25 million in costs, 150 million in returns? A fact-check on the Pope's visit to the Canary Islands

The headline that circulated after the visit is temptingly simple: the Pope had delivered the Canaries a 500 percent return — 25 million euros invested, 150 million euros earned. The problem: these two figures do not belong together at all. Setting them side by side compares apples with oranges.

First: the 25 million is not the Canarian cost

The figure of around 25 million euros is given by the Spanish Bishops' Conference (CEE) as the cost of the Pope's entire trip to Spain — that is, for all four stops in Madrid, Barcelona, Gran Canaria and Tenerife combined. Most of it naturally fell on the large mainland events. Only a fraction of that sum is attributable to the Canaries.

The budget is funded 45 percent by companies and foundations, 30 percent by the Church itself, 20 percent by public bodies and 5 percent from small donations. In the Canaries, the regional government contributed 2 million euros — one million each to the dioceses of Canarias and Nivariense — plus 500,000 euros each from the island councils of Gran Canaria and Tenerife. That makes 3 million euros of public money for the Canarian leg. Importantly: the security operation, road closures, venues provided and the transport of the popemobiles are expressly not included in the 25 million — so the real burden on the public purse is higher.

Second: the 150 million is an estimate — and a national one

The second figure rests on shaky ground too. The 150 million euros in "returns" is a projection by the organisers, made before the visit, and it refers to all of Spain, not the Canaries. It is not a measured result but a forecast based on previous visits — Benedict XVI's 2011 visit was later put at around 240 million euros.

Just how uncertain the ground is can be seen in the Canarian coverage itself: one newspaper published two different versions on the same day — first a "200 percent ROI" with more than 60 million euros for the islands, and a few hours later a "500 percent ROI" with 150 million for the Canaries and Spain. Two contradictory headlines are the clearest sign that what is being juggled here are figures no one can pin down with any rigour.

Third: why the ROI calculation does not add up

The real flaw lies in the linkage. Anyone who pits "25 million in costs" against "150 million in returns" and derives a 500 percent return from it is setting a national cost figure against a national estimate — and then selling the result as a Canarian success. Only one of two approaches would be sound: either national against national, or Canarian against Canarian. Mixing the two yields an impressive percentage but no reliable statement.

That an event of this scale benefited the island economy is beyond doubt: full hotels, busy restaurants, tens of thousands of pilgrims, plus the "shop-window effect" of worldwide coverage. But that benefit simply cannot be squeezed into a snappy return figure. Official Canary-specific final accounts were not available at the time the headlines were circulating; the Church announced it would present the definitive balance only after the trip had concluded.