Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
13
Parties on record
2,355,091
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Clear
Showing 0 of 2,355,091 contributions in session S6, 16 Apr 2026 – 16 May 2026. Latest 30 days: 148. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 14 May 2026.

No contributions match those filters.

← Back to list
Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 19 February 2026 [Draft]

19 Feb 2026 · S6 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Visitor Levy (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

I start by thanking the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee for its excellent work on the legislation. It feels like yesterday when the 2024 act was passed, which was vital for my city of Edinburgh. Our visitor levy scheme will start this year and is a practical and vital tool that will allow our capital to manage the pressures and opportunities that come with being one of the most popular and visited cities in Europe. Edinburgh welcomes millions of visitors every year, and the number of visitors is set only to increase. Visitors are drawn by our festivals, our heritage, our culture and our global reputation, which we are proud of. However, that success comes with real costs.

The City of Edinburgh Council estimates that the visitor levy could raise around £90 million over three years when it is implemented. For us, that will be transformative. That money could be used to maintain and improve the infrastructure that visitors rely on, including our streets, public transport and parks, and our cultural venues. It could protect our historic environment and help to ensure that the benefits of tourism are felt across the city, not just in the city centre. For example, Leith theatre is lined up to receive £4 million to help it to reopen and £3 million is set to go to the old Royal high school. Our culture sector cannot wait to see money being invested in its projects, but we need to ensure that we get it right.

I say to members who have not been in the Parliament since 1999 that the area has been transformed by tourism and we have a housing emergency. The modest amount of cash that will go to support affordable homes will enable workers who support the tourism sector to live and stay in our city. As many members have said, it is about recognising that tourism, as with any major industry, requires reinvestment. Other European cities have long used visitor levies to balance the needs of residents and visitors alike.

A key issue that has been highlighted by committee members is that, when the 2024 act was passed, there was a need for flexibility in different areas of Scotland that faced different challenges and opportunities in managing tourism, but that was not reflected in the legislation. Alasdair Allan’s point about cruise ships was well made, although, of course, there must be a balance, as we do not want to have millions of amendments between now and the end of parliamentary session.

A key point that has been made repeatedly is that it is critical that local authorities have flexibility. Although a percentage tax makes sense for a city such as Edinburgh, other councils want to take a different approach. It would be good to get clarification in the minister’s closing speech as to whether the Scottish Government will publish its draft amendments as soon as possible for stage 2, and then for stage 3, which I think he is willing to do. That would enable us to properly scrutinise the amendments and ensure that stakeholders are listened to, so that we can do the parliamentary work that we are here to do.

The minister is willing to consider the concerns that have been raised by the Law Society of Scotland about fairness. For example, people may have to stay in a tourist area that has a levy in place because of hospital appointments or court proceedings. It is absolutely critical that we do not create unintended burdens for people who are already going through stressful situations.

The bill gives local authorities powers to act, and it enables them to do so in a way that suits local businesses. I support the committee’s call for implementation to be monitored. With different approaches taken in different parts of the country, it is important that lessons are learned. I suggest that the Government could think about guidance. One issue that frequently comes up in representations from those who have been consulted is the challenge for small businesses in working their way through the process of a visitor levy. It is critical that there is guidance and monitoring, and that lesson are learned from how the visitor levy is implemented across the country.

Stakeholders have made the point that the use and booking of accommodation has all got much more complicated in the past few years, and that needs to be reflected so that the bill works as intended.

One point that has been made quite a lot of times is about the importance of ensuring that the amendments to the 2024 act will work. We need to strengthen the legislation and we need to keep up with the growth that parts of our country are now experiencing.

I note Ariane Burgess’s comments about the Scottish Government’s response of

“We are considering these matters”.

The sooner we get clarity, the better—not just for members, but for key stakeholders.

I urge colleagues to support the bill. We need to engage constructively with the concerns that have been raised so that we deliver future-focused, successful legislation. The legislation has to work. I suspect that those who are members in the next session will be discussing the matter again, in relation to cruise ships, how the legislation is working or the details—and details in legislation are important. Guidance, monitoring, ensuring that we have made the bill the best that it can be, given the circumstances that we are going through—that is our job. Let us work constructively to do it.

