because of the complexity, they chose to ignore it, or rather bury it in the grave of prohibition. Why create an additional problem?

The complexity is such that it isn't clear if the problem has truly been defined. When the PP were so steadfastly refusing to free up the rentals' market, they didn't have the issue that has since arisen. This may not be a housing crisis as such, but there is an accommodation crisis, and it's only likely to get worse. Consequently, any legislation on holiday rentals has to take account of legislative change for housing. Biel Barceló's tourism-driven bill cannot neglect Marc Pons' society-driven act, and vice versa. The two go hand in hand. Or they should do.

This accommodation crisis has compounded what was already complicated. The problem isn't therefore static. Barceló (and Pons) are taking aim at moving targets, with websites like Airbnb seemingly shifting the goal posts on a constant basis. They both also have to take account of legislation that isn't in their hands, i.e. the national law on urban leasing, while there is a fundamental issue - a constitutional one almost - of human rights. Under this, an owner should be permitted to do as he or she sees fit with properties.

The solution, whether you liberalise the market or not, is to resort to the power of the fine. The controversies in Barcelona are predominantly to do with illegally rented holiday properties, yet that city, as with the rest of Catalonia, has what on the face of it seems reasonable enough legislation that permits the open commercialisation of holiday rentals. By now imposing massive fines on websites, Barcelona might hope that the problem will go away, when of course it will not. And the same will apply in Mallorca and the Balearics. Got a problem? Then fine the hell out of it rather than seek alternatives.

Barceló, with hindsight, might have preferred to stick with the PP's prohibitive stance. At least that way he could simply order the issuing of fines without having to concern himself with all the massive complexity that comes with being permissive - where are these legal holiday rentals to be, what are the powers of veto (communities, town hall, island councils), are there to be time limits (x number of weeks/months that accommodation can be rented for tourist purposes), and so on and so forth.

On top of this, Barceló has a problem that the PP did not have - his so-called partners in government. He has to satisfy the requirements of one party (PSOE), which isn't overly minded to establishing tourist number limits, with another (Podemos), which most certainly is. And Podemos sit very firmly on the Pons side of the accommodation debate - society's needs and not the needs of tourists and definitely not the needs of owners with several properties for holiday rent.

Yet another consideration is growing societal antagonism, and it is the way in which Barceló has handled this which allows some to accuse him of indeed trading in bluster. The whole "sustainable tourism" campaign he has undertaken is, say the likes of the Terraferida agitators, a load of eyewash, a major PR stunt with absolutely nothing to back it up.

Inherent to this sustainability is the tackling of seasonality, a problem that has always existed and one that has always been subject to politicians' bluster. They have all made announcements as to how they will deal with it, yet knowing that it is something over which they have minimal control. The current lengthening of the season owes very little to political initiative; it has to do with the fluctuations of demand and with the efforts of the private sector in expanding products such as cycling.

Do they know what they're doing with rentals' legislation? Actually, I believe they do, but convincing everyone of the fact is another matter.

The Pariah Status Of Airbnb

Among all the various exhibitors at London's World Travel Market this week, there was no sign of what is arguably the most important business in the travel market right at the moment. Airbnb was not there. Why would it be there? This is a business of the internet. That is its whole point of being. Why be physical in a promotional sense?

Being a web-based operation is not, though, a reason. All tourism businesses are web-based in one way or another. Some, like Airbnb, are exclusively so, such as the Palma-based Hotelbeds, which did exhibit in London and which took the opportunity to announce that it is planning on tripling sales of its transfer and activity bank division. There again, Hotelbeds is a different business to Airbnb. It works with hotels and others, and while it does offer tourist apartments, it has always made a virtue of these being properly regulated and legal. "We can't do things any other way," has said its managing director, Carlos Muñoz.

For Hotelbeds, therefore, travel fairs are perfect opportunities to forge deals with other businesses, which is what it is constantly doing in order to grow. Airbnb does make deals, as it broadens the scope of its operation, but the core business doesn't rely on other companies - or not directly. It is dependent on private individuals. But then there also also, because it can't be denied, businesses which have multiple units of accommodation to market, whether legally or illegally.

