Various groups, led by Cantabria No se Vende (CNSV), have promoted a demonstration “against the imposed tourism model” in Puente San Miguel (Reocín) this Sunday, on the occasion of Institutions Day. “We are late, but we can still save a large part of the territory from overcrowding and bet on sustainable tourism,” says CNSV spokesman Diegue San Gabriel, who focuses on the “inconsistency” that exists between political discourses and the sentiments of the population. “We must show up and create that social noise that forces politicians to change their minds,” he explains about the importance of this mobilization on July 28.
‘Cantabria to live’ is the motto of this Sunday’s demonstration. What message is intended to be given by it?
Faced with an imposed tourism model, the majority of the population thinks that the development of Cantabria should be based on those who live and work here all year round. And we talk about an imposed model because we understand that there has not been the necessary social or political debate about what kind of tourism we want, the only policy has been and will continue to be that the more tourists the better. Tourism must complement the productive economy. That is why we defend the right to live in Cantabria, with access to housing, with quality employment and without being humiliated.
Is the fact that this debate has not been allowed to generate a societal response justified by the clear consequences of that model?
Yes, what we understand, because we have carried out several neighborhood meetings in different areas and also interviews on the streets, is that it is very difficult to find someone who agrees with the current tourism model, even among tourists, because what to see in Cantabria is something else. This has generated a huge discrepancy between the institutional discourses and policies that you are collecting in your newspaper, which say that it is a fallacy that tourism makes housing more expensive and that what needs to be done is to continue to urbanize more and more – as if the most urbanized areas of Cantabria, such as Castro, Laredo, Comillas or San Vicente, were not the most inaccessible for housing – and between the sensation and sentiment of the majority of the population, which fundamentally opts for a different model. We have a bubble situation. Two out of every three homes in Cantabria are paid for in cash, which means that it involves investment and speculative funds. So building without regulation makes no sense. On the contrary, it inflates the bubble even more. The theory that the market regulates itself is not true, everyone knows it except the government. We understand that politics exists so that measures are taken that result in the welfare of the population. Intervene to guarantee access to housing for people who work here all year round, take care of the environment and guarantee that the work generated has an adequate salary and is not temporary. In short, we want the development model of Cantabria to be structured thinking about the people who live and work here, not those who visit us seasonally. Because it seems as if everything now revolves around them.
In relation to this inconsistency between political statements and the sentiments of the population, what do you think of the Housing Minister’s statement that Cantabria will not limit rental prices because it “is done in Cuba and other communist countries”?
First of all, it is very serious that he is unaware of the social and political context of his European and State in this way. This problem is global with specificities in each region, and regulation policies already exist in many places in Europe and the State. And to continue, this mobilization on Sunday is very urgent because it will be the only thing that will move this political class from its initial attitudes. I attended the first fracking meeting years ago. We didn’t even know what it was, they had just given the first extraction permit, it seemed impossible, but thanks to social mobilization, awareness and pedagogy, the situation changed completely so that it was banned in Cantabria by consensus parliamentary. Now once again there is incongruence between the permits and the institutional policies and the feelings of the population, so we must show up and make that social noise that forces politicians to change their minds, either out of ignorance or because they want the plan to be exactly the same, there is no plan, but the fishermen benefit from the turbulent river.
The main consequences of this tourism model are already being seen. Are we in time to stop its impact or are we a bit late?
We are late, the environment and the landscape have already suffered enormous damage. I am from Argonos, what can I tell you about urbanization with hundreds of demolition sentences… This has harmed many people who have had to leave their city and neighborhoods because they cannot find housing. Those who spend their summers there are exploited, have to work overtime from morning to evening and receive low salaries. Services are saturated. An example of this is the Laredo hospital. We are late, but it is never too late if the cause is good. A large part of the territory can still be saved from overcrowding and opt for sustainable tourism. And it can even be reduced and reversed in areas where the rent is less than 1% all year round. If not, these areas will have no future and the tourism model risks self-phagocytosis. People who come to Cantabria come in search of peace, nature, gastronomy… and the mass tourism model does not exactly conform to those lines.
What do you think of the decree regulating tourist apartments recently presented by the Government of Cantabria?
This shows how far the Government is from being sensitive and knowing where to go with the issue of accommodation and tourism in Cantabria. It is absolutely uncontrolled and what it does is, firstly, delegate power to the city councils, when the powers, as stated in the Statute of Autonomy, belong to the Government of Cantabria. It is the one who has the resources and it is the one who can provide a holistic view of the territory on this issue. Secondly, it opens the door to legal personalities, that is, to investment funds and large companies, which is the opposite of what we need. In addition, it is committed to eliminating the Responsible Declaration System and the Habitability Cell, that is, a series of indefinite requirements.
Given this situation, what do you expect from the opposition parties?
In Cantabria, political parties, when they listen, lag behind civil society. In the few victories that have been made in terms of environmental protection (for example, fracking), civil society has united, done education work, created a common sense among the entire population of Cantabria and then political parties have been forced to react in that sense. We hope that in this case they will do the same, because this noise has already been heard this Sunday in Puente San Miguel.
I mentioned this before in the neighborhood meetings of recent weeks. Specifically, what kinds of past actions have they taken to organize citizens and raise awareness of this problem?
The questioning of the tourism model of Cantabria No se Vende has been going on for five or six summers. It arose in an informal context, in which many people commented about their desire for summer to arrive in September. So we asked ourselves what was happening in our land for this to happen and we proposed the concept of finite Cantabria against the official discourse, since Cantabria has environmental, territorial, social limits, etc. Then came the pandemic, which showed the fragility of this economic model highly dependent on current circumstances. And after the pandemic, when people started talking about the ‘Ibiza of the North’, we saw it as a time to unite. First of all, we organized neighborhood meetings to debate and question the imposed tourism model. When we started, tourism was 11% of GDP and employment, industry and other sectors that were left out were of greater importance. There is talk of macro figures, but where is the wealth that is generated is not known. Are ordinary people really seeing those benefits? Or only its negative consequences? We made stickers and posters, we participated in the media and now we are making interventions such as the recent intervention at the Yera station to denounce a project that consists of allocating public money for a totally disproportionate hit to the Vega de Pas. We also intervened in those absurd giant aluminum frames that they built with the money of the supposed regeneration of the rural environment, as well as in the tourist ‘letrones’ that are replicated in all places with the motto ‘live’. They are visibility and awareness actions. Every possible pedagogy to raise awareness and organize people for this July 28th.