BBC article on new accommodation requirements

[dick bird]

Spain hotel check-in delay fears as new registration rules begin

A new law requiring hotels and car hire firms to send customer data to the government starts on Monday.

www.bbc.com

For general information and discussion.

The consensus of the article seems to be that it will a bit of a nuisance, it may cause some delays but otherwise not a lot will change.

The article also cites the name of the new law if anyone wants to scrutinise it.

 

[Perambulating Griffin]

Frustrating article. Thanks to @dick bird for posting it. Too bad it provides us with so little...

It stakes an enormous claim, that "...hoteliers were being are forced to comply with 'confusing and disproportionate regulations' that go against other European directives related to data protection and payment systems," and provides no substantiation for this claim. What is the evidence to animate this histrionic characterisation of the new procedures? Instead of providing evidence, it leans into the entitled feelings of vacationers, with this:

"Penelope Bielckus, travel content creator at The Flyaway Girl blog, said the new rules "add
another layer of paperwork that can feel like a chore when all you want is to relax on holiday".

It is odd that in the rhetoric here, we are supposed to feel sorry for vacationers (when there are so many billions who will never enjoy a single vacation) enduring a few minutes of information inputs at registration. It's a "chore" ... I'm sorry... a "chore" is generally a task involving the physical upkeep to prevent domestic or rural life from sliding into squalor. Miss Content Creator needs to stop clutching her pearls, grab some smelling-salts and take a reality-check.

I remember when some news organisations, the BBC being a prime example, could be relied upon to report on policy with facts and explanations of the mechanics and reasoning without fanning flames of indignation based on nothing more than assertion. Journalists used to summarise policy so that we could see the raison-d'etre behind it. Now? Write a headline, find some randoms loosely associated with the periphery of the policy's terrain, and encourage the well-off to *feel* beleaguered.

 

[dougfitz]

It stakes an enormous claim, that "...hoteliers were being are forced to comply with 'confusing and disproportionate regulations' that go against other European directives related to data protection and payment systems," and provides no substantiation for this claim. What is the evidence to animate this histrionic characterisation of the new procedures?

I think that it would be more accurate to say that the article reports this as the view of CEHAT, one of the Spanish travel industry associations. Inasmuch as these are not claims made by the journalist who wrote this, but reporting of statements made by others, I cannot see what your criticism of the BBC relies on. Unless you have reason to suggest that what has been attributed to CEHAT and others was reported inaccurately, when it would be worthwhile being critical.

I sense your frustration about the lack of details, but I do wonder if there are any more details to be had here. Until hotels, hostels, etc have had some practical experience, it won't be possible to test whether the dire predictions that have been made are in any way realistic. It seems easier to generate outrage in anticipation, and garner publicity and sensationalist reporting, by doing that. It may seem cynical, but I am pretty certain every little hiccough during the initial stages of implementation will also be reported on with alacrity and massive fanfare. Only then will be get to hear the crickets again.

 

[Molly Cassidy]

I cannot see what your criticism of the BBC relies on

Just reporting what someone says without investigating whether or not it's true isn't really journalism. It reflects a general decline in the quality of news reporting.

 

[Jeff Crawley]

But surely this has been common practice for years? Do we not do something similar every time we book into an albergue or hostal? Remembering back 50 years in Europe I can recall filling in hotel registration cards that were submitted to the local police daily. Passports were left with reception overnight to be compared with the cards. This certainly happened to me in France, Belgium, Spain, Germany and Greece is this "new" law really any different?

 

[Molly Cassidy]

But surely this has been common practice for years? Do we not do something similar every time we book into an albergue or hostal? Remembering back 50 years in Europe I can recall filling in hotel registration cards that were submitted to the local police daily. Passports were left with reception overnight to be compared with the cards. This certainly happened to me in France, Belgium, Spain, Germany and Greece is this "new" law really any different?

Different countries have different rules. In recent years, I have never been asked for ID in France at all. In Spain, I have always been asked for my passport/ID and usually copies were taken. In Italy, twice, I have had my passport kept by staff and had yo ask to retrieve it. In Greece legally they are supposed to check ID but it varies a lot whether they do,

 

[Kathor1]

Short news articles do not repeat background that is commonly known.

For example, the GDPR (the famous EU regulation about the protection of personal data and the rights of EU citizens in this context) does not apply to laws that an EU member state makes about the processing of personal data for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, including the safeguarding against and the prevention of threats to public security. Which is most likely [IANAL] what the Spanish decree 933/2021 is about.

The frequent (so far not yet proven) claim that the obligations of this decree are disproportionate refers to an EU directive from 2002 (there may be others with the same phrase) that says: Member States may adopt legislative measures to restrict the scope of the rights and obligations provided for in this Directive when such restriction constitutes a necessary, appropriate and proportionate measure within a democratic society to safeguard national security (i.e. State security), defence, public security, and the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences. Which, again, is most likely [IANAL] what the Spanish decree 933/2021 is about.

It is now presumably up to the courts to decide about this but so far no court cases have been started by any person or hospitality organisation. First in the Spanish courts, and if they can't make up their minds, then asking the EU court in Luxembourg to provide assistance for the interpretation of these laws.

 

[Tincatinker]

Ah, but Jeff. 50 years ago those cards used to get stuffed into over-stuffed filing cabinets or cardboard boxes in basements. The cheap ink faded; the mice nibbled; the damp let the moulds in and, overtime those records faded back into the universal fog.