What was a name praised and synonymous with the shared (collaborative) economy and with a new style of accommodation has now acquired - where some are concerned - pariah status. Exhibiting might just seem like a red rag to a bull. And one of the bulls might have been Palma's normally all-smiles mayor, José Hila. Prior to travelling to London, Hila was in Barcelona for a meeting of mayors from various Spanish cities. The purpose of that meeting was to discuss Airbnb.

Cities are unlikely to all adopt the same policies, but the fact that they were gathering to share experiences was taken as a sign that they are getting their act together in seeking to put pressure on Airbnb; this pressure is mounting in cities outside Spain as well. The city authority in Paris announced earlier this week that it wants to avoid a situation like that in Barcelona, where rentals are pretty much out of control despite tough action by that city's authority, and will do so by obliging Airbnb (and others) to obtain the registration number of any property that is marketed.

Systems of registration exist in various cities and destinations. There is a system in the Balearics. Regulated properties for rent have a number. The problem is of course that regardless of insistence on registration proof, there are still illegal properties. The only attempted remedy has been, as in Barcelona, to slap large fines on operators like Airbnb. These in turn run up against legal challenges, while Spain's National Competition Commission is lurking in the background and taking a highly permissive stance on services like Airbnb.

Another city that has been facing problems, as reported by the BBC this week, is Amsterdam. Other towns and cities in the Netherlands are also affected, so the government has introduced regulations by which properties can be rented out for no more than two months and for a maximum of four people. Tourist tax is then paid at the same rate as hotels. Amsterdam city spokesperson, Sebastiaan Meijer, says that the downside of the sharing economy can now be seen: properties being bought and rented out all year as an "illegal hotel". He also wonders whether people want to end up with streets having more tourists than residents. This is something being asked in many cities, not least in Palma.

The regional government has to take tough and effective action against Airbnb and other such sites. It is increasingly evident just how damaging the so-called collaborative accommodation economy is. Were it restricted, it might not be, but restrictions which exist are wholly inadequate. This has led, for instance, to the speculative purchase of properties with a single aim in mind: Sebastiaan Meijer's illegal hotels. The social distortion is obvious, with local people unable to find or afford accommodation. 

The Majorca Hoteliers Federation took time at the World Travel Market to present a report to Biel Barceló about the harmful effects. The government has responded by saying that its legislation will impose "iron restrictions" on apartments for tourist rent: they will be authorised but under tough conditions. There will be more inspections and higher fines. But we've heard all this before. What needs to be heard is effective legislation. We await it with great anticipation.

Do The Basques Offer A Clue To Balearic Holiday Rentals Legislation?

A new law on holiday rentals came into effect in the Basque Country on Wednesday. This is a region of Spain which, while it isn't recognised as being among the leaders for sun-and-beach tourism, does of course attract this market. San Sebastian, for example, can lay claim to being one of the finest resorts anywhere in Spain. It is also a region with city-break tourism in Bilbao as well as San Sebastian. There are coastal villages. There is surfing. There is gastronomy. Tourism is not unimportant, even if it is a tourism largely shunned by northern Europeans fearful that the Atlantic might not offer as benign sun-and-beach conditions as the Mediterranean.

Despite this, there has been a boom in accommodation. It's a familiar story to that of the Balearics, to Barcelona and the Costa Brava, to the Costa del Sol and to the Canaries. The debates and arguments in the Balearics over so-called saturation, partly brought about by the dramatic increase in private holiday accommodation, might make these islands seem unique. They are not. They share similar concerns with other regions, and as the Balearic tourism ministry undertakes the task of drafting holiday rentals legislation, it might wish to take a look at what the Basques have come up with, as there is one very significant aspect to their legislation.

The Basques have removed the loophole of the national urban leasing law (aka the tenancy act). Where accommodation is for tourist purposes it will be regulated only by the regional tourism legislation. As in the Balearics, it is clear when tourist purposes apply, even if there is no marketing that says so. The Basques are putting a stop to that.

But might this this legislative move be subject to possible legal challenge on the grounds of it being unconstitutional? The Basques are working around a national law after all. However, it has become increasingly obvious that the urban leasing law is a nonsense in that it creates confusion as well as what can amount to blatant fraud. There is a tax consideration to be factored in over and above income tax and VAT. San Sebastian, as noted last week, is looking at introducing a tourist tax. This couldn't be applied if property, by definition of a legal loophole, cannot be classified as being touristic.

