Hansard

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."