Plans for Glasgow tourist tax approved by councillors
It is expected the fee could bring in about £16 million annually after costs and will apply to hotels, hostels, guest houses, B&Bs and self-catering accommodation.
Speaking at the city administration committee on Thursday, City treasurer Ricky Bell said he and leader Susan Aitken 'had been lobbying the Scottish Government for some time to give us more powers to be able to raise our own revenues and this is the start of what I hope will be a continuation of those powers being devolved to local government.'
READ MORE: BAE given £9.2 million to create 300 shipbuilding jobs by Scottish Government
It is proposed that hotel operators keep 1.5% of the amount collected to make up for any costs incurred. Organisations who don't comply would face penalties.
Councillors approved the visitor levy at the city administration committee on Thursday morning.
Cash generated would go towards the look and feel of the city with investment in infrastructure and the 'built and natural environment' as well as culture and events and marketing of the city as a destination to grow visitors.
A visitor levy forum is also to be set up to provide advice to the council relating to the scheme and it is proposed those involved in the visitor sector and representatives from communities would have a key role.
Employees are to be appointed at Glasgow City Council to handle the process and annual costs are estimated to be about £750,000 to £950,000 – with initial set up expected to be £400,000.
Scottish Green councillors moved an amendment at the committee relating to accommodation provider costs stating that they 'may only retain money under this rebate scheme for three years' and providing more details on penalties if they don't pay.
The amendment was rejected by Labour, the SNP and a Conservative councillor.
Commenting, Scottish Green councillor Blair Anderson, whose motion started the process, said: 'The tourist tax is going to be a game-changer for Glasgow, delivering more money to tidy up our city and make it even more attractive for visitors and residents alike.
READ MORE: 300 jobs at risk as London-based firm moves Scottish Power contract to South Africa
'A small contribution from tourists will mean we can invest millions more in street sweeping, bin collections, and getting Glasgow looking good again.
'I'm glad that Greens in Holyrood got this law passed, and I'm grateful to all councillors who have worked with me over recent months to get this tax in place as soon as possible.'
Meanwhile, Scottish Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie said: 'Glasgow is a global city, drawing visitors from all over the world. But we have seen how over-tourism can damage communities, like in Venice and Barcelona, where the residents end up paying the price.
'The tourist tax is vital to delivering sustainable tourism where local residents feel the benefit of our tourism and events sectors. I'm delighted that Glasgow is continuing to benefit from Green policy in action.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
19 minutes ago
- The Independent
Ministers must summon the courage to right an ‘obvious injustice'
The very judges who handed out 'unfair' indefinite prison sentences have joined The Independent 's campaign to resentence thousands of offenders who are still trapped by a law that was abolished in 2012. Sir John Saunders, a former High Court judge, tells us that he would apologise to offenders he sentenced to imprisonment for public protection (IPP) terms. 'I should say I'm really sorry this has happened; it's extremely unfair,' he said. 'I didn't want to be party to unfairness. I would feel very bad about it, I would apologise to them.' The sentences, described as an 'obvious injustice' by one former senior judge, were introduced by David Blunkett as home secretary in 2005 in an attempt to deal with a small number of offenders who might continue to be a danger to the public. Such prisoners were given no release date, were subject to stringent assessment before being let out, and were then liable indefinitely for recall to prison if they broke the conditions of their release. However, the sentences were used more often than Lord Blunkett intended, and the psychological effects of indefinite detention caused more problems than it solved. Lord Blunkett now describes the policy as his 'biggest regret'. The law was repealed by the coalition government in 2012, but it continued to apply to the thousands of prisoners still serving IPP sentences. Victims of the scandal, whose tragic cases have been taken up by The Independent, include Leroy Douglas, who has served 19 years for stealing a mobile phone; Thomas White, who set himself alight in his cell and has served 13 years for stealing a phone; and Abdullahi Suleman, who is still inside 19 years after he was jailed for a laptop robbery. The Independent supports a plan put forward by an expert panel convened by the Howard League for Penal Reform, which calls for IPP prisoners to be given a release date within a two-year window at their next parole hearing. They should, in effect, be resentenced and treated henceforth on the same basis as all other offenders. James Timpson, the prisons minister, says: 'We have significantly improved support for these offenders, with greater access to rehabilitation and mental health support. There is more work to do as we reduce the number of IPP offenders in custody, but we will only do so in a way that protects the public.' We understand why ministers in successive governments have been reluctant to go further. They are fearful of the consequences if someone released from an IPP sentence goes on to commit a serious offence. And they are right to make the protection of the public the highest priority. But that will not be achieved by the continued indefinite detention of 2,500 prisoners who were unlucky enough to be sentenced at the wrong time. Especially when a greater risk to the public is probably posed by the early release of prisoners to free up space in our overcrowded prisons. Simon Tonking, the former recorder of Stafford, told The Independent that the Labour government should use its majority to end the injustice by taking up the Howard League's proposals: 'Virtually everybody who has had any professional dealings with IPP knows that it is unjust and now is the time to act.' It is no use for former ministers such as Lord Blunkett and Alex Chalk, the former justice secretary, calling for justice to be done after they have left office. It is up to Lord Timpson, his boss Shabana Mahmood and ultimately Sir Keir Starmer to do the right thing while they can.