Any challenge on constitutional grounds may fail in any event because when the national government devolved responsibilities for tourist accommodation regulation to the Spanish regions, this came with the urban leasing law attached. Or with its possible regional amendment. Biel Barceló has identified the leasing law as a major complication when it comes to effective regulation of private holiday accommodation. He would do well to get on the phone and speak to his Basque counterpart - only in Spanish, though.

The Basque law also has a language aspect. It is one which Barceló might be interested in (to the horror of many in the Balearic tourism industry). When it comes to classification of accommodation - star ratings for hotels and other systems for non-hotel accommodation - a weighting is to be given to the knowledge of Basque among staff, notably the frontline staff (hotel receptions, for instance). For Basque, substitute Catalan? The regional government here has said that it won't be compelling the private sector to employ Catalan speakers, but this might not stop it trying to take a leaf out of the Basques' book.

Four Grand To Make Holiday Rentals Legal

The Balearic government, working on the reform of tourism law legislation that will regulate (make legal) some accommodation for holiday rental that is currently not legal, has a plan that could see it bringing in getting on for 200 million euros.

To give some background to this, it may be recalled that the government was, until recently, benefiting from a system whereby hotels paid to regularise places that did not have legal status. Reasons why they didn't have this status were principally due to the fact that rooms had at one time been used for non-guest purposes, such as use by staff, as utility rooms or for other purposes. They were subsequently converted but left in a state of regulatory limbo.

When this system was introduced, there was a figure of some 53,000 such places throughout the Balearics, an enormous number when one thinks about it. The decree that enabled the system was extendable only once, and the final deadline for this expired in January this year.

Although the system worked reasonably well in that the fee required to regularise these places went into a fund for resort infrastructure regeneration, it didn't work anything as well as it might have done. Roughly one tenth of these places were regularised and paid for. There remain around 48,000.

You may well of course ask how the hotels can get away with this. You may ask, but getting an adequate answer would be another matter. In theory, all these places are now not being occupied, though theory and practice are two entirely different things. It is, though, the very existence of this stock of places which is one reason why the government is not minded to allow new places to be created. If hotels want to build new places, then they have to close others down.

Anyway, the government has been considering these 48,000 places in a different light. Why not have a stock of holiday rental places equivalent to this number? Moreover, why not have owners of properties who wish to legally market their properties - apartments, for instance - pay an equivalent amount as the hotels were paying to regularise their places? Four thousand euros per place.

It is said, and you can of course never be certain of these figures, that there are 100,000 places of a holiday rental nature on the margins of legality, a polite way of saying that they are in fact illegal. The government views such a number with a degree of horror: they would be far too many. Forty-eight thousand, however, might well be acceptable.

The problem that the government will have, though, is that whatever it does in terms of legislation, there will still be owners who simply refuse to abide by the rules. Catalonia's experience is just that, and it hasn't asked for the sort of money to regularise properties that Biel Barceló and his ministry have in mind. There is also the fact that some owners might only want to rent out accommodation now and then. Asking them for four thousand sounds rather excessive. That would then leave the owners who only wish to ever rent out and to do so all above board. They would pay four thousand euros, need to meet minimum standards of quality and service but find that there are plenty of others flouting the regulations.

There again, the government is also planning on introducing what it dubs an "express" system of fining owners who bend the rules. The tourism ministry says that there isn't a problem with the number of inspectors but with the bureaucracy that surrounds the processing of penalties. It is going to simplify the process therefore.

Well, it may be simplified but one suspects that there is an issue with the number of inspectors. As for the 48,000 places at 4,000 a pop, one struggles with the logic, but then legislation regarding holiday rentals has long defied logic.

A further element of the planned legislation relates to the potential for communities to veto permissions for individual owners to rent out touristically in apartment blocks. But the word from the ministry this week has been that it doubts if this - a community veto - would stand up legally.

Guess Who'll Be Marketing Holiday Rentals

If Biel Barceló and the Balearic government think that holiday rentals' legislation is already complicated, then they can now add a further ingredient to the mix. Aware that the legislation will have to take account of the growth of "sharing" accommodation websites such as Airbnb, along is coming a company which is a grand advocate of free markets and competition. It is? Ryanair.

The new theme for the Irish airline is that it plans on becoming the "Amazon" of travel in Europe. Michael O'Leary has said so, and he has been echoed in this by Kenny Jacobs, the head of marketing. On 1 October, the airline is to launch Ryanair Rooms, a service by which its travellers can book all manner of accommodation, including tourist apartments.

