Barcelona: pay to enter?

Thanks to the inventor of postcards – a certain Giovanni Antonio Canal, also called Canaletto – and the creator of the walker's existential inner journey – a certain Johann Wolfgang von Goethe – Venice has ended up being the creator and the main victim of modern tourism. Indeed, all the brothers-in-law in the world have said at some point that, before dying, one must set foot in the capital of Veneto "because it is a unique city on the planet." The problem arises when the exponential sum of brothers-in-law (and their relatives and interlocutors in general) causes the city to have become a boulevard for guiris. Venetians who have the audacity to remain in their Cità Antica (communal data speak of some 40,000 daredevils out of a metropolitan total of about 250,000 inhabitants) must coexist with the presence of 100,000 daily visitors and some 30 million annual tourists. My solidarity, amici. 

If one pays attention to the evolution of the main Venetian tourist areas between 1997 and 2023, we will see how the exile of natives is unstoppable: San Marco (from 41,782 to 29,357), Dorsoduro-Giudecca (from 26,818 to 19,772), Pellestrina-San Pietro in Volta (from 4,675 to 3,442) and so on. As is well known, Mayor Luigi Brugnaro and the officials of the former serenissima have once again proposed a 5-euro toll during peak days when the city suffers unbearable stress. The revenue-raising measure had already been implemented between 2019 and 2021, and it is perfectly known that the 5 euros in question are good for making a lot of money, but they will not stop any brother-in-law in the world who wants to stroll through the historic center of the city pompously emulating Gustav von Aschenbach's sexual delight. Things that don't work, don't work, no matter how many times you repeat them.

I would say that the future of Venice will be very similar to the city paradigm already advanced by Bruce Bégout in his wonderful book Zeropolis, where he anticipated the spread of urban models of use and abuse, where visitors end up devouring residents. Evidently, Barcelona does not experience the delirious figures of Venice, but it is the first Spanish city in the European ranking of tourist overcrowding (it is the twentieth overall, with a ratio of 4.80 tourists per inhabitant) and receives around seven million travelers annually. In turn, it would also be unfair to say that the different administrations of the City Council have stood by idly while guiris invaded: by regulating tourist housing or limiting hotel expansion ad nauseam, the city's politicians have at least had the delicacy to insinuate to the world that the Rosa de Foc is not a mere playground for bachelor parties and conferences.

That said, it is evident that Barcelona should raise the tourist tax to 15 or 20 euros, as is the case in Paris or Amsterdam. This year, with the variable of 6.75 euros to 4.35 (depending on the category of the overnight stay), Barcelona still has one of the lowest rates among large European cities and, as we well know, tourism generates a large volume of jobs, but always temporary and precarious. In turn, the omnipresence of the visitor paradigm (as those of us reckless enough to still live in Ciutat Vella know very well) degrades and erodes our public services and diverts local commerce towards theme park shops and establishments, in addition to making life in the city center unbearably expensive. At the same time, the collection of the tourist tax should be used precisely and solely to alleviate the consequences of depredation, not to mitigate it by incentivizing more visits.

The Venetian administration has been quick to say that the collection of the contributo di accesso will be used for the architectural conservation of the city and the underwater control of water growth. So far, the Colau administration allocated the money from the tourist tax to revitalizing and cultural activities that already existed in the city (some of which had no relation to the tourist wear and tear of the capital, such as the Flamenco de Nou Barris festival...) and the City Council continues this policy of addressing problems –very important, I don't deny it!– but unrelated to the core of the issue, such as the air conditioning of schools or family-artistic activities that take place on the periphery of the urban center. The tax, in short, ends up being a false compensation –and therefore, perverse!– that seeks to entertain the city's residents so that they forget about the subtle invasion that plagues Barcelona.

The tax, in short, ends up being a false compensation –and therefore, perverse!– that seeks to entertain the city's residents so that they forget about the subtle invasion that plagues Barcelona