'Totally unfair': Airbnb fights back over protests
A leading Airbnb executive has said it is 'totally unfair' to blame the firm for 'over-tourism' in Europe.
Theo Yedinsky, vice-president for public policy at the American company, has accused regulators and residents of 'scapegoating' the app.
The US giant, which allows jetsetters to book short-term home rentals, has been accused of causing overcrowding in holiday hotspots.
But Yedinsky instead pointed the finger at hotels.
Tourist levels have angered those living in major European cities, who complain that Airbnb has pushed up rents and reduced the permanent housing on offer for residents.
It has even led to protests by locals in Barcelona, Amsterdam, Malaga and Santorini.
Yedinsky told the Financial Times: 'We end up getting a lot of the blame, especially in city centres. The reality is overtourism is really driven by the hotels.'
In Barcelona, where officials have ordered nearly 66,000 properties to be wiped from the app, Yedinsky told the newspaper the mayor should 'look at hotels' and 'build more housing'.
'They are scapegoating Airbnb. They are attacking a fraction of the problem and then wondering why it's not getting better,' he said.
The app claims it helps local communities as it supports families who want to let their property to make ends meet, as well as boosting tourism to areas outside of main cities.
But it has garnered many critics. Spanish prime minister Pedro Sanchez earlier this year said 'there are too many Airbnbs and not enough homes'. Although most holidaymakers stay in hotels compared to short-term rentals, critics are concerned with the rapid growth of these properties.
Visitors stayed in short lets for 715m nights compared to 1.9bn staying in hotels, according to data from the European Union.
Apps such as Airbnb – founded in 2008 by Brian Chesky, Nathan Blecharczyk and Joe Gebbia – were effectively banned in New York in 2023. Closer to home, residents in tourist destinations incluyding Devon and Cornwall have complained that more landlords are letting properties to holidaymakers while locals struggle to find affordable homes.
Liberal Democrat MP for North Cornwall Ben Maguire earlier this month claimed 'too many local families are being priced out while homes sit empty or churned through weekly rentals'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
40 minutes ago
- The Sun
Man Utd's new £65m-rated striker transfer target revealed after Viktor Gyokeres ‘REJECTS Old Trafford transfer'
MANCHESTER UNITED have a new striker target after being rejected by Viktor Gyokeres. The Sporting star was United's No1 priority this summer but the deal is dead following talks this week. 2 Gyokeres was not happy with the Red Devils' offer and now wants to move to Arsenal instead. United are still in need of a striker and will now turn their attention to Victor Osimhen. The in-demand striker scored 32 goals in 37 games on loan at Galatasaray last season, and the Turkish side are keen to make his stay permanent. So far, though, no deal has been agreed, with Osimhen seemingly ready to consider all his options - including a potential move to the Premier League. Saudi Arabian clubs are interested and would be able to afford his £500,000-a-week wage demands. That could prove a stumbling bloke for United however, and player sales would have to happen to get a deal for Osimhen over the line. It is understood the Nigerian could be available for £65million. And he was said to be open to a move to Old Trafford. United are also in danger of missing out on another top target - Bryan Mbeumo. The winger was said to have decided on moving to United but that was before Tottenham appointed Thomas Frank. Spurs have held initial talks with Brentford and could hijack United's £60m move for the Cameroonian.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
How Labour's winter fuel fiasco paves the way for means-testing the state pension
As Rachel Reeves announced an about-turn on her winter fuel policy this week, she opened a whole new can of worms for pensioners. The Chancellor's decision to return the payments to those with an income of under £35,000 has created a complicated means-test and reignited calls from some commentators to claw back other benefits, such as the state pension, from those deemed 'wealthy'. Means-testing the state pension system would be a radical move that no British chancellor has dared attempt before. But Labour is desperate for cash and has shown it is not afraid to anger older voters. Could Ms Reeves possibly get away with it? Introduced in 1909 and originally worth five shillings a week, the state pension is a cornerstone of the welfare state. Today, workers pay National Insurance contributions for 35 years to receive its full benefit. The full new state pension is £230.25 a week, while the old 'basic' pension – for those who reached state pension age before April 2016 – is £176.45 a week. However, the benefit has become increasingly unaffordable to administer. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) predicts the country's spending on pensioners will reach £180bn by 2029. The idea of reserving the payment for those who need it most has therefore become increasingly attractive. Both Labour and the Tories pledged to keep the 'triple lock' that means pensions are increased each April by the highest of wage growth, inflation or 2.5pc. Means-testing could be one way to dramatically cut costs, without breaking that pledge. In January, Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, caused uproar when she said her party would 'look at means-testing' the state pension. Key Labour advisers, think tanks and academics have also voiced support for the plan. Means-testing would completely upend the system. But this week's winter fuel policy reversal could make it slightly easier. Under the latest changes, all pensioners will receive the winter fuel payment, worth up to £300 a year. However, those who earn more than £35,000 will be expected to return it to HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC). To administer the new system, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) will