This "Amazon" approach, which already includes Ryanair Car Hire, is the latest service to come out of the Ryanair Labs (with its motto "always improving"). The plans for Ryanair Rooms are such, or so it would seem, that the company wants to challenge even Airbnb. And who is to say that it won't?

Until now, Ryanair has had an agreement with Booking.com. That will cease when Ryanair Rooms comes on-stream. Jacobs says that Ryanair's low fares revolutionised air travel and Ryanair Rooms will "transform" the booking of accommodation.

The intention of Ryanair to enter this market is just another move that is indeed transforming the booking of accommodation. TUI has already started to include private accommodation in the sale of packages, there is a growing number of travel agencies doing this, while Be Mate, which was launched back in 2014, was a statement of intent by the founder of Room Mate, Kike Sarasola, that he wished to create his own Airbnb-style model.

Be Mate in fact announced a few days ago that it had entered into an agreement with the Spanish Confederation of Travel Agencies (CEAV) for the marketing of tourist apartments. That led the former president of the Mallorca Hoteliers Federation, Aurelio Vázquez, who is also the Iberostar CEO for Spain, the Middle East and Africa, to say that Be Mate is doing "more damage" than Airbnb. Sarasola responded by stating that the prohibition of something only awakens desire. Be Mate is going to be at the head of the market not in the rear. "We strive for excellence in our treatment of customers, which is why an organisation such as CEAV is good for us. We share the same philosophy." 

At the same time as Be Mate was making its tie-up with the travel agencies known, Aurelio Vázquez was attending a forum on hotel investment. One of the themes that came up was holiday rentals, and there was a specific aspect to the rentals' market that hasn't necessarily been well discussed. It was one of safety and security and in particular the ease with which potential terrorists can book into accommodation via a site such as Airbnb. The former president of the hoteliers in Madrid, Antonio Gil, observed that hotels are required by the police to record data related to every guest. This is not the case with rentals' websites.

Well, maybe terrorism is something else that the Balearic government will need to factor in. With all the activity going on and with such big hitters in or entering the market, it becomes increasingly difficult for governments, such as the Balearic government, not to adopt legislation which reflects what is a massive and unstoppable trend. The previous government under the Partido Popular preferred to bury its head in the sand (assisted by the hoteliers) and so only contributed to making legislation more complex and more urgent.

Reclaiming The Past: Mallorca's War Graves

The reclamation of the disappeared during the Civil War and the Francoist dictatorship on the islands. It's something of a mouthful for the name of a law, but the mouthful is worth it. I'm not convinced that I have the translation absolutely right, as I struggle with the Spanish "recuperación" which is the original word (or rather "recuperació" to be linguistically correct in a Catalan style). Recuperation - restore to health - that doesn't seem right. Recovery? Possibly so in as much as what will be recovered. But reclamation seems to possess greater strength and moral correctness: a reclaiming of what was lost. Lives in this instance.

This is what had been proposed as the war graves (my words) act, though even this was stripped back to the titular barest bones (and I really don't mean a pun) of just "pits". The change to the title reflects a rare occurrence. Often cited, too often cited to be genuinely credible, consensus has nonetheless prevailed. And for once it is genuine enough. So it should be. Genuine, that is. One is talking about people who were murdered. That shouldn't be forgotten.

It had been the Partido Popular (and Ciudadanos) who had proposed the changed title. By doing so the law would appear less one solely driven by Republican sentiment. There would be a recognition that there were two sides and that two sides were capable of atrocity. Inclusion of "the Civil War" permits a nuance of the bipartisan: the two parties to the dreadful events of the second half of the 1930s. The insertion of "the Francoist dictatorship" enables the political right to observe its own revulsion. There may still exist - not may, do - Francoists on the political right, but the contemporary right has for the most part come to terms with the need to distance itself. And generally, it does so with sincerity.

The Balearic political parties stated their views. With consensus sought, found and delivered, there was a lack of stridency. The views were conciliatory. Margalida Capellà, the Més parliamentary deputy who was the chief sponsor of the bill, spoke of issues on which you cannot win, only convince. It was a day of celebration but also the saddest day in the parliament's history. Miquel Jerez for the PP said that the law will serve to "reclaim" the forgotten victims, to remind us of humanity and of memory that is life.

