Canary Islands set to overhaul tourism rulebook with new laws ahead of mass protests
The Canary Islands are set to shake up the tourism industry, as new regulations loom amidst escalating protests. There has been a surge in demonstrations, with protestors taking to the streets against the influx of tourists in the Canaries, with Tenerife in the spotlight recently. Activists have pledged to target well-known tourist spots, disrupt events, and challenge political figures.
The campaign is slated to commence on May 18. "From now on, we will take our fight to the very spaces where their predatory model is perpetuated," declared the activist group Canarias tiene un límite (The Canaries Have a Limit).
"We will boycott public events, confront political leaders during their appearances and occupy symbolic tourist spaces to make it clear that we will not stop until real change is achieved.
"The Canary Islands can no longer be a postcard backdrop for the enjoyment of a privileged few," the group announced. In an additional cautionary message, they stated: "This cry, which reflects the feelings of a people tired of being ignored and mistreated, will be the beginning of a new stage of struggle: firmer, more direct, more uncomfortable for those who refuse to listen to us and take real measures.", reports Birmingham Live.
A public consultation to update tourism laws in the Canary Islands has been launched by the government this week which could 'reshape' the 'vital economic' sector.
The consultation, launched on Monday April 21, aims to update the General Tourism Law of 1995 and the 2013 Law on Tourism Renewal and Modernisation and adapt them to the 'current challenges and realities facing the islands'.
Alfonso Cabello, the regional government's spokesperson, commented: "We're doing this the Canary Islands way - extending a hand and listening to everyone."
Jessica de León, the Canary Islands' Minister of Tourism and Employment, highlighted the importance of balancing tourism with residents' well-being, asserting: "The new regulation must align with today's social and environmental realities, correcting outdated elements and integrating changes from national and regional rulings, including Constitutional Court decisions,".
One British commenter showed understanding for the challenges faced by locals, stating: "You have to feel some sympathy with the Islanders, they need tourism but they need the right kind of tourism. All inclusive kills the local economy however at the same time they need to manage the costs charged and the amount of tourists that can be on the island at the same time."
Another person enthusiastically recommended British destinations, commenting: "I'm glad I spend my money in Britain each year. The North Yorkshire Moors, Whitby, Scarborough, and the famous NYMR (Railway) is worth a visit."
Meanwhile, a third individual suggested a practical approach for the Canarian government: "If the various branches of The Canarian Govt could manage a building programme to house residents into may be a way forward. Even simpler, limit air bnb properties at any one time to a very small % of housing stock available."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leader Live
8 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Harry and Meghan considered changing surname to Spencer
However, this plan was apparently shelved after the UK passports for Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet were issued almost six months after the initial applications. The passport application was apparantly delayed (Image: Dominic Lipinski/PA) A source claimed that the duke and duchess feared that UK officials were delaying the process because of the applications included HRH titles (His/Her Royal Highness) for both children. According to The Guardian, a source close to the Sussexes said: 'There was clear reluctance to issue passports for the kids." However, after three months without receiving the documents because of "technical issues," it is understood that Harry and Meghan reapplied using the 24-hour passport service, only for their meeting to be cancelled because of a "systems failure". The source claimed: 'The king hadn't wanted Archie and Lili to carry the titles, most of all the HRH, and the British passports, once created, would be the first and perhaps the only legal proof of their names'. They added: "Harry was at a point where British passports for his children with their updated Sussex surnames (since the death of Queen Elizabeth II) were being blocked with a string of excuses over the course of five months. 'Out of sheer exasperation he went to his uncle to effectively say: 'My family are supposed to have the same name and they're stopping that from happening because the kids are legally HRH, so if push comes to shove, if this blows up and they won't let the kids be called Sussex, then can we use Spencer as a surname?'' It is understood that Prince Harry wants his children to have the HRH titles so that they can decide for themselves in the future if they want to be working royals. The standard wait time for a UK passport is within three weeks (Image: Phil Harris/Daily Mirror/PA Wire) Prince Harry says he doesn't know 'how much longer my father has' Prince Harry loses appeal on keeping level of police protection when in the UK According to the UK Government website, the standard wait time for a British Passport is within three weeks. However, this could take longer if more information is required or if applicants need to be interviewed. The turnaround time may also differ for those applying from another country. The application time starts when the Passport Office receives an applicant's documents.
