This interview on La Première on July 12, 2023 (Link to La Première audio recording) Tourism in Brussels: non-hotel accommodation has not returned to pre-COVID levels (P. Vandenbulcke – LP 12/07/23) – – Auvio (rtbf.be) where the Director of visit.brussels speaks is worthy of several comments:
- First, visitors are directed to the website’s slider (click on the “Statement” button to access it) to understand that while AllTheRooms lists 4,800 non-hotel tourist accommodations, only a very small number of tourist residences are registered (96), and even if we add the registered private accommodations (166), this would only represent ~5% of the “legal” market… in other words, 95 to 98% of the non-hotel accommodation market we are talking about is illegal!
Let’s now return to the two statements made by the Director of visit.brussels:
- “There is a Covid effect”: we do not believe this statement to be accurate in 2023. While it is clear that Covid has had the effect of reducing the number of tourist residences due to a lack of tourists, tourist residences, due to their specific characteristics, particularly their autonomy (access, space available), have been even more popular with tourists since the end of the health crisis. Eurostat figures confirm this trend. As a reminder, short-term rentals represent 25% of the market on average across European Union member states. And demand for tourist residences is even more in line with the Eurostat barometer trend for all tourist accommodation (as a reminder, tourist accommodation by definition = hotels, aparthotels, tourist residences, homestays, youth hostels, and campsites, based on the definition provided by the Government of the Brussels-Capital Region).
- “There is Brussels legislation that aims to maintain a proper balance between residents and tourists, so it is clear that the Brussels Region does not want to see an explosion in the supply of tourist accommodation that would be detrimental to residents.” One cannot help but be struck by the nature of the balance sought: if the number of tourist accommodations must be limited, then the number of hotels should also be limited. However, it is clear that the number of hotels in Brussels is growing significantly, which is a good thing. We might therefore question the balance to which Mr. Bontinck refers: is he taking the number of 4,800 non-hotel tourist accommodations as a reference (= actual market)? Or does he support the government’s thesis that the number of tourist accommodations on the market should converge towards the currently registered/‘legal’ market, i.e., a drastic reduction of ~95% in the supply of non-hotel tourist accommodations? STR-Belgium addresses the crucial issues surrounding this topic on its website and calls for democratic and objective debates on the arguments put forward by critics of tourist residences: housing protection, fair competition in the sector, and public peace.