15:57

In the same item of business

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Liam McArthur) LD
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-20814, in the name of Ivan McKee, on the Visitor Levy (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. I invite me...
The Minister for Public Finance (Ivan McKee) SNP
Scotland benefits from having a significant number of first-class sectors that compete with the best in the world, including our world-renowned tourism secto...
Sarah Boyack (Lothian) (Lab) Lab
In its evidence to the committee, the Law Society of Scotland suggested that an exemption from the levy be considered for visitors who are compelled to stay ...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Liam McArthur) LD
Minister, I will give you the time back.
Ivan McKee SNP
The exemption powers that local authorities have would already enable such an exemption to be made at the local level. However, I am willing to engage in fur...
Daniel Johnson (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Lab
The minister is right to say that the bill is about responding to need and that it affords additional possibilities. However, he has not acknowledged the fun...
Ivan McKee SNP
That is a very fair point. The Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee asked why more of those issues were not picked up at stage 2 of the previous ...
Stephen Kerr (Central Scotland) (Con) Con
I will be less diplomatic than Daniel Johnson. Does the minister regret not listening to the Conservatives, who were making exactly those points to him durin...
Ivan McKee SNP
To be clear, they were not making exactly the same points. The Conservative proposition was to not give councils the flexibility to operate a percentage sche...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Liam McArthur) LD
I advise members that we have a little bit of time in hand.15:05
Ariane Burgess (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Green
I am pleased to speak on behalf of the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee. I thank everyone who gave evidence to the committee, including counc...
Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Con
Let me make it clear from the outset that the Scottish Conservatives will support the bill at stage 1. The bill is a welcome step in the right direction and ...
Alasdair Allan (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) SNP
I cannot speak for all local authorities, but I understood that at least some local authorities had agreed not to charge the visitor levy for people who were...
Murdo Fraser Con
I accept that that may be the case, but I think that it would be far better, from the point of view of clarity, if we had a scheme that made it very clear wh...
Mark Griffin (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lab
I thank the organisations and individuals who provided evidence during the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee’s scrutiny of the bill and the or...
Ivan McKee SNP
I confirm that that will not be the case. That will be resolved.
Mark Griffin Lab
I thank the minister for confirming that, and I look forward to supporting that amendment at stage 2.We need a visitor levy that works for local communities ...
Willie Rennie (North East Fife) (LD) LD
Ivan McKee is too much “team SNP” to dump his predecessor in it, but, if he had a bit more freedom to speak openly, he would admit that mistakes were made in...
Fulton MacGregor (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) SNP
I am pleased to contribute to today’s stage 1 debate on the Visitor Levy (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill and to speak in support of its general principles, parti...
Tim Eagle (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Con
First, I want to respond to Willie Rennie—ever the father of the house—giving us that guidance on bells and whistles. I have to throw a tantrum and tell him ...
Alasdair Allan (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) SNP
A visitor levy is a welcome step forward for our local authorities, and I hope that it can now be implemented in a way that takes account of local factors. T...
Daniel Johnson (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Lab
I, too, welcome the bill and, indeed, the dialogue that the Government has had with stakeholders and members across the chamber, because there was a real iss...
Stephen Kerr Con
Daniel Johnson is quite right to say things like, “I told you so,” although we need to consider Labour’s record in response to the progress of the bill throu...
Daniel Johnson Lab
I agree with that, but I will leave it to members to decide whether that is in a good way or a bad way.Above all, it is worth remembering a couple of fundame...
Evelyn Tweed (Stirling) (SNP) SNP
I am glad to speak in the debate and share some of what the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee heard during its stage 1 considerations.Tourism ...
Stephen Kerr Con
Evelyn Tweed will be aware that, in Stirling, the SNP proposes the introduction of a levy. It is one of the few places that is sticking firmly to the idea. T...
Evelyn Tweed SNP
I thank the member for the intervention, but I think that I have already covered that point. Interruption. Yes, I have. It is up to individual local authorit...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Annabelle Ewing) SNP
We move to closing speeches.15:51
Sarah Boyack (Lothian) (Lab) Lab
I start by thanking the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee for its excellent work on the legislation. It feels like yesterday when the 2024 act...
Stephen Kerr (Central Scotland) (Con) Con
We had a refreshing moment of honesty from the minister in his opening remarks, when he volunteered that the Government had introduced legislation for a sect...