It was Maria Antònia Oliver of the association Memòria de Mallorca, which has been pressing the case for the exhumation of mass graves, who expressed things the best. "The approval of the law through the consent of all parties is a sign of democratic normalisation. This is not a political issue but one of humanity." Amen.

Someone of course did have to go and spoil it. Baltasar Picornell of Podemos displayed a Republican flag. Why? Why do that? The Republican sentiment is and was lost on no one. Why resort to symbolism at a moment of reconciliation?

But is this what it is? Reconciliation? Not as such. There has never been such a thing. It's partly why the Civil War still hangs over Mallorca and Spain: a cloud on the past which officialdom attempted to erase through, for example, the amnesty (aka amnesia). No, this was and is a belated recognition. It will be styled as one by the right, but the law's title facilitates a recognition by the left as well. Consensus as opposed to reconciliation. As it is with the insertion into the text of the adjective "possible". Possible crimes against humanity. This replaced the definitive. There had been no possibility, only certainty. One can never, at the distance of some eighty years, always be certain.

We are of course only weeks away from the eightieth anniversary of the start of the Civil War. A law to permit the exhumation of graves, to provide closure for the families of the disappeared, to raise the "possibility" of pursuing crimes against humanity is as close as there will be to any form of celebration. Just as apposite, if not more, is the thirty-ninth anniversary of the Amnesty Law. The UN has been pressing for Spain to meet obligations on crimes against humanity. The Balearics have now done so. There is no statute of limitations under international law.

Yet while the Balearic parliament, with mostly commendable dignity, has been enacting legislation, in Palma we have had the ongoing controversy of the Feixina monument. A dignified solution for this had been made six years ago: a monument to all victims. Now, the stridency of the left (and the right) is in contrast to the considered reflections of parliament.

Symbols like the monument cannot be ignored. It is perhaps too easy to overlook how deep the feelings remain among some: the genuine ones as opposed to the outraged expressions of politicians. It is for this reason that the monument should be debated with greater dignity. The war graves act offers consensus and a form of reconciliation that have come about through empathetic discussion. Baltasar Picornell says that it is a "big step to closing wounds". Quite so. The monument, on the other hand, is re-opening them.

Holiday Rentals: The Right Noises On Consensus

Regulation on holiday rentals can be expected within six months. This is what the Balearic parliament agreed on Wednesday, and they agreed without dissent. That it was the Partido Popular which made the proposal was not grounds for opposition. The PP has seen the light and the need for regulation; something that did not shine when the party was in power.

Knowing what this regulation might entail is anyone's guess. It will almost certainly offer owners of apartments the opportunity to finally be able to market properties as tourist accommodation in an open and legal fashion, but what might the attached strings be? We have previously heard that the government is considering some form of zoning system by which rental accommodation would be confined to specific parts of towns or resorts; this is certainly what is wanted for Palma. Other than this, there have been precious few hints, other than that - inevitably for this government - there will be attempts at consensus with all involved.

By this, it principally means the involvement of business, relevant associations and federations (Aptur, the tourist properties association, and the Mallorca Hoteliers Federation, as examples), town halls and others. What of, however, owners themselves, ones not represented by Aptur? And not just owners who might wish to rent out properties as holiday lets. There are the other owners to consider. Are there not? How far does consensus go? In a democratic sense, communities (i.e. for apartment blocks) should be able to decide whether there are tourist rentals or not on the basis of a simple majority. Some would be happy with the outcome, others not, and it would depend which way the vote went. But over and above this are the rights of an individual owner, regardless of neighbours. This seems to be at least one of the angles being taken by Més. Toni Reus, knowledgeable of matters in Can Picafort from his time as mayor of Santa Margalida and still a councillor as well as a parliamentary deputy, has spoken again of the "human right" to rent out without obstruction and so allow owners to derive legitimate additional income.

There is a great deal for the government to consider, and one trusts that the tourism ministry (along with the tax agency) have already been preparing the ground. Drafting, debating and approving regulation within six months is a tight schedule otherwise. And given how the tourist tax has provoked such argument among the so-called partners in government, one shouldn't rule out there being a repeat with holiday rentals.

