Picking up the thread interrupted by the news from Ceuta, I continue with my proposal for practicable solutions to the main problems of Catalonia.Tourism accounts for more than 12% of our GDP. Now it is time to move from volume to value. Tourism cannot grow any further—we are already under strain—but we must redirect it by moving from quantity to quality, because it is a source of wealth that is difficult to replace in the short term.We have two types of tourism: vacation and urban. The former is seasonal, is linked to low-value services—sun and beach—and has little gross value added. The latter, on the other hand, is linked to business, congresses, conventions, culture, gastronomy, etc. They are two different activities, with diverse social and economic impacts, which require specific treatments. We want, and must achieve, more quality and less volume; more income and fewer people. This is the paradigm that must be explained and that implies social problems that the citizenry needs to understand. The measures that are taken may be unpopular because they are uncomfortable and may affect the income of those who live from it.The conclusion is simple: we want urban tourism —which generates benefits in various economic sectors, such as science, industry, or business— and we want to limit vacation tourism —the excesses of which can lead to environmental degradation, to the erosion of the physical heritage that makes Catalonia attractive, and to a corrosion of social coexistence due to the rejection that the activity generates in part of the population. This duality leads to the need to limit the rental of rooms for tourist use, which exacerbates the housing shortage. Its prohibition has been announced starting in 2028, as well as the need to control daily visitors, who—coming from the coast near Barcelona—account for about 7 million more tourists, who contribute little value but generate significant congestion. Furthermore, Barcelona does not have the same problem as large metropolises like London or Paris. Although the scale of the problem may be the same, the size of the city is not; therefore, the effect, in Barcelona, is N times greater and affects the entire city, and not just the monumental area, as is the case in Paris and London.What is not wanted requires effective containment measures to avoid it. For example, the number of tourist buses arriving in Barcelona could be limited. Society knows the tourist reality; the citizenry will not oppose measures that seek to contain holiday tourism. Its capacity must be limited. We have 150,000 beds in Barcelona. Why are we increasing the supply? Why do we limit the number of hotels in Barcelona but not in the metropolitan area? Why have we allowed, and are now correcting, the renting of rooms? It makes no sense, but it is allowed. We have created the problem for ourselves and now we want to solve it. That is fine, but there have been inconsistencies in these policies.

Last Friday, on the Telenotícies migdia, Xavi Coral informed us about an advertisement at Palma airport "that is causing a lot of controversy", with this rather bland introductory phrase, worthy of the most exasperating journalistic inertia. In recent years, a good part of the news in the media has begun in the same way. The presenter developed the case. A huge poster from a German bank promoting the immediate sending of money between users has used the following slogan: "What happens in Mallorca is paid for in Mallorca". The text is written in German. In the report by correspondent Caterina Karmany, it was explained how the Balearic Government has requested the removal of the banner because it invites a tourism of excesses, parodying the famous American slogan "What happens in Las Vegas stays in Las Vegas". The statements of Antoni Costa, government spokesperson, were included, railing against Aena, because the airport manager has considered it a harmless play on words. Sunday, two days later, on Telenotícies migdia they explained the same news to us again, even including it in the program's opening headlines. Júlia López spoke to us about the airport sign as if we had never heard of it before: “This sign you can see is at Palma airport and it is not without controversy”. Once again this cliché formula, the autopilot wildcard to announce significance. Joan Raventós explained the translation of the sign to us, the nuance that differentiated it from the Las Vegas phrase and the cause that has provoked the unease in Mallorca. Next, they gave way to a new report by Caterina Karmany who explained the news to us again, although this time she included a group of drunken German tourists to highlight the type of tourism the advertisement is aimed at. Aena was no longer mentioned, but it collected the voices of Mallorcans annoyed by a linguistic issue and Germans living on the island, unhappy with the image of Mallorca presented in their country. The news was the same, but it was explained in a different way.It's strange. At least, in its forms. First, because they tell us the same news a second time as if they hadn't done it before. There is no reference to the fact that the news program already covered the case two days ago. As if between Friday and Sunday there was a kind of disconnection, as if they had nothing to do with each other. And the viewer is left with a feeling of living the groundhog day, with a déjà-vu of events that were already explained to them days ago in the same place. It could be that it was a repurposed piece that could not be broadcast on Friday's Telenotícies vespre (evening news), but in any case, you can't sell fish, two days later, as if it were fresh. It creates a greater sense of cohesion and normality if you talk about it as an extension of work. Because otherwise, it ends up seeming that not even the professionals who make the Telenotícies (news) watch their own news program during the week.