Once something is recorded on the internet it is there forever. You can delete it but it’s still there and still accessible and can still be aggregated to build that perfect picture of your lovely life.

And if you think that’s unlikely just have regard those kiddies porn and bomb making curious individuals currently languishing at the pleasure of various judicial systems. The “safeguards” are as robust as that red-rope in a nightclub. Sufficient wealth or power gets you passed

 

[Perambulating Griffin]

Short news articles cannot reproduce background that is commonly known.

I guess the problem is that it’s not really an information/news article; it’s an opinion-piece masquerading as news. If it were a brief article advising people to be aware of some coming changes and to be prepared to produce a,b, and c, it would be informative without being in-depth. we used to see such side-bar pieces in “the news” all the time. But… they need to generate clicks… so it becomes an opinion/lifestyle Frankenstein’s monster with a petulance parade thrown in.

Thanks for your other very useful bits of information.

 

[chinacat]

Simon Calder, who is quoted in the article, is a reliable commentator when it comes to all things travel.

 

[dougfitz]

I guess the problem is that it’s not really an information/news article; it’s an opinion-piece masquerading as news.

I don't get what you are saying here. I saw this article as simple reporting, not investigative journalism. I couldn't see anything in it to suggest it was an opinion piece by the author. What did I miss?

 

[dick bird]

Can we keep the discussion on the topic, please?

 

[JustOneGuy]

I am currently writing from an apartment (right on the Primitive, but not for walking) and was able to “taste” the new rules for the first time: there are 35 questions. At least 10 minutes to answer. Per person.

I imagine a caravan of Japanese or Uzbek tourists (knowledge of Spanish or latin languages ZERO) answering all these questions one by one.

I also imagine the “terrorist” going to a nice AirBnB and giving a real answer to the question about home address and phone number, which by the way Booking.com, AirBnB, etc. already knows.

He takes a shower, empty the luggage. And then goes and plants a bomb.

I don't understand why a passport (or a photocopy of it taken at the reception) is not simply enough to identify a person and build a database of his movements.

However, sooner or later hoteliers will create a form for travelers to fill out before registration.

The situation reminds me of when an Italian minister in the first Berlusconi government (the one who called “goggle”...google), in the '90, banned internet access in hotels if the Ministry of the Interior was not informed first.

Sending a form by fax.

 

[Molly Cassidy]

which by the way Booking.com, AirBnB, etc. already knows.

They only know what you tell them. There are no checks on your address as far as I'm aware.

 

[JustOneGuy]

Sure. Same for what you declare. No hotelier asks for written proofs.

 

[Lexicos]

Why not just plant a chip under our skin when we are born, then we can forget about all the fuss and bother. Ugh!! I need a long walk ……

 

[WGroleau]

It stakes an enormous claim, that "...hoteliers were being are forced to comply with 'confusing and disproportionate regulations' that go against other European directives related to data protection and payment systems," and provides no substantiation for this claim. What is the evidence to animate this histrionic characterisation of the new procedures? Instead of providing evidence, it leans into the entitled feelings of vacationers, with this:

As hospitalero, I was required to enter name, date of birth, type of ID (usually passport), ID number, and other things into a database maintained by the Guardía Civil. When GDPR took effect, they gave us no notice of any change. We continued doing what we had been told to do, which in my NONexpert opinion violated GDPR. Looking at the input form today, it does not appear that it has changed since I first saw it in 2015. (Except for the (about 2017) addition of more ID types to a drop-down menu.

 

[Tincatinker]

We continued doing what we had been told to do, which in my NONexpert opinion violated GDPR.

No it didn’t. The data was collected for a legitimate reason, was used in accordance with the purpose for which it was collected. And, hopefully was stored, and deleted, as was/is required under GDPR.

If the accumulated data was supplied or sold to a certain dodgy Norwegian and he used that data to contact potential customers on the basis that they had stayed in an Albergue once and therefore, obviously, needed to buy one of his knock-off T-shirts - now that would be a breach of GDPR.

There’s a world of difference between collecting data: Bird-watchers and Train-spotters do it all the time; and using data for a purpose other than that for which it was obtained.

If the Spanish Department of Extreme Paranoia needs to know where everyone is whenever then they have a reasonable right under GDPR to collect and collate that information. What they don’t have is any right or permission to sell or otherwise share their accumulated data with anyone else, including aforementioned dodgy Norwegian

 

[Pilgrim2022]

I wonder how many Pilgrims (besides me) are giving second thoughts to doing a Camino in Spain since this new rule (Royal Decree 933/2021) has come into effect?

 

[SYates]

I wonder how many Pilgrims (besides me) are giving second thoughts to doing a Camino in Spain since this new rule (Royal Decree 933/2021) has come into effect?

Why would you? It is a bit of a nuissance to answer all these questions, but just google yourself and digg a bit deeper in the internet and you will discover how much information about you is already out there for everybody to find. In our day and age privacy is a illusion.
BC SY

 

[WGroleau]

No it didn’t. The data was collected for a legitimate reason, was used in accordance with the purpose for which it was collected. And, hopefully was stored, and deleted, as was/is required under GDPR.

The data was collected without the required (so I've heard) step of telling the pilgrim what and why and getting his/her signed permission. It may be that what I heard was typical internet misinformation. It is stored in a database maintained by the Guardia Civil and those with a password can still retrieve the information they entered. How far in the past we can look, I don't know and don't care to try.