An interesting aspect of the consensus that is to be sought is the emphasis apparently to be placed on involving online agencies. Which ones remains to be seen, but if the government is wanting to bring the likes of Airbnb into the discussions, then this would be a very sensible move. Whether administrations like it or not, they need to work with the internet suppliers and recognise how the market has changed since Airbnb and others made their presence felt. At present, these administrations prefer to seek legal action or issue fines (as has been the case in Barcelona). It is preferable to make these businesses part of the solution and not keep them on the outside as the problem. So if it is the government's intention to involve them, then the government should be applauded.

The PP had also proposed that tourist tax implementation should be delayed until the holiday rentals legislation is in place. The government was, of course, never likely to support this, and it didn't. But there is a curious situation unfolding whereby, on the one hand, the government may be moving towards a more liberalised market and, on the other, it is in discussion with the national finance ministry (and so the Hacienda) to look at how much tougher it can get.

The word coming out of the regional tourism ministry is that it is determined to track down properties that are being rented out (and not just apartments) with payment in black. But we have heard this before. The fact is that, although the ministry may therefore be more determined to get its inspectors out and about, it doesn't have that many inspectors. And these same inspectors will also be expected to undertake tasks such as checking on hotels and bars. One can possibly anticipate there being the announcement of a campaign some time during the season which involves additional inspectors being brought in from the mainland. The government did something similar in checking employment contracts and working conditions last summer by adding numbers to its employment ministry inspectorate.

Fundamentally, though, if the government wishes to get tough and show it is getting tough, it will want some good examples. Rather than single owners, the emphasis will surely be on the organised operators, which can take in vast sums and pay nothing by way of tax. And if these are indeed to be the prime targets, then the government should once more be applauded.

Another ingredient that the government may wish to take account of comes courtesy of the "Defensor del Pueblo", the Ombudsman. In the annual report, the office of the Ombudsman admonishes administrations for the "unreasonable" ways in which they have curtailed the freedom of individuals to offer properties for tourist rental. The report draws attention, for instance, to a six thousand euro fine issued by the Catalonian government to an owner who had not made the proper declaration of being the "accountable" person responsible for the property. It also directs comments towards the Balearics in opining that there appear not to be "public interest reasons" for the current legislation as it applies in the Balearics.

The Muddled Ideology Of Holiday Rentals

Catalonia has a system whereby apartments for holiday rental can be openly marketed. It is a system that operates reasonably well, with accommodation subject to classification according to its standard (which has to meet set levels) and which is also transparent in terms of tax liabilities - revenue on the property, IVA (VAT) and tourist tax.

Despite this system, Catalonia still has a problem with accommodation that has not been registered and is therefore marketed illegally. One of the main means for this marketing is a P2P website, and two such websites - Airbnb and HomeAway - have been hit with fines totalling 120,000 euros by the Barcelona city administration because of what it calls the illegal advertising of tourist apartments.

For Airbnb, this is not the first time that it has fallen foul of a Catalonian administration: the government previously fined it 30,000 euros. But the Barcelona sanction is tougher as it also includes a sort of naming and shaming without actually naming. Plaques denoting legal accommodation have been appearing. If there is a property without one that is being rented out to tourists, then neighbours can readily identify it. 

HomeAway, for its part, has said that it will take legal action, insisting that the city administration's attitude is contrary to principles of free competition and also criticising the public announcement of sanctions without having been formally notified of them. Airbnb, in total disagreement with the fine, has attacked Barcelona for not supporting private individuals who wish, in the language of the P2P phenomenon, "to share" their homes, and adding that it should follow the example of European capitals and regulate in order that private individuals can share.

What Airbnb is getting at here is that the system should be like it now is in London, where new legislation, effective from May last year, allows anyone to rent out on a short-term basis. The previous restriction under the 1973 Greater London Council Act was considered "outdated" as well as a "bureaucratic headache".

Airbnb, by referring to support for private individuals, is also making a thinly veiled comment on the political ideology at Barcelona council. Ada Colau, who became mayor following the municipal election last spring, was a founder of Guanyem, a political party/movement not dissimilar to Podemos and one, therefore, with much the same advocacy of the rights of the citizens.

Barcelona, and especially its La Barceloneta area, has witnessed a massive increase in the availability of private apartments, and in the case of La Barceloneta, these have attracted a youth tourism of a (now former, perhaps) Magalluf style. It was an issue that demanded attention, but in going after Airbnb and HomeAway, while at the same also having an agenda that is not supportive of hotelier interests, Colau's administration appears to be behaving in a manner that is contrary to the rights of the citizens: a muddled ideology, therefore.