Rhyl Journal
8 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
Harry and Meghan considered changing surname to Spencer
However, this plan was apparently shelved after the UK passports for Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet were issued almost six months after the initial applications. The passport application was apparantly delayed (Image: Dominic Lipinski/PA) A source claimed that the duke and duchess feared that UK officials were delaying the process because of the applications included HRH titles (His/Her Royal Highness) for both children. According to The Guardian, a source close to the Sussexes said: 'There was clear reluctance to issue passports for the kids." However, after three months without receiving the documents because of "technical issues," it is understood that Harry and Meghan reapplied using the 24-hour passport service, only for their meeting to be cancelled because of a "systems failure". The source claimed: 'The king hadn't wanted Archie and Lili to carry the titles, most of all the HRH, and the British passports, once created, would be the first and perhaps the only legal proof of their names'. They added: "Harry was at a point where British passports for his children with their updated Sussex surnames (since the death of Queen Elizabeth II) were being blocked with a string of excuses over the course of five months. 'Out of sheer exasperation he went to his uncle to effectively say: 'My family are supposed to have the same name and they're stopping that from happening because the kids are legally HRH, so if push comes to shove, if this blows up and they won't let the kids be called Sussex, then can we use Spencer as a surname?'' It is understood that Prince Harry wants his children to have the HRH titles so that they can decide for themselves in the future if they want to be working royals. The standard wait time for a UK passport is within three weeks (Image: Phil Harris/Daily Mirror/PA Wire) Prince Harry says he doesn't know 'how much longer my father has' Prince Harry loses appeal on keeping level of police protection when in the UK According to the UK Government website, the standard wait time for a British Passport is within three weeks. However, this could take longer if more information is required or if applicants need to be interviewed. The turnaround time may also differ for those applying from another country. The application time starts when the Passport Office receives an applicant's documents.
The Independent
14 minutes ago
- The Independent
Would a £15bn investment in public transport ‘level up' the red-wall areas?
The chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has announced a £15bn investment in public transport projects in the English regions. Albeit her commitment to restore the pensioners' winter fuel payment (in whole or part is not known) has grabbed much of the attention, these plans for enhanced light rail, bus and tram links will no doubt make an impact. She said: 'We know the potential that exists in all of our towns and cities … I can tell you today that we will be making the biggest ever investment by a British government in transport links within our city regions, and their surrounding towns; £15.6bn in transport funding settlements, to be delivered by our regional mayors – more than doubling real-terms spending on city-region connectivity.' But it is not quite what it seems to be. Is this new money? Not exactly. Much of it is effectively a reannouncement of the schemes unveiled by Rishi Sunak at the Conservative Party conference in October 2023. That was when he announced, to no one's surprise but still widespread disappointment, that the HS2 high speed rail link between Birmingham, Manchester and beyond was being cancelled, but the funds would be redistributed to a wide variety of smaller transport schemes (some of which, embarrassingly, were to repair roads in the South). At that time, the figure of £13.8bn was allocated to the 'City Region Sustainable Transport Settlements 2' – ie public transport improvements controlled by the various elected mayors in Greater Manchester, Teeside, West Yorkshire and so on. Reeves says that these were never properly funded by the previous government, and she put them on hold when she came to power last year. Now they have been defrosted, topped up and presented as Labour achievements. They may turn out to be, but it will take years for them to come to fruition – as with earlier announcements focused on the South, such as the Heathrow expansion. And, just for the record, there's no prospect of the HS2 Northern extension, nor the potentially revolutionary (for growth) Northern Powerhouse east-west fast rail link between Liverpool and Hull via Manchester and Leeds ('HS3'). So, is it good for growth? In principle, yes, but building new tramways, say, doesn't necessarily leverage commensurate private investment or create new jobs. One of the more consequential of Reeves's announcements was that she's reviewing the criteria the Treasury uses to approve large-scale infrastructure projects, contained in the so-called Green Book. She wants civil servants to recognise the benefits of investment as well as the cost. This is fine in principle, provided the government's economists are not pushed into politically useful wishful thinking about regeneration projects that turn into white elephants. History is full of such prestigious (but in the end futile) dreams. As with the 'raid on pensions' – where funds are to be directed to invest in certain UK assets – the net effect of any misallocation of resources would be to reduce productivity rather than boost it. Is it good for Labour? Politically, the point is that it shows Labour cares about what used to be called 'levelling up' in 'left behind' areas, especially in Labour's red-wall areas previously taken by Boris Johnson and now vulnerable to challenge from Nigel Farage and Reform UK. The recent local elections showed just how deep and widespread the discontent can be. (Lisa Nandy, cabinet minister and MP for Wigan, has been warning that social pressures are so intense it could mean northern England could 'go up in flames'). Labour MPs representing marginal seats in the North West and the Midlands will thus have at least something to show for their efforts – or at least the prospect of improvement. However, it will be some time before any tangible improvements will be felt. And the irony? If Labour loses the next election, all the dividends of its investment in transport, housing and green power will be enjoyed by the Conservatives or, more remotely, Reform UK.
