The citizens' platform denounces that the parties have proposed amendments to change the classification of holiday homes from 'non-inocuous' to 'inocuous', eliminating key noise and safety requirements.
The platform Canarias Tiene un Límite has focused on the amendments presented by PSOE, Nueva Canarias, Agrupación Socialista Gomera (ASG) and VOX to the holiday rental law currently under consideration. According to the group, these modifications aim to downgrade the classification of the activity from “non-inocuous” to “inocuous”, which would eliminate reinforced requirements regarding noise, health, and safety. The complaint comes at a time when the law has only just begun to be implemented and has only managed to remove a thousand of the more than 74,000 registered holiday homes in the archipelago.
The shift that disarms the regulation
The proposal to downgrade the classification from “non-inocuous” to “inocuous” would, in the platform's view, represent a significant regression in the control of the activity. Canarias Tiene un Límite warns that this modification would facilitate not only the registration of new accommodations but also the continuation of those that currently do not comply with the regulations. “The law would be toothless,” sources from the group state, reminding that the regulation was approved after years of citizen pressure to curb the impact of mass tourism on the housing market.
Additionally, other amendments presented by ASG and the Mixed Group propose to safeguard the situation in El Hierro, La Gomera, and La Palma, establishing exceptions and extending the regularisation period from five to ten years. According to data from the platform, in La Palma there are already 500 more holiday homes than before the volcano, which exacerbates the pressure on the residential market in an island still recovering from the eruption.
The parties' defenses: “The problem is not holiday homes”
The deputy from Nueva Canarias, Esther González, has defended that “the problem is not holiday homes” and that small landlords are not responsible for the housing crisis. “Many owners do not rent out for fear of non-payments,” she argues, adding that the key lies in the legal insecurity created by the state housing law. For his part, the socialist deputy Gustavo Santana clarifies that PSOE has not presented amendments to this law, although it has to the urban licensing project. Nevertheless, he views positively that small owners can obtain a rental supplement with up to three homes, because “if they can benefit from the wealth generated by tourism, why not?”.
While Barcelona moves towards the total elimination of tourist flats by 2028, in Canarias there is debate over whether to further reduce the requirements for this activity.
The territorial pulse
The controversy exposes the tensions within the Government of Canarias. The coalition of CC with PSOE, Nueva Canarias, and ASG has shown unity on major issues, but the regulation of holiday rentals reveals very disparate positions. The Tourism Minister, Jéssica de León (CC), has reiterated the need for balance, although now it is the partners who are pushing for a shift that, if approved, would reduce control over a sector that citizens are asking to limit. The outcome will depend on the voting of the amendments in Parliament, expected in the coming weeks. If they succeed, the law will lose much of its capacity to regulate an activity that, according to the platform, is expelling Canarians from their homes.
For the Canary reader, the debate is not minor: holiday rentals have become a key factor in the escalation of residential rental prices. According to data from the Canary Islands Statistics Institute, rental prices have risen by 25% in the last three years, while the number of holiday homes continues to grow. The Parliament's decision will have a direct impact on the ability of young people and families to find affordable housing in the islands. The vote is expected in the coming weeks, and the platform has already announced that they will continue to mobilise to prevent what they consider a “regulatory disarmament”.
You may also like
