The European Commission’s response to the difficulties faced by the tourism industry has not convinced MEPs (see EUROPE 12509/4).
And the arguments put forward on Tuesday 14 July before the European Parliament’s Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN) by Kerstin Jorna - recently appointed head of the Commission’s Directorate-General for the Internal Market (DG GROW) (see EUROPE 12456/31) - did not change this.
“The Commission has implemented a large number of tools”, Ms Jorna stressed, referring, inter alia, to the SURE instrument to support national short-time working schemes (see EUROPE 12490/10), the CRII and CRII+ initiatives in the field of cohesion policy (see EUROPE 12460/3) and the liquidity injected to stabilise European businesses, in particular by the EIB (see EUROPE 12462/3).
“Tourism should have benefited from specific measures, especially for countries whose GDP depends on this sector”, said Marian-Jean Marinescu (EPP, Romania), who agreed with many of his colleagues on this point. Carlo Fidanza (ECR, Italy) added: “The Commission’s response has not been adequate for the magnitude of the task”.
Lack of response
“How is it possible that an industry representing more than 10% of EU GDP and 25% of GDP in some Member States is still not benefitting from EU policies?” asked José Ramón Bauzá Díaz (Renew Europe, Spain). He regretted that the Commission showed so little interest in a sector which it had publicly acknowledged was among those most affected by the crisis.
Kerstin Jorna herself pointed out that the loss of revenue for European tour operators, hotels and restaurants was around 85%, that of airlines and cruise lines 90%, and that more than 6 million jobs were at stake.
István Ujhelyi (S&D, Hungary) also regretted the “total absence” of reaction from the Commission, particularly after the European Parliament voted a resolution on boosting European tourism (see EUROPE 12508/10).
However, the Commission had sent “very positive first signs”, the MEP pointed out, referring in particular to the announcement by the European Commissioner for Internal Market, Thierry Breton, of a “Marshall Plan” for the sector.
“Nothing has changed”
The coordinators of the different groups also lamented the absence of a budget line dedicated to tourism in the European Recovery Plan and the EU’s multi-annual financial framework for 2021-2027.
“Today’s funding is fragmented, scattered over a whole series of programmes which are burdens on the Member States and which may not relieve companies”, Carlo Fidanza said, criticising the Commission’s lack of vision.
“Nothing has changed”, he added. As chairman of the Task Force for Tourism “two terms ago”, I have already asked for the creation of such a budget line, without success, he noted.
Responding to these interventions, Ms Jorna advocated a two-pronged response, arguing that a distinction should be made between the funds to be mobilized urgently - the “lifelines” - and those that should be raised in the future to finance the recovery and rebuilding of the sector.
“It is not only about the EU budget, but also about private investment. The more effective a tourism strategy we adopt, the more certainty we will create for the benefit of future investment”, she said on this matter.
This strategy, which is due to start being drawn up in October at the European Tourism Convention (see EUROPE 12471/6), is already raising questions.
The Greens/EFA group in particular is counting on the Commission to ensure that “not a single penny more will be spent supporting mass tourism”, as Luxembourg’s Tilly Metz pointed out, and will advocate a transition to sustainable, high-quality and inclusive tourism services. (Original version in French by Agathe Cherki)