In Mallorca, these rights were once expressed by the former mayor of Santa Margalida, Toni Reus, who is from the Mallorcan socialist wing of Més, just as tourism minister Barceló is. Reus said that it was a human right for anyone to rent out property for whatever reason, and he was thinking of the town's resort, Can Picafort.

But while Barceló seems likely to introduce a more permissive system of regulation, he is also concerned about the sheer numbers of tourists coming into the islands in the summer and who are the result of the massive availability of private accommodation, much of it not registered. Airbnb has over 300 rentals in Mallorca (many of them without photos to avoid detection), but it is only one sharing website: there are many others, in addition to websites which are blatantly offering illegal holiday rentals.

One understands that the Balearic government isn't particularly interested in pursuing owners with single properties, but it is interested in the large-scale operators. In the case of Airbnb and others, it is hard to know which type of owner may be advertising and wishing to share.

The sanctions to be imposed in Barcelona, where there are also major concerns with overcrowding, could well cross the sea to Mallorca if administrations here were minded to adopt that city's example, but the same ideological muddle would follow in their wake. Podemos might be in less of a muddle if it follows the attitude of its counterparts in the Canaries who are opposed to anything that prevents tourist rental when it represents an important source of family income.

Ideologically, there shouldn't be restrictions (with the caveat of earnings being declared), but Barceló also has an eco-agenda to pursue as well as the proposal for rentals to be permitted only in certain parts of resorts or Palma. His new legislation is complicated enough, but it has been made more so because of the sharing economy and the rights of the citizen. Deny such sharing, and a basic right is denied.

The Complications Of Holiday Rental Regulation

A key issue that the tourism minister, Biel Barceló has only partially touched on recently is that of the regulation of holiday rentals. Barceló had said that new regulation to cover private apartments would be needed prior to the introduction of the tourist tax. The fact is, however, that whatever pitfalls the government might encounter with introducing the tax they are nowhere near as large as those requiring the coherent and watertight crossing of t's and dotting of i's that rental legislation will demand.

To recap, the reason for there being a need for prior legislation of holiday rentals is two-fold. One is to be able to have as many accommodation units as possible subject to the tax, and the second is to try and avoid the cries of foul that will come from the hoteliers sensing the same discrimination as they did with the poorly implemented eco-tax of yesteryear.

The legislation, however, is far from straightforward, and an additional complication concerns the powers for tourism that the Council of Mallorca (and the other island councils) are to assume under a transfer of responsibilities from the government. Barceló and the council's president, Miquel Ensenyat, have met in order to map out how this transfer is to be made and what it will entail, and one aspect of it will be for holiday rentals.

Barceló has made clear his intention to reform the tourist law and to permit the commercialised rental of holiday apartments, something that is currently outlawed. The legal reform will presumably, however, have to establish the mechanism for decisions as to how this liberalisation will apply, and this is where the council (and ultimately also the town halls) is going to play a key role. The reform, or so it would seem, will not be universal. It will apply to tourist areas that the council will determine.

The simple way of doing this would be to apply the law to those parts of Mallorca already classified as tourist areas. These are easy enough to identify without the aid of official classification systems. But will it be this simple?

There are tourist areas of Mallorca where the reform would be particularly beneficial and indeed where it is pretty much essential: those resorts which rely heavily on private accommodation because of a lack of hotel stock - Puerto Pollensa, Colonia Sant Jordi, for example. Then there are resorts where the reform might appear to be less essential: the ones with high density of hotels - Alcudia, Palmanova-Magalluf, Cala Millor, for instance. Yet all of these resorts have considerable stocks of private accommodation as well. It would be most unlikely that they would not be included, but there is, within the Barceló drive to legislate, a potential inconsistency on his behalf. He has spoken of his concern regarding "saturation" in high summer, and one key reason why there is this saturation is the availability of private accommodation and the sudden dramatic increase in its supply, facilitated in no small part by internet rental websites.

Why, though, should the reform only apply to designated tourist areas? Perhaps this will not be the way the council goes, and there are good reasons why it shouldn't. Non-tourist areas are mainly those of the interior, but why exclude these?

