Chamber
Plenary, 11 Jun 2008
11 Jun 2008 · S3 · Plenary
Item of business
Small Business Bonus Scheme
I stand corrected. On the subject of correction, the establishment of a town centre regeneration fund was a policy in the Conservative manifesto, as Elaine Murray said. We think that more can be done to regenerate town centres and that the small business bonus scheme will go a significant way towards helping in that regard. However, we were unable to support the Labour proposals during the budget process for one simple reason: they were to be funded by reducing the total amount of funding that was to be made available to local government. We do not think that it is sensible to reduce funding for local government in one way, only to give it back in another.
I move to the substance of today's debate. Most members, regardless of the area that they represent, realise that businesses throughout the country will be helped by the business rate cuts. The cuts are especially timely because small businesses face higher taxes as a result of actions by the United Kingdom Government this year. The rates cuts will allow many businesses to invest and will offset the higher costs that others face due to rising bills. Even if the rates cuts are not reinvested in businesses, the fact that they have been made and are going into local economies is good news.
Let us take as examples two struggling enterprises from outwith my region, for which survival is far from guaranteed: the offices of Wendy and Douglas Alexander. Together this year alone, they will save over £1,300. At least we can say with some certainty that the complaints from the Labour Party about the tax cuts are not motivated by self-interest, be it financial or electoral. It might be that what the Labour Party is saying is that because those particular individuals cannot spend that money more wisely than the Government, it should not be available to anyone else. However, I suggest that every other enterprise and small business in Scotland is better able to spend those business rate cuts than the Scottish Government and better able to decide the appropriate way of spending it.
Our amendment welcomes the acceleration of business rate cuts for 150,000 small businesses that was announced on the day of the final budget vote. Having pushed for it ever since publication of the spending review in November, we are as happy to support it now as we were then.
There is, of course, scope to improve awareness and take-up of business rate cuts. Many councils are taking different approaches to promoting the scheme even though there is no direct revenue loss to them in achieving full take-up. Some councils—for example, Conservative-run South Ayrshire Council—have taken a proactive approach by contacting every business that might be eligible and providing information and application forms. That sort of approach is needed on a national level but will, realistically, happen only if central and local government co-ordinate their activities to promote take-up.
Business organisations also have a role to play in raising awareness. Many of them were key supporters of the policy and it would be helpful if they were to do as much as possible to ensure that their members take full advantage of it.
I offer members a quote about business rate cuts.
"Small businesses are the backbone of our rural community. They may not have huge numbers of employees but their sheer volume ensures work for thousands. Many are family run and struggle to make more than a meagre living. They are increasingly faced with mountains of bureaucracy in the shape of taxation, VAT, operating licences and so on. So it's nice to hear that politicians have moved to take some of that away".
That view, with which I agree entirely, came from the viewpoint column of the Dumfries & Galloway Standard, which obviously has a rather different view to the member for Dumfries.
I find the Liberal Democrat amendment intriguing, although it is—to give it full credit—carefully worded. It makes reference to an assessment
"of the current and previous administrations' business rate reduction measures".
It is carefully worded in that it does not ask for a review of the previous Administration's business rate increase measures. If there is to be an independent assessment of the impact of business rate cuts—I think that the minister suggested that there would be—it is surely only right and proper that such an assessment also takes into account the breaking of the uniform business rate and its consequences on business.
We do not believe that it is necessary to commission an independent report to decide that such measures are worth while; they are self-evidently good. I do not for a minute suspect that the Lib Dems are demanding a review because they want to use its findings to demand further business rate cuts, although I might well be surprised when they come to speak.
If the assessment proceeds, we would want an assurance that as little money as possible is diverted from helping businesses to funding reports. Scotland has sent a positive signal on business taxation through business rate cuts. If we can help small businesses, we should. It is just a pity that there are still some members in this Parliament who seem to be so blinded by ideology that they cannot see what is staring them in the face: business rate cuts are good for business and good for Scotland, and next year's will be even better. I have pleasure in moving the amendment in my name.
