De León expresses that he will not “prevail”, NC-BC views it as a “condemnation” and the PSOE anticipates that it will not be enacted.
Santa Cruz de Tenerife, 8 Apr. (Press Europa) –
The Plenary of the Parliament of the Canary Islands has approved this Tuesday, with the votes in favour of the Cuatripartito-CC, PP, ASG and Ahi–and the opposition’s disapproval, the validation of the residential decree-law which suspends the penalties and paves the way for the change of use so that the affected residences are not designated for tourism.
Furthermore, the proposal to process it as a bill has been dismissed.
The Minister of Tourism, Jessica de León, acknowledged that it is a “complex issue” stemming from the “serious inaction” of recent years and questioned the deputies whether they would be inclined to “prevail.”
She remarked that “no inspector is targeting anyone” and that there are “crossed complaints,” emphasising that the goal now is to suspend the ongoing penalties to “protect” those impacted, whilst the municipalities adjust their planning. “It’s a respite measure,” she stated.
Additionally, she condemned the factions that “turned a blind eye in the government,” informing them that they “should not come seeking votes at the expense of people’s suffering” when owners “have been left vulnerable.”
In her view, if the law were repealed, up to 10,000 jobs could be affected by the exploitation unit. “Ignoring the problem has cost us 3.5 billion euros, it has resulted in a loss of 943 million in tax revenue and 88,000 jobs,” she asserted.
Raúl Acosta, spokesman for the Mixed Group (AHI), remarked that the government is attempting to address a “very complex” issue that has caused “numerous distortions, fears, and uncertainties” among owners and feels that one cannot “look the other way.”
He noted that the decree presents an “opportunity” for individuals who find themselves “in a limbo” and will also assist in alleviating the housing shortage, urging the Executive to establish a support office to address queries and assist those affected throughout the process.
Melodie Mendoza (ASG) expressed that the decree enhances legal certainty by establishing a legal framework that enables municipalities to define use specialisation and suspend the penalties.
She defended achieving a “reasonable balance” between the “persecution” of owners and the management of land use. “This decree is a step in the right direction,” she explained.
Vox claims they are creating a “gallimaty”
Paula Jover (Vox) has reproached the councillor for not signing the decree and pointed out that the Canary Islands Municipal Council was not consulted when San Bartolomé de Tirajana, for instance, could be faced with around 16,000 claims.
She has criticised the Parliament for not “postponing” the debate and accused the Executive of generating legal “gallimatisms,” arguing that it would have been better to repeal certain articles.
“This is the fourth time you have had the chance to prove that the Government is capable within matters of urban planning and reconciling it with the citizenry, yet they have failed to do so,” De León added.
She also mentioned that her group will not engage in the “trap” of this “decretazo,” which she labelled as “nonsense.”
Esther González (NC-BC) has expressed her “disappointment and outrage” regarding the decree, as it “condemns” the affected individuals with a “separata” of the most insidious and damaging holiday rental law “for the owners.”
She remarked that during her term “only two protests and a strike during Holy Week” have occurred, and the decree “does not suspend anything” since the files continue to be initiated, leaving owners compelled to approach their City Council to declare themselves “illegal” and request the change of use for the entire plot.
David Morales, from the Popular Group, has reproached the ‘Pact of Flowers’ for initiating sanction procedures during the height of the health pandemic for up to 9,000 euros and defended that the decree intervenes with “surgical, legal and legislative precision” to resolve the issue by suspending the sanctions and mitigating the risk of expropriation.
José Miguel Barragán, spokesman for the nationalist group, indicated that municipalities are informed as the measure is also included in the Holiday Rental Law, asserting that the decree serves as a “positive means” to resolve the situation.
He expressed confusion over the “excitement” demonstrated by some groups since many individuals “purchased knowing they were buying into a tourist complex” that was divided into apartments, “and thus the buyer is responsible.”
Santana (PSOE): Decree “is doomed to fail”
Gustavo Santana (PSOE) questioned whether the government governs for “specific economic sectors,” asserting that the decree “is doomed to fail” and amounts to “madness,” expressing confusion over how the Executive continues amidst these circumstances, while challenging the “burden” it places on municipalities.
In his perspective, “the affected individuals who possess adequate evidence will argue that what the government is doing is detrimental to their personal, economic, and social dignity.”
She also criticised the councillor for her “lack of understanding” of the urban planning of San Bartolomé and predicted that those impacted will defend themselves “to the end,” refusing to comply with the decree as it would mean “selling their dignity.”
