Meeting of the Parliament 28 May 2024
I join others in thanking the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee and all those who gave evidence to it, including people in Orkney. I pay tribute to the committee for taking the time to visit the islands.
We broadly support the principle underlying the bill, which is that of empowering local authorities to take steps to meet the challenges that they face. Earlier, in considering the amendments, we heard that certain local authorities are champing at the bit, although it would be a mischaracterisation to assume that all local authorities find themselves in that position.
At the same time, we need to acknowledge that, far from champing at the bit, many businesses in the tourism sector have approached the debate with apprehension. We heard from Miles Briggs about the views that have been expressed by the Federation of Small Businesses and the Association of Scotland’s Self-Caterers. Those organisations have rightly highlighted concerns that I am picking up locally and which are being felt nationally. Part of that is about uncertainty, and part of it is a reflection of cumulative effect, whether that is to do with the short-term lets legislation, the broader cost of living crisis or the aftermath of Covid.
It is absolutely right that the bill has taken an approach that seeks flexibility and local determination wherever possible, in recognition that the tourism sector looks different in different parts of the country and, as I said earlier, at different times in the year.
Nevertheless, to command the confidence of the sector and the wider public, fairness and equity need to be at the heart of the bill, and it absolutely needs to ensure that it can wash its own face. There is no point in setting up a system of attracting, from a levy, revenue that barely covers the cost of administration.
I return to my amendments on cruise traffic and motorhomes, which we discussed earlier in proceedings. I happen to believe that the development that we have seen in both those aspects of the tourism sector is a good and healthy sign, but both require to be managed. Unfortunately, in the bill as it stands, the fact that bed and breakfasts, self-catering businesses and hotels are captured by the levy but cruise traffic and motorhomes remain outwith its ambit—for reasons that I understand—means that it is difficult for many local authorities to see a way of proceeding with it.
On the exemptions that would be delivered, which go back to the principle of local flexibility, I disagree with Miles Briggs—I think that those are better determined locally. He is, however, absolutely right to point to the example of patients in Orkney and Shetland. They will often access services within Orkney and Shetland, and one would assume that any local scheme would exempt them. However, very often they seek specialist treatment in Aberdeen, Inverness or even further south, and it is difficult to see how they, their patient escorts and so on would be exempt under schemes that are operated by other local authorities.
I pay tribute to the minister for the characteristically constructive way in which he has sought to engage on the issues that I raised around cruise liner traffic and motorhomes and, as has been clearly evidenced through the votes on stage 3 amendments, the way in which he has engaged across the parties during stages 2 and 3. That is entirely characteristic.
I recognise that the bill will be passed this evening, and maybe the concerns that I have raised will come to be seen to be misplaced but, at this stage, given the gaps, the uncertainty around key issues and the way in which the bill would apply in practice in the islands that I represent and others, it is not a piece of legislation that I or other Scottish Liberal Democrats can support.