I move amendment S3M-2102.2, to insert at end:
"; welcomes the acceleration of the business rate reductions announced during the Parliamentary budget process, and calls on the Scottish Government, local authorities and business organisations to work together to ensure that eligible businesses are aware of and benefit from the reductions."
I move to the substance of today's debate. Most members, regardless of the area that they represent, realise that businesses throughout the country will be helped by the business rate cuts. The cuts are especially timely because small businesses face higher taxes as a result of actions by the United Kingdom Government this year. The rates cuts will allow many businesses to invest and will offset the higher costs that others face due to rising bills. Even if the rates cuts are not reinvested in businesses, the fact that they have been made and are going into local economies is good news.
Let us take as examples two struggling enterprises from outwith my region, for which survival is far from guaranteed: the offices of Wendy and Douglas Alexander. Together this year alone, they will save over £1,300. At least we can say with some certainty that the complaints from the Labour Party about the tax cuts are not motivated by self-interest, be it financial or electoral. It might be that what the Labour Party is saying is that because those particular individuals cannot spend that money more wisely than the Government, it should not be available to anyone else. However, I suggest that every other enterprise and small business in Scotland is better able to spend those business rate cuts than the Scottish Government and better able to decide the appropriate way of spending it.
Our amendment welcomes the acceleration of business rate cuts for 150,000 small businesses that was announced on the day of the final budget vote. Having pushed for it ever since publication of the spending review in November, we are as happy to support it now as we were then.
There is, of course, scope to improve awareness and take-up of business rate cuts. Many councils are taking different approaches to promoting the scheme even though there is no direct revenue loss to them in achieving full take-up. Some councils—for example, Conservative-run South Ayrshire Council—have taken a proactive approach by contacting every business that might be eligible and providing information and application forms. That sort of approach is needed on a national level but will, realistically, happen only if central and local government co-ordinate their activities to promote take-up.
Business organisations also have a role to play in raising awareness. Many of them were key supporters of the policy and it would be helpful if they were to do as much as possible to ensure that their members take full advantage of it.
I offer members a quote about business rate cuts.
"Small businesses are the backbone of our rural community. They may not have huge numbers of employees but their sheer volume ensures work for thousands. Many are family run and struggle to make more than a meagre living. They are increasingly faced with mountains of bureaucracy in the shape of taxation, VAT, operating licences and so on. So it's nice to hear that politicians have moved to take some of that away".
That view, with which I agree entirely, came from the viewpoint column of the Dumfries & Galloway Standard, which obviously has a rather different view to the member for Dumfries.
I find the Liberal Democrat amendment intriguing, although it is—to give it full credit—carefully worded. It makes reference to an assessment
"of the current and previous administrations' business rate reduction measures".
It is carefully worded in that it does not ask for a review of the previous Administration's business rate increase measures. If there is to be an independent assessment of the impact of business rate cuts—I think that the minister suggested that there would be—it is surely only right and proper that such an assessment also takes into account the breaking of the uniform business rate and its consequences on business.
We do not believe that it is necessary to commission an independent report to decide that such measures are worth while; they are self-evidently good. I do not for a minute suspect that the Lib Dems are demanding a review because they want to use its findings to demand further business rate cuts, although I might well be surprised when they come to speak.
If the assessment proceeds, we would want an assurance that as little money as possible is diverted from helping businesses to funding reports. Scotland has sent a positive signal on business taxation through business rate cuts. If we can help small businesses, we should. It is just a pity that there are still some members in this Parliament who seem to be so blinded by ideology that they cannot see what is staring them in the face: business rate cuts are good for business and good for Scotland, and next year's will be even better. I have pleasure in moving the amendment in my name.
I move amendment S3M-2102.2, to insert at end:
"; welcomes the acceleration of the business rate reductions announced during the Parliamentary budget process, and calls on the Scottish Government, local authorities and business organisations to work together to ensure that eligible businesses are aware of and benefit from the reductions."
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Alex Fergusson):
NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S3M-2102, in the name of Jim Mather, on the small business bonus scheme.
The Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism (Jim Mather):
SNP
I am delighted to open this debate on the impact of the small business bonus scheme. The introduction of the new scheme on 1 April marked an important stage ...
