"It's an anti-nonsense document": tourism and immigration focus a debate on the 'Phoenix Report'

BarcelonaTheFènix Report, prepared by several renowned economists, has opened the debate on whether the Catalan economy is doing well or not. The study has caused controversy due to criticism of some productive sectors such as tourism and the meat industry, which it considers to be indirectly "subsidized", and for criticism of economic growth based on immigration rather than increased productivity of companies and workers.

To discuss it, ARA and the College of Economists of Catalonia (CEC) have organized this Tuesday at the headquarters of the College itself the event The 'Fènix Report', under debate, which brought together the economist Miquel Puig, one of the co-authors of the document, with three other experts: the general director of Economic Analysis and Foresight of the Generalitat, David Lizoain; the co-founder of Ksnet – a company dedicated to the accessibility of knowledge and research –, Elena Costas, and the professor at Pompeu Fabra, Oriol Amat. The moderation was in charge of the director of ARA, Esther Vera, and the dean of the CEC, Carles Puig de Travy, made the presentation.

Puig defended the content of the report by recalling that Catalonia is "lagging behind compared to supermature economies" like the Basque Country. The economist said that this situation is due to the Catalan productivity deficit compared to the rest of Europe and the strong growth of sectors intensive in labor and that pay low wages.

In this sense, Puig found consensus among the rest of the speakers: "The last 25 years have yielded results that have not been desirable, although we have seen an improvement," said Lizoain. "Productivity is the key that allows us to have a welfare state," added Costas. Both agreed with Amat that the report was good news because it opens a necessary debate.

From here on there have been more divergences. Lizoain recalled that the policy of the current Government, but also of the previous one, has emphasized the increase in productivity, but has opted to do so by gaining "industrial weight" and not by "dissuading some sectors," which is what the report proposes to do, for example, with tourism. Despite this, Puig recalled that Catalan industry today is in a better position and is more productive than Basque industry, which is why – in his opinion – it is not the root of the problem.

While administrations have traditionally focused economic policies on the growth of gross domestic product (GDP, the indicator that measures the size of an economy), Amat opined that the study "does very well to focus on GDP per capita"; that is, on how much wealth is created in a country per inhabitant, not in general. Costas, however, went further and asked that indicators that include the "well-being" of the population be taken into account, which GDP per capita does not achieve.

Lizoain and Amat agreed, and the latter asked that, since the focus has now shifted from GDP to GDP per capita as a measure to analyze, the debate should focus on well-being, and asked for a "National Pact for Well-being" between parties and social and economic agents in Catalonia. In the same vein, Lizoain called for "great national consensuses" to correct the economy's problems.

For her part, Puig accepted the criticism and said that focusing so much on productivity and GDP per person was a "sin" of the report, but justified it: "We are focusing on a point that we believe is very important for public attention."

The migratory debate

The most controversial point of the Fènix, however, is the idea that the least productive sectors are growing thanks to a hidden subsidy through the wages they pay their workers, which are insufficient to cover the public services they consume. The report emphasizes that these types of low-paid jobs are occupied by immigrants and that, moreover, two of these sectors – tourism and the meat industry – offer products that are consumed mainly by customers from outside Catalonia.

This has led to the study being criticized for targeting specific sectors and newcomers in the country's economic problems. In this regard, Costas said that it is necessary to avoid pointing out "good or bad sectors", and Lizoain regretted "the terminology" used in the document, which speaks of salaries and sectors "highly subsidized".

In the question and answer session, Francesc Reguant, president of the agri-food economics commission of the College of Economists, and Carlos Rabaneda, president of Pimec Turisme, defended their sectors. Reguant questioned the idea that the meat sector is unproductive and indicated that it is mainly made up of "technically advanced companies", and Rabaneda recalled the cohesion role that tourism plays in many regions.

"It is not an anti-immigration document, it is an anti-nonsense document," defended Puig, who assured that the report only asks to curb sectors where "the beneficiary is a non-resident" at the same time that "the immigrant receives an undignified salary". "Catalonia is creating too many low-skilled jobs that it does not need at all and it is costing it a deterioration of the welfare state," he stated.