The start of Fitur 2026 has been marked by a head-on collision between the Canary Islands Government and Aena. Fernando Clavijo has launched a scathing attack against the airport operator, accusing it of prioritizing dividends for its private shareholders over the competitiveness of an outermost region destination. This is not merely a political grievance, but an indictment of rent-seeking in a sector where connectivity costs are the primary determinant of the profit margin for tourism in areas like Maspalomas.
Clavijo's argument is purely structural: he characterizes the 2026 tariff increase as a maneuver to plug financial holes at the expense of the Canary Islands' unique characteristics. At a time when key source markets, such as the United Kingdom and Germany, are showing signs of fatigue and macroeconomic uncertainty, the increased cost of air travel is perceived as an unnecessary burden that compromises the yield per tourist.
Beyond the tax figure, the Canary Islands president has revived a long-standing demand based on the Statute of Autonomy: airport co-management. From an asset management perspective, the Canary Islands seeks a seat at the decision-making table to ensure that the surplus generated by its airports (historically the most profitable in the Aena network) is reinvested locally instead of being diluted in the parent company's consolidated balance sheet to satisfy capital markets.
Despite the conflict, the 2025 figures (18,4 million tourists) provide a safety net. However, the strategy for 2026 shifts towards protecting the natural asset. The implementation of the Teide access fee and the focus on select cultural and gastronomic offerings indicate a change in the key performance indicator (KPI) for tourism success: from the volume of arrivals to the efficiency of wealth distribution.
18,4 million visitors (historic record), 281.000 direct jobs at risk due to variations in air competitiveness.
Clavijo's stance reflects a global trend in successful destinations: the transition from extractive growth to managing carrying capacity. The risk for Aena is that this political discontent could lead to legal uncertainty affecting the route planning of low-cost airlines, vital to the archipelago's cash flow.