The Sun
19 minutes ago
- The Sun
Chelsea have spent eye-watering £360MILLION on defenders in three years – but how many of them were worth it?
THE arrival of £37million Jorrel Hato takes Chelsea's spending on defenders under their new owners past a record-shattering £360m. Yet the Blues back four which lines up against Crystal Palace on the opening weekend of the new season may well include just one player who cost a fee. Marc Cucurella, who came in from Brighton three years ago in a deal worth up to £62m, is the biggest success of Chelsea 's hit-and-miss defensive recruitment. The signing of Hato is a major coup for the Blues, with Liverpool and Arsenal among the other major clubs who wanted the talented and versatile teenager. The young Dutchman is the 12th defender brought in since the consortium led by Clearlake Capital and Todd Boehly took over the club in May 2022. But Cucurella, a Euro 2024 winner with Spain, is the only member of the current Chelsea back four that you would describe as world class. And if Chelsea are to win domestic and European titles, they will need more defenders to reach that level. To be fair, Enzo Maresca 's side can already claim to be world champions. To beat a flair-filled Paris Saint-Germain side 3-0, just weeks after they had spanked Inter Milan 5-0 in the Champions League final, was an impressive achievement. The back four which started the Club World Cup final was left back Cucurella, homegrown centre backs Levi Colwill and Trevoh Chalobah, and right back Malo Gusto. The Frenchman, now 22, could end up costing Chelsea £30.7m after signing from Lyon in January 2023 and spending the rest of that season on loan back at the French club. Gusto has done a decent, sometimes very good, job at right back. He covered for the long injury-related absences of Reece James over the last two seasons and kept his place when James was employed in midfield - as he was against PSG. 8 8 But if you believe Moises Caicedo and Enzo Fernandez will start the biggest games in front of the defence, and James will mostly play as an inverted right back when he is fit, then Gusto will not be in Enzo Maresca's strongest 11. Chalobah did well after returning from half a season on loan at Crystal Palace, but could yet find himself being sold this summer. As a product of the Chelsea Academy, he would generate pure profit for financial rules purposes and there could be clubs willing to pay £40m for him. If Chalobah left, his replacement as right-sided centre back at the start of the season would almost certainly be Tosin Adarabioyo. The free transfer from Fulham last summer has carved a niche for himself off the pitch as well as on it. At just 27 he is one of the senior members of the squad, and plays an 'Uncle Tosin' role to the youngsters, enjoying a particularly close relationship with fellow Mancunian Cole Palmer. But no-one, not even Tosin himself, would claim that he is one of Europe's best defenders. If Wesley Fofana is able to put his injury hell behind him and rediscover his previous form, he could yet meet those standards and become a Chelsea stalwart for years to come. Fofana, still just 24, has made only 34 appearances for the Blues since arriving from Leicester in the summer of 2022 in a deal worth up to £75m. He is the most expensive of all Chelsea's defensive signings and that means, through no fault of his own, he has also been the biggest let down. But only just. The Blues really have had trouble finding a settled and satisfactory centre back pairing. Within weeks of the 2022 takeover, Kalidou Koulibaly became the new regime's first defensive signing. The Napoli star's £35m fee felt a little steep for a player about to turn 31, but the Senegal international was highly-rated and on the radar of other big clubs. Koulibaly failed to live up to his billing, although he could point to the chaos of playing under three different managers and a hamstring injury as decent explanations. He was offloaded after just one season to Saudi Pro League side Al-Hilal - and played for them in this year's Club World Cup. When Chelsea set a new record for winter window spending in early 2023, Benoit Badiashile 's £35m arrival from Monaco went a little under the radar in the wake of massive deals for Enzo Fernandez and Mykhailo Mudryk. The Frenchman did fine in a struggling team in the remainder of the 22/23 season, but not well enough to seal his spot. And when injury kept Badiashile out of the start of the following campaign, Colwill took his chance after returning from loan at Brighton. 