In the Canary Islands, we have normalized the unacceptable. Precariousness is presented to us as a lesser evil. The collapse of infrastructure or basic services as part of the socioeconomic landscape that we must swallow without question.
Now, the fashion is the art of political makeup and discourse as a structural solution because the Minister of Tourism and Employment has just announced that the future Tourism Law will require new establishments to demonstrate that they meet the minimum employment standards before granting them a license.
A measure that, under the guise of social responsibility, does not address or question the dependent economic model that is costing serious fractures to our social and territorial cohesion in the islands.
In reality, his proposal is more of the same with a hint of dialectical camouflage.
A model that has not only reached its ceiling, but is already threatening to sink the social, economic and environmental foundations of this territory.
Instead of rethinking tourism growth, they consolidate it.
Instead of opening a serious debate about the limits, they postpone it. We are asked to applaud that compliance with labor regulations that have been systematically ignored or circumvented for years will now be verified.
And that's all? Is that the new direction?
The Canary Islands has one of the highest temporary employment rates in the State.
Salaries that are 36.5% below the average of the European Union and this inevitably leads to a low purchasing power that hinders the quality of life.
Nearly 60 percent of the contracts signed each year are temporary. This is not a deviation from the system. It is the system.
A model based on the intensive exploitation of a single sector that, in the name of employment, destroys social, territorial and economic balance.
Monoculture has always been the ruin of the Archipelago and we do not learn.
Every economy should tend to achieve the greatest possible balance between sectors in order not to fall into structural dependencies of an economic model that does not entail opportunities for progress. The data of the socioeconomic reality of the Canary Islands demonstrate this.
We are not facing a transformative policy. We are facing a continuation policy with new vocabulary. We talk about quality, responsibility, sustainability.
But what continues to be promoted is unbridled growth. More beds. More tourists. More pressure on resources that are already at their limit.
The key question is not asked. How many tourists can the Canary Islands support without destroying its soul? How many more beds can be installed without expelling residents? How much load can a fragile territory withstand before collapsing?
The answer is uncomfortable. That's why it's avoided. Because it requires changing the logic, not the discourse.
It requires facing the fact that tourism cannot continue to be an end in itself, but a means subordinated to collective well-being.
From Liberación Canaria we say it without mincing words. It is not about imposing symbolic conditions on new licenses.
It is about ceasing to grant them. It is about imposing real and binding limits. It is about regaining control of the territory. Above all, about deciding for whom one governs. Whether for those who live here or for those who only come to exploit and leave or foreign capital owners of 80% of the tourist beds.
The Minister has admitted that the Government lacks the powers to regulate wages.
So, what can you guarantee? That agreements are met that, in many cases, are already insufficient? Is that the basis of the new law?
A tourism law that does not address the pressure on housing, that does not protect the most fragile ecosystems, that does not stop the touristification of entire neighborhoods, is not a transformative law.
It is an alibi to continue as before. You cannot manage well what is already overflowing.
A new vision is needed. A model that bets on quality of life, opportunities for progress and true sustainability, for a tourism that fits into the territory instead of subjecting it.
We need to rethink tourism, not refinance it. Redesign it, not sweeten it.
We propose less volume, more value. Diversify. Invest in conservation. Infrastructure and services