tell HMRC who they've paid the winter fuel payment to. HMRC will then apply the income test to determine who will need to repay the money. Government departments have long shared data about taxpayers, including doing so specifically to pay or not pay a pensioner benefit, such as free TV licences. But is this Whitehall bureaucracy really a slow slide towards a means-tested state pension? Telegraph Money reader Jim Humphrey fears so. The 69-year-old, a part-time financial adviser from St Albans, is one of the estimated two million pensioners who will still not receive the winter fuel payment. This is because his income exceeds the £35,000 threshold. He is worried Labour is on a 'slippery slope' to means-testing the state pension. He said: 'I don't need the money, but it is a question of principle... I have paid tax for many, many years.' Other state benefits have been means-tested in recent years. Free TV licences for all over-75s were scrapped in August 2020 and restricted to those who qualify for pension credit. Last year's restriction of the winter fuel payment to those on pension credit was also a form of means-testing – as is the payment of pension credit to those on the lowest incomes. Campaigners and economists have also pushed for free prescriptions for the over-60s to be similarly restricted. Last October, Dr Kristian Niemietz, of the Institute for Economic Affairs think tank, said: 'Means-testing old-age benefits is a way to make fiscal savings while insulating the poorest from cuts.' Labour is also gearing up to ban over-60s from taking student loans from 2027, as it introduces a 'Lifetime Learning Entitlement'. Ben Ramanauskas, of think tank Policy Exchange, said: 'The Government's approach to cutting spending through means-testing is the right one. 'However, this alone will not significantly lower the cost of the UK's unsustainable welfare bill, improve public finances, or give younger taxpayers a fair deal.' Other countries already operate means-testing on their state pension payouts. In Canada, which operates a flat-rate benefit system, a maximum of $1,433 (£773.30) is paid each month, and is topped up for those on low incomes. In Chile, a pension is paid to those over 65, unless your family's wealth is deemed to be in the top 10pc of the population. Those with an income of less than $1,210,828 (£955.30) a month are eligible, whether they are still working or not. In Australia, the state pension – or 'age pension' – has no reference to how long a person has worked. Instead, it is granted as an age-based means-tested benefit. About a third of pensioners have their pension cut because they have other sources of income. Moving to an Australian-style system would be highly controversial, angering those who say if you have 'paid in' you should get the full amount irrespective of your income. Mike Ambery, of pension provider Standard Life, said: 'There would need to be a change in applying for state pension as well as the detail to replicate means-testing in other countries. The practicality and change to a universal system now would be operationally significant.' There would be other barriers to overcome. The Government could only make significant savings if people are able to generate big enough private pension savings. But despite the 'automatic enrolment' reforms that made workplace pensions compulsory, millions of people are on course for meagre retirement incomes. Research by the Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association (PLSA) found that the cost of all but the most basic retirement has increased over the past year. Two retirees running one small car, eating out weekly and taking a four-star foreign holiday each year would now need an income of almost £35,000 each before tax to retire comfortably, rising to £52,000 if they live alone. Meanwhile, anyone living alone on the state pension would even fall short of a basic retirement, which now requires an income of £13,400 a year, the PLSA said.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Starmer's latest freebie: British sovereignty in exchange for nothing
While we can't rely on the French to help police the Channel – despite paying them £500 million for the privilege – we can always trust our Gallic cousins to bear a grudge. We already knew that the Prime Minister's great EU 'reset ' was a sham; that much was clear when all we got in return was the use of e-gates that were already operational in many European countries. Now, we learn that we may not even be granted access to the bloc's industrial defence programme, despite Sir Keir Starmer's insistence that defence and security was a central tenet of the deal. As he boasted last month after selling us out to Brussels: 'We've also struck a new defence and security partnership to strengthen our cooperation and strengthen our security – which is vital in this dangerous new era. 'And it will open the door to working with the EU's new defence fund – providing new opportunities for our defence industry, supporting British jobs and livelihoods.' Except, of course, the French have other ideas. In yet another example of just how bad Labour is at negotiating anything (see also the Chagos surrender and, more recently, the 'deal' to allow Spanish border guards to check passports on Gibraltar) we now learn that Emmanuel Macron is trying to shut out British arms firms from the European Defence Industry Programme (EDIP). While different to the defence fund, which is known as SAFE (Security Action for Europe), EDIP will see cash pumped into joint procurement projects and the production of weapons, ammunition and other military hardware. It was created for the benefit of the EU and 'allies' but French diplomats have insisted the tool should be solely used to boost firms based inside the EU, as well as Norway and Ukraine – shutting out the UK. So much for Starmer's boast that the reset deal would put Britain 'back on the world stage' and give us 'unprecedented access to the EU market, the best of any country.' Labour is yet to reveal how many billions is being squandered on a reset that has already prompted another big fat 'non' from Paris.