8 8 8 Meanwhile the unfortunate Fofana had suffered the second major knee injury of his short Chelsea career in the summer of 2023. Within weeks, the Blues had gone back to Monaco to bring in Axel Disasi for another £38m. The France international was a first choice under Mauricio Pochettino for much of the 2023/4 season. But new boss Maresca did not fancy Disasi, and he was sent on loan to Aston Villa for the second half of last season. The signing of Hato, 19, fits Chelsea's current transfer philosophy of signing the best young players and trying to turn them into superstars. If they fail, they can usually be sold on for a profit, as is likely to be the case with Renato Veiga. The versatile Portuguese was signed only last summer, did well enough to earn a loan to Juventus for the second half of the season and could find himself joining Atletico Madrid for a chunky fee. In addition to Veiga, Chelsea signed two teenage defenders last summer in centre back Aaron Anselmino and left back Caleb Wiley. The latter has now returned to Watford for a second season on loan, while Anselmino may well also leave on a temporary deal after recovering from injury. Mamadou Sarr, 19, is likely to be loaned back to Strasbourg after the Blues paid £12m to their sister club. Hato is also 19 but at a fee of £37m, he will surely need to deliver for Chelsea this season. The Blues will probably ease him in, perhaps initially as cover for left back Cucurella. In the longer term, Hato should end up challenging Colwill for that left-sided centre back slot or forming a partnership with the England international. And finally, after spending more on defenders than any club, Chelsea could end up with a world-class back four to show for it. 8
The Guardian
19 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on car finance scandal redress: mis-sold loans demand action, not excuses or spin
With its ruling in the car finance case, the UK supreme court sent a clear message: some motorists purchased vehicles with deals that were indeed unfair, but it's not the judiciary's job to redraw the boundaries of consumer protection law. That burden, the justices suggested, rests with regulators and elected governments. This reasoning is in line with a major speech in June by the court's president, Lord Reed, who argued that judges aren't policymakers – and shouldn't be. He led a bench that nonetheless upheld a finding of unfairness in the case of the factory supervisor Marcus Johnson. The court flagged the danger, defined the threshold – but stopped short of imposing redress itself. Now, the baton has been passed. Millions could get payouts if the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) follows the court ruling with its proposed redress scheme, now out for consultation. The regulator admits what courts and campaigners have long suggested: that hidden commissions and opaque contracts were endemic, and that consumers were misled on a large scale. It may be 2025, but the roots of this scandal stretch back decades. More than 90% of new car purchases are financed, and for years, buyers weren't offered the best deal – just the one that earned the broker the biggest cut. Last October, the court of appeal saw hidden commissions as tantamount to bribes – secret incentives to push pricier loans. Banks had been on the hook for potentially £40bn in compensation had that view prevailed. But the supreme court disagreed. Dealers aren't fiduciaries, it said. They're not priests or doctors. They're salespeople and everyone knows it. The Treasury had tried, and failed, to intervene on behalf of banks that feared big payouts. The supreme court dismissed that petition with waspish brevity. Rachel Reeves may argue she was guarding financial stability, but it is not a good look to be siding with lenders over misled consumers, especially when there is a strong case to suggest regulators had been asleep at the wheel. The FCA now admits that many firms broke the rules. It plans a compensation scheme covering loans dating back to 2007, including both discretionary and some non-discretionary commission arrangements. The potential bill? At least £9bn, and possibly double that. Most individuals will probably receive less than £950 in compensation. The court's refusal to stretch the law to encompass issues of trust wasn't a shrug; it was a signal. The law allows unfairness to be addressed. But the heavy lifting must be done by the state. This episode lays bare a deeper malaise. Britain's credit system often runs on skewed incentives and asymmetric information. Brokers pose as advisers but act as commission-driven salespeople. In Mr Johnson's case a £1,650 hidden commission – a quarter of the car's price – went undisclosed. That's not a quirk; it's economics' classic lemons problem. In car finance, consumers didn't know how much brokers were pocketing or how that skewed the deal. Without trust or clarity, quality suffers – and everyone overpays for 'lemons' (duds). The court of appeal did focus minds; and failing to interpret the law robustly in the face of clear wrongdoing is itself a judicial choice. The supreme court smartly redirected the narrative. The regulator is stirring. Ministers must now support a consumer-facing system of redress and not shield the City from the consequences of its own mis‑selling. The public will be watching.