Whichever way this reform goes, it may well be that it takes much of the current legislature (up to May 2019) to get it sorted out. Before it can genuinely be considered, the transfer of powers has to be nailed down and fully approved, and this is also not as simple as it seems. The previous government sought to do this but ran up against the issue of financing this transfer of responsibilities. The current government will not be as parsimonious, but Menorca and Formentera in particular will be agitating for vastly increased budgets to those proposed by the PP.

Armengol: The First One Hundred Days

Certain numbers carry significance for the suspicious and the commemoratively inclined. 111 is English cricket's number of suspicion: its Nelson. 666 is the Devil's number or the number of the beast from Chapter 13 - unlucky for some - of the Book of Revelation. 100 isn't associated with superstition or bad luck, but it has acquired a mythical status in politics. The first 100 days. Why the fascination with 100? For a kick-off, it's a nice round number. It is not 111. It's also reasonably short in temporal terms. 666 would be far too long, even if - with many a governmental administration - its beastliness would offer a more insightful analysis of performance.

Judging when 100 days start is a ritual of its own. In Mallorca, thanks to the procrastinatory nature of installing a new government, it isn't immediately obvious which day is day one, or day zero if you prefer. However, with reasonable certainty, we can take 3, as in 3 July, to be the day of commencement, the day when Francina Armengol held her first cabinet meeting and announced that it was Day Zero for the symbols of Bauzáism: out went the Law of Symbols, trashed was trilingualism (TIL).

On this basis, we can assume that 11 October will commemorate the first 100 days of Armengolism, a useful day as it will be a Sunday and so afford newspapers the opportunity to bulk up their weekend copy with First One Hundred Days specials. It is further useful in that the day after is Spain's National Day, the Day of Hispanidad (Spanishness). Travel agents will be especially happy because of the "puente" weekend, but how happy will others be? How much Spanishness might by then have been dispensed with?

There again, travel agents might have reason to be less than happy. Might the first 100 days witness the arrival of the eco-tax, the 666 devil's work of the horned demon of tourism vice-presidency Biel Barceló? He has said that he will work from the outset for a tourist tax.

Surprisingly, a survey - by the Mallorcan research organisation Gadeso - has found that only a slight majority (51%) of businesses in the tourism sector reject the idea of the tourist tax. Admittedly, only 23% actually agree with it, leaving a further 26% undecided, but one might have anticipated there being greater hostility towards it. Barceló might just be able to take some reassurance from the finding.

It is being said that the tourist tax will be the key legislative item for this government. Possibly it will be, though its passage through parliament shouldn't detain deputies too long, unless PSOE get cold feet, in which case the Més pact (and Podemos support) will collapse rapidly. PSOE's feet will stay warm, especially if Barceló is true to the implication of what he says and seeks to establish at least the legislative framework within the first 100 days. Armengol couldn't afford a falling-out so soon.

What else, apart from the tax, will the specials of Sunday, 11 October be obsessing over? There are already clear signs and not just the abandonment of TIL and the Law of Symbols. One has to do with land, a subject which is vitally important to Mallorca yet which tends to be overlooked in favour of the headline-grabbing of controversies such as the eco-tax. So important is that, even more so than education and language, it is subject to constant political revision which creates the legalistic chaos which surrounds rules on land, on its categorisation and on its use.

Armengol has indicated that another piece of Bauzá legislation - the Ley de Suelo (Land Law) - will be repealed in removing the amnesty that was applied by this law to predominantly rural properties that had been illegally built and which were more than eight years old. The law may, for many, have appeared to have been overly generous, but the fact that so many properties were involved (some 20 odd thousand if I remember rightly) did require some form of pragmatic resolution of their status. Now, the likelihood is that in addition to ever more confusion, the courts will come into their own in arbitrating between two opposing pieces of legislation.

This is an example of Mallorca's politics at its absolute worst. Continuity in legislation is rarely sustained, but when it comes to land, the disruptive legislative tendency causes constant uncertainty. Hence, all the endless cases that do indeed end up in courts. And into this mix comes what may be one of the most important changes during the first 100 days, the confirmation of far greater responsibilities for the Council of Mallorca and so its redefinition of the Mallorca Territorial Plan with all the implications this has for tourism, among other things.

Land law, tourist tax, Catalan linguistic immersion. The first one hundred days will be busy days. Just as well that no one's superstitious.