One finds it strange that "negotiations" are taking place between the government and the tourism sector regarding the tax on bednights that tourists spend in hotels. There is nothing out of this world in such a tax; practically wherever I go in Europe, I must pay it.
It is true that at first, the proposal to tax a productive sector feels a bit awkward. But then, come to think of it, why not?
At times when tourism was in the doldrums, along with others I was all out for help to be given to the sector. But now that it has recovered, it will not wilt if it has to carry a "small" additional tax.
The hesitation about how to implement the tax too appears difficult to understand. One cannot believe that over this matter the government and hoteliers must reinvent the wheel. A number of models exist in Europe. All we need to do is follow that model which approximates most to our situation and then be ready to amend it on the basis of experience.
***
From tourism to tourism
No matter whose idea it first was, why does it make sense for the government to guarantee that revenue from the projected bednight tax be clipped into a fund which by statute, would only be able to spend its income ontourism projects?
For by the same logic, one could claim that income from taxes for instance on cigarettes should only be used on health projects, while that from taxes on cars should be dedicated only to road works.
According to the political mandate it has received, a government is in charge in order to manage its finances in ways that are beneficial to society and to the economy as a whole. Sometimes it finds it needs to promote measures that benefit one sector, sometimes another. In the end, progress in economic and social management will result from balanced outcomes, from which the people and the government stand to gain, as well as the particular sectors which together constitute the productive and social system of a country.
***
Choice at the University
It's a good thing that two candidates, both of great value, have presented themselves for election to the rectorship of the University. That a nomination for rector stays uncontested and too often is left to the government to promote, is a bad arrangement, especially today when the University has grown so much.
At the same time, no matter how the rector gets chosen, the very size that the University has reached, increases the need for greater transparency and accountability over the use of funds and the exercise of meritocracy (a word much abused during the last twenty years) in the academic decisions that are taken.
Perhaps after all, it would have been better had the election of a rector been taking place between three or more candidates, with a least one a woman.