Johann Lamont (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab):
Lab
The minister said that, as a listening Government, it received the message from the business community that what was happening was a disincentive. Is he awar...
Jim Mather:
SNP
I have not heard that message directly from the housing associations. We deal with them in my constituency as a key sector in the economy. I look forward to ...
John Park (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab):
Lab
Will the minister explain how he can guarantee that there will be increased investment from smaller companies that will lead to more jobs and greater economi...
Jim Mather:
SNP
I regret that John Park has a zero-sum game mentality. The Government is putting business in the driving seat, and business has a sense of obligation. Let us...
Tavish Scott (Shetland) (LD):
LD
On the minister's point about his discussions with business, is his position on regulation still that it should be one in and one out?
Jim Mather:
SNP
We have a mature approach with the regulatory reform group. Better regulation is the objective and the process, and it has to be the focus. I can assure Tavi...
John Park:
Lab
Would it be appropriate for you to make available the names of the companies that you are talking about today? It would be useful for us in the wider debate.
Jim Mather:
SNP
There are plenty examples from around the country. I advise John Park to do what I did the other day, which was to walk around Oban and Rothesay and talk to ...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
Before I call Elaine Murray, I remind all members that contributions should always be made through the chair, which means referring to members by their chose...
Elaine Murray (Dumfries) (Lab):
Lab
I ought to start by declaring an interest as one of the people who has received a small business bonus. That is probably true of many members who run offices...
Gavin Brown (Lothians) (Con):
Con
In 2000, Jack McConnell ended the uniform business rate that applied to both Scotland and England. Was that a good result for businesses in Scotland?
Elaine Murray:
Lab
As I was just about to explain–and as has been long rehearsed over the years—business rates comprise two factors: poundage, which at that point increased in ...
Derek Brownlee (South of Scotland) (Con):
Con
The minister is often attacked—not without cause—for bewildering people with management gobbledegook, but today I will forgive him his mention of Deming beca...
Elaine Murray:
Lab
I offer a brief correction. I said:"Tax cuts are always popular with the beneficiaries."
Derek Brownlee:
Con
I stand corrected. On the subject of correction, the establishment of a town centre regeneration fund was a policy in the Conservative manifesto, as Elaine M...
Liam McArthur (Orkney) (LD):
LD
Small businesses are the lifeblood of our economy. The contribution that they make to the diversity, competitiveness and resilience of our economy is immense...
Derek Brownlee:
Con
I accept the logic behind Mr McArthur's argument. Do the Liberal Democrats think that that logic should also apply to other Government interventions to assis...
Liam McArthur:
LD
I would not disagree with that point, but it does not seem to reinforce the point that Derek Brownlee has just made in his speech. Good governance and sound ...
Gavin Brown:
Con
Will the member give way?
Liam McArthur:
LD
I am sorry, but I must make progress.I am astonished that, amid their self-congratulation, Mr Brownlee and his colleagues cannot bring themselves to support ...
Gavin Brown:
Con
Will the member give way?
Liam McArthur:
LD
No.Our amendment also provides the basis on which to address the concerns that underlie the Labour amendment. Skills, energy efficiency and, of course, physi...
Roseanna Cunningham (Perth) (SNP):
SNP
I have looked forward to the debate for some time, and not just because I, too, can declare as an interest the fact that my constituency office is saving mon...
John Park (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab):
Lab
I have been consistent on this issue since entering Parliament last year and I made my views known in one of my first speeches. Reductions in business rates ...
Roseanna Cunningham:
SNP
Just exactly what size of business does the member think that he is talking about when he talks about fleets of cars? Most of the businesses benefiting from ...
John Park:
Lab
That is why we want to give those businesses more investment and ensure that the public infrastructure is there to support their businesses, rather than just...
Alasdair Allan (Western Isles) (SNP):
SNP
As other members have done, I declare an interest in as much as my office pays rates.Whatever our arguments today, there can, I hope, be no disagreement abou...
David Whitton (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (Lab):
Lab
Just as the sun shines, I stand up. Does Mr Allan think that it is an economic benefit to the Western Isles that the minister turned down the Lewis wind farm...