Hansard

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 money, which will support the employment of another person—yes, another new job is being created.

There is no doubt in my mind that in a few years the small business bonus scheme will be seen to have had a hugely positive effect on towns, villages and local shopping areas around Scotland—the benefits are already visible in my constituency—and I am sure that we will come back to it before 2011.

Business rates for small businesses have been slashed. I am sure that there is not a single MSP who will not be able to point to small businesses in their areas that have experienced a major boost to their income and expenditure figures. I challenge members who are lukewarm about the policy—Labour members appear to be even more negative than that—to express their faint praise to those small businesses for whom it has been a lifeline. I would be happy to provide John Park with numerous examples of such businesses in my constituency, every one of which I am sure would be glad to speak to him about what a great boon they consider the small business bonus scheme to have been.

Is it enough? In truth, no amount of money will ever be enough—we know that. Arguments can always be made for the provision of more money, and I expect that more than one of us have received letters and e-mails from businesses that do not qualify for the scheme, in which they express their disappointment at being left out. However, we must start somewhere, and it does seem right that we have started with very small businesses.

I have to pinch myself when I hear what some members say because, make no mistake, we are not talking about huge businesses. The businesses in question are tiny; most likely, they involve one self-employed person, who perhaps has one or two employees, who will probably be family members. When we support such businesses—that seems a very grand word to use for some of them—we are supporting families and keeping people away from the dole queue. Just as important, we are contributing to the survival of some of our smallest and most marginal communities. How on earth can any of that be wrong?

The removal of one big bill from the annual expenditures of such microbusinesses shows that this Government means business when it says that it wants to foster a can-do atmosphere in Scotland. For once, business leaders are in agreement about a Government policy. The FSB—the voice of small businesses—has been unequivocal in its support and has made helpful suggestions about how the policy can be made even more effective. I commend to the minister the various points that it has made about the dissemination of information and the possibility of retrospective claims; the minister has already conceded an independent assessment.

These are very difficult times for businesses of any kind. Fuel costs are rising, so prices are rising, too. Households are beginning to cut back on discretionary spending. I am in no doubt about the fact that the scheme's existence this year will have kept open some businesses that would otherwise have had to shut their doors. The cost to society of such business closures is far greater than the immediate effect might suggest. Job losses, even on a small scale, add up across the country. Business closures mean loss of family income and the possibility of debt and worse. Preventing that represents a major contribution to the health of Scotland. Small businesses in England and Wales have made it clear that they would give their eye teeth for the same scheme to be applied in their countries.

More than 5,000 businesses in Perth and Kinross have a rateable value of less than £8,000. In 2009-10 alone, they will save, on average, £1,360. Another 900 or so businesses will save an average of between £1,340 and £1,870. That is a lot of money in just one area of Scotland. Someone said that it almost does not matter what that money is spent on, because it will be spent in the community in some way, shape or form. It is not just figures on paper: it is real people behind real counters with real shop fronts on real high streets. It is not just high streets, though; down the side streets of Perth members will meet new shop owners who will openly tell them what a difference the scheme has made to their first-year projections. I can tell the Lib Dems that one shop owner is married to a former Lib Dem official who is equally effusive about the policy.

It is not just shops; it is also the tradesmen who can stay on in their premises, or move into premises out of their vans or take on extra help when they need it. Even in the current climate, new businesses are opening in small towns such as Crieff and Auchterarder and are already making a difference to them. I have no doubt that a factor in their calculations was the removal of the huge rates burden that they would otherwise have had to bear.

Existing businesses that have benefited in the same towns might otherwise have struggled to cope with the current situation. In my home town of Crieff, I see with my own eyes the change in the shopping streets as small business after small business opens its doors. Let the doomsayers croak on; the truth is that I could introduce them to any number of people who would tell them how welcome and important the scheme is and what it says about a Government that is determined to encourage business with all the tools at its disposal. Would that we had the tools that would allow us to make a difference to much bigger businesses.