What If? Tourism after the wars

1936 and all that. But what might have happened to tourism had things after 1936 been rather different? What-ifs are pure hypothesis but they are still intriguing, and when one considers how Mallorca's tourism was disrupted by 1936, it is intriguing to wonder whether the island's tourism would be like it is today.

Mallorca's tourism can be traced back to the Archduke Luis Salvador, who invited a collection of intellectual and creative friends to Ramon Llull's Miramar in Valldemossa. This was in the nineteenth century, though, and it was a very specific and high-brow type of tourism. Mallorca's first tourism era as such began in the 1920s. There have been two tourism eras, because of what got in the way to cause there to be two.

Of articles I have written previously, there have been those about the old golf course in Alcúdia, about the first tourism seaplane flights from France to Alcúdia, about the first passenger flights from Italy to Puerto Pollensa, about the abandonment of plans for the rail extension to Alcúdia. These are all linked to 1936 which meant that the golf course was built on, the French flights ceased, the Italian ones started and the railway wasn't to be given serious further attention for 70 years.

War obviously has an impact on economic life, and tourism was an economic victim in that it was killed stone dead in 1936. It didn't help that the Civil War was followed immediately by the World War, but, and notwithstanding the relatively small amount of tourism in the 1950s, there was a hiatus of some 25 years between the two tourism eras. War can explain or excuse only so much, though; the rest of the explanation was political and economic.

Accepting the fact of both the Civil and World Wars and their intervention in the first and nascent Mallorcan tourism era, what if the political regime had been more benign, less inward-looking and less economically parochial from the end of World War Two?

A different type of regime wouldn't have brought about the earlier creation of mass tourism, as this was only possible once air transport and general living standards in northern Europe were sufficiently advanced to allow it, but had it been progressive from the late 1940s, more outward-looking and embraced what had started to be shaped before 1936, a different tourism would in all likelihood have been developed.

From the examples above, take golf. This only truly reappeared on the Mallorcan agenda under a tourism plan of the 1980s. Arguably, this was too late, as competitors, such as Portugal, were already far more advanced. Yet had it been given genuine attention much earlier, Mallorca's winter tourism might now not suffer to the extent that it does.

Then take the railway and the flights: infrastructure on Mallorca was neglected; Air France didn't come back; the Italian flights ceased in 1943 and there weren't more (British) until the second half of the 1950s. Had, however, there been a resumption of flights into Alcúdia and Puerto Pollensa and had the northern rail line been established, the accessibility of the north of Mallorca would have been considerably greater than it was and would have altered the balance between north and south in tourism development.

But perhaps most important of all would have been how tourism as a whole would have developed. Mass tourism to Mallorca, the second era, came about through economic necessity, once Franco's technocrats had convinced him that autarky and parochialism were not the way forward. And it led to wholesale environmental destruction in the mad dash to create an economy worthy of the name. Had, though, general economic management not been the total disaster it was until the change of tack in the late '50s and had tourism development been smoother and more along French lines, might the massive resorts have ever been created?

The French model of tourism differs to that of Mallorca and to parts of Spain. Its relatively few purpose-built resorts, such as Cap d'Agde, primarily came into being only as a response to the challenge posed by the Costas. Otherwise, it is more diverse and less ruled by interests of hoteliers.

Mallorca may have ended up with exactly the same tourism it did in the 1960s, regardless of the style of political regime, but it might not have. Had the development been more on a straight line of a continuous tourism era (save for the interruption of war) and had there not been the economic need for the suddenness of what occurred in the 1960s, Mallorca's tourism and indeed whole economy might now be very different.


Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.

You Just Can't Get Agreement - Antich And Other Politicians

There was an interesting little thing tucked away in "The Diario" yesterday. Interesting, not because of what it said, but because of what could be extrapolated from it. The article referred to a meeting between Francesc Antich, the regional government president, and the hotel federation. The headlining element was that Antich suggested it was easier to reach agreements with business and unions than with political parties. From that, one can infer that it is not always easy to reach compromise with coalition partners. He is not wrong. But this was not the most interesting aspect. Antich is also reported as saying that "the political situation impedes the taking of measures that allow for greater tourism competitiveness". In other words, the very nature of the system is a constraint on Mallorca's most important industry.

Now, just think about this, and take into account also the fact that the hoteliers made a number of demands to Antich, one of which was for the improvement of public transport to Alcúdia, i.e. the train, the train that was effectively vetoed by Alcúdia town hall. Think about it. Who is now the new tourism minister? The mayor of Alcúdia, Miquel Ferrer, the one who stood in the way of the train because the town hall would not go along with the government's preference for the siting of the Sa Pobla rail extension.

The political system - the coalition - acts against the best interests of the tourism industry, including those to do with transport infrastructure. This is what Antich is saying. The coalition comprises three parties, one of which, the Unió Mallorquina, is represented in the tourism ministry, as it has been throughout the Antich administration, albeit by different politicians. Do we infer from this that the UM has been obstructive in tourism development? No, this has not been the case. But now that Ferrer is in charge of tourism, will he see the train in a different light, i.e. one that takes account of a wider interest than merely a parochial Alcúdia one of self-interest, as was manifest in the protests by the finca owners of the Son Fé area of Alcúdia? It is not for Ferrer, as tourism minister, to decide anything where transport is concerned, but he must have an opinion or be asked for one. Will this now change?

When Ferrer gave his first press conference the other day, one of the things he was not asked about was the train. Had he been, he would probably have deflected it by saying that it is not an issue for the tourism ministry. But he should still have been asked. Ferrer has been mute on the subject since the decision was taken to use funds earmarked the Sa Pobla extension for different projects. He has made something of a virtue of not saying things, but now he is tourism minister, he is going to be expected to be less taciturn. Though the train is effectively dead in the water until a new administration is elected, it nevertheless remains an issue, an issue for tourism development - as the hoteliers have made clear and, by implication of what Antich said, for the president himself, whose whole period of office was meant to have been celebrated as "the age of the train".

There is no collision course as such between Antich and Ferrer on the matter, as it has been shelved, but the very fact of the matter having been raised highlights - again - the difficulties created by different levels of government and different parties and also the potential complications for a politician elevated from a local environment to one of state (assuming one can call the regional government a "state"). Moreover, Ferrer will spend much of his time in discussion with the likes of the hoteliers federation. What will he say to them about the train? That Antich has had this meeting with the federation could be interpreted as a shot across Ferrer's bows, while a more active involvement in tourism matters by Antich, something I believe he should have, might be taken as either an admission of possible inexperience on behalf of Ferrer or of undermining him and also the UM.

Alcúdia town hall went against the preference of the government's transport ministry, one headed by a member of the Mallorcan socialists (Bloc), i.e. one to the left of centre, an area also inhabited by Antich. There is no love lost between the UM and the Bloc, and the train debacle was in so small part a reflection of this. Antich is widely admired for his patience and for his attempts at diplomacy, but one could forgive him just a touch of annoyance that one of his "big things", the train, was scuppered by the very person who is now his tourism minister.


QUIZ
Yesterday's title - Editors, "Smokers Outside The Hospital Doors", http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zLxTGjpDew. Today's title - "you just can't get agreement" from a song with a choir by a Genesis off-shoot.

(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)