Meeting of the Parliament 19 March 2026 [Draft]
I will respond briefly to the points that have been made, and I will begin with the points that were made by Tim Eagle and by Jamie Halcro Johnston in his intervention, which we did not hear a convincing answer to. Jamie Halcro Johnston’s point was that people from the Highlands and Islands who, say, have a sick child in a hospital in Edinburgh will need to travel. The City of Edinburgh Council has no incentive to grant a medical exemption because there are no people who live in Edinburgh who would benefit from that, so it is people in other parts of Scotland who will end up losing out. As Tim Eagle said, that would have a particular impact on those who live in rural areas. It would therefore be unfortunate if amendment 26 is not agreed to.
I turn to the point that Stephen Kerr made about shrinkage. I can, from my personal knowledge, give the minister several examples that I have come across of people who ran bed and breakfasts in their homes, letting one room on a short-term seasonal basis, who gave that up entirely because of the short-term let regulation that was brought in by this Government. They decided that it was not worth their while, and there was a shrinkage of that part of the rural economy. The danger is that the visitor levy will come in and add to the bureaucracy and cost of doing business, which will make it more likely that people will say that it is not worth the candle of carrying on with their businesses.
I will address the broader point that the minister referred to—which Mark Griffin also referred to in his intervention—about leaving the schemes up to the discretion of councils. Councils right across Scotland are hard-pressed when it comes to their finances, and many of them are looking at the visitor levy as a way to fill the gap between the amount of money that they need to spend on vital local services and the amount of money that they receive, either through council tax or the grant that comes from the Scottish Government. They face huge cost pressures in areas such as care, and they need to find money somewhere. Therefore, it is not surprising that they are considering how they can raise the maximum amount of money from the visitor levy. That money will come out of the pockets of people who stay in accommodation.
I lodged my amendment on camping sites and caravan parks because the accommodation that they provide is the accommodation that is most used by families who would otherwise struggle to go on holiday, who cannot afford to fly abroad or to stay in swanky hotels. Staying in a static caravan in a caravan park is the only holiday that they can afford. If we do not exempt such accommodation, the reality is that, in future, many people will not be able to take such holidays, because the additional cost of the visitor levy will put it beyond their means.
I intend to press amendment 5 and to move amendment 6, because they relate to the important issue of protecting those families who, without such protection, would not be able to afford a holiday.
I press amendment 5.