Tourist tax could generate £1m income in West Lothian
A visitor levy scheme for West Lothian could potentially bring in more than £1m a year into council coffers.
But while councillors welcomed the start of consultations agreed this week, the Tories branded the proposals a tourist tax which would hit local business and discourage visitors.
And councillors were concerned as officers offered a cautious two-year path to an actual introduction following a similar decision taken by the council in Edinburgh last month.
Councillor Sally Pattle, Lib Dem, Linithgow, asked how soon the levy could be introduced. 'How urgently are we moving on this, what is the timeline given this is an easy revenue stream we can capitalise on.'
The meeting heard that there are statutory guidelines on the introduction of a levy demanding clear consultation.
'Are those conversations taking place already?' asked Councillor Pattle.
Jim Henderson, Business development manager said the conversation was in the early stages.
Edinburgh last month agreed to impose a 5% levy from next summer. Glasgow, Argyll and Bute, and Aberdeen are all now in formal consultation stage. Other councils such as East Lothian, Stirling, Dumfries & Galloway, and others have been given approval for 'early engagement' work.
Many cities across Europe now have visitor levies in place.
A report to West Lothian's Executive outlined potential income based on the 298,000 visitors who stayed in the county in 2024. The most expensive accommodation, with an average spend of £100 per person per night would generate £1,342, 800 at a 5% levy. The lowest proposed levy of 2% would generate more than £500,000 in the most expensive accommodation.
In a report to the Executive, Stewart Ness, Tourism and Town Centre Manager said: 'Whilst Visitor Levy is historically considered in areas of 'over-tourism', such as Edinburgh, it may be inappropriate to argue that this applies across West Lothian where some areas might benefit from an increase in visitors.
'There could be a risk that West Lothian is 'left behind' by neighbouring local authority areas that do use the ring-fenced funds raised through the introduction of a Visitor Levy to invest in tourism in their areas.'
Stressing the need to establish consultation with local businesses Mr Ness added: 'Local authorities are encouraged to conduct early engagement before entering the consultation phase.
'Although not statutory, this engagement phase is considered by the guidance to be best practice. Learning from other local authorities' areas who have undergone the process is available and this could be used to guide the process in West Lothian.
'By engaging with the tourism businesses in this collaborative fashion, it will increase understanding for the scheme amongst those who will be responsible for collecting the levy.
'By using already established networks, such as Visit West Lothian and Business Gateway, it should increase the participation rates of businesses in the engagement.'
However Conservative group leader Damian Doran-Timson criticised a move to what he called a tourist tax which could damage local business.
In an amendment he said: 'Given the importance of this tax on business and the negative impact this is likely to have on the tourist economy across West Lothian it is vital that all West Lothian Councillors are involved in the decision making on this extra tax.'
The amendment welcomed the decision to engage with those in the tourism industry and added: '[We] trust the Council will ensure those who will have to administrate the scheme are fully advised of the processes involved and the implications.'
He told the meeting: 'This is a tax on people, a tax on businesses and a tax in individuals.'
The amendment called for any future decision on the implementation of a levy to come back to full council because all councillors would have businesses in their areas which could be affected.
The SNP group leader Janet Campbell welcomed the report but said: 'It doesn't seem to be moving forward at a pace we would have expected and, given that we are looking at more than £1m, which would almost cover the savings to be made on the community centres. It seems to be a bit of a no-brainer.'
Councillor Pattle said: ' I welcome this report, but I have concerns about the lack of urgency, I hope that we are able to move forward with this easy income strategy at pace.'
In a vote Councillor Doran-Timson's amendment demanding later decisions come to full council rather than the executive was defeated along with a similar amendment from the SNP.
By Stuart Sommerville, Local Democracy Reporter
Like this:
Like
Related
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
4 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Brexit destruction - 'stupidest' and 'unhinged' fair enough
It would surely be easy to make the argument that he hit the nail on the head. After all, it is certainly not wise decision-making which is behind a move to cause major damage to your economy. Mr Bloomberg, who was visiting his eponymous company's Dublin offices exactly nine years after the UK's referendum, added of Brexit: 'It's hard to believe how they did it.' It is indeed difficult to believe, as the nightmare continues. Mr Bloomberg's comments evoked memories of what Professor Sir Anton Muscatelli, principal and vice-chancellor of the University of Glasgow, had to say about Brexit in the aftermath of the vote. Sir Anton told the Scottish Government Brexit Summit for Further and Higher Education back in November 2018: 'I've previously referred to our impending exit from the EU as 'the most unhinged example of national self-sabotage in living memory'. 'Nothing has happened in the last few weeks to change that view. Indeed, with the confusion and uncertainty we are seeing every day in Whitehall, if anything my view has only hardened.' This was before former Conservative prime minister Boris Johnson's administration took the UK out of the European single market at the end of December 2020 in a hard Brexit. This folly saw the ending of free movement of people between the country and the European Economic Area and the loss of frictionless trade with the UK's biggest trading partner. Read more So words such as 'unhinged', from Sir Anton, and 'stupidest', from Mr Bloomberg, seem perfectly measured and proportionate in the scheme of things. What is also hard to fathom, based on any economic rationale, is the Labour Government's 'red lines' of not taking the UK back into the European Union, single market, or even the customs union. That said, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and Labour look to be far more focused on politics than economics when it comes to Brexit, and specifically appear terrified of upsetting those red-wall voters who swept Mr Johnson to power in December 2019. It was this general election victory which enabled the incredibly foolish hard Brexit for which we are all paying the price - Leave and Remain voters alike. My column in The Herald last Wednesday - focused on a YouGov poll which surely yielded some interesting findings for Sir Keir and Labour - observed: 'Les Britanniques 'Bregret' beaucoup.' Noting the ninth anniversary, on June 23, of the vote for Brexit, the pollster declared: 'YouGov polling has long since shown that the public are 'Bregretful' about that outcome, with our latest survey showing 56% think it was wrong for Britain to vote to leave the EU.' My column observed: 'There might still be the sounds of 'non, je ne Bregret rien' from those who voted for the folly. And some of those who led voters down the Brexit path continue to bump their gums rather noisily. 'However, the quieter majority clearly knows what is actually going on. YouGov's latest findings show, as its polls have for years now, a clear majority believes the UK was wrong to leave the EU. Only 31% now think the UK was right to leave.' Read more The YouGov poll found most people in the UK want to see the country return to the EU - 56%. This is way ahead of the 34% opposing such a move, with 10% of those polled saying they do not know. Sir Nick Harvey, chief executive of the European Movement UK campaign group, said on June 22: "Labour's 'red lines' on its relationship reset with the European Union, including no return to the single market or the EU customs union, must now be revisited and revised. The reasons why will not have escaped the Government's notice, even if it does not want to look in their direction." His observation about Sir Keir's administration not wanting to look at the reasons is an astute one. Not only is Labour sticking with its red lines but it continues to refuse to acknowledge the scale of the Brexit damage. My column last Wednesday, noting another finding of the YouGov poll, observed: 'The fact that 56% of those who voted for Labour last July consider rejoining the EU to be the right priority, right now, raises the question of why Sir Keir and his colleagues seem hell-bent on going along with the views of the minority in their policymaking. Labour has made it clear that it is absolutely intent on maintaining its 'red lines', a truly lamentable state of affairs.' Sir Nick said: "Nine years have passed since the United Kingdom voted to leave the European that time, the consequences for the British people have become increasingly stark. This latest polling not only reinforces that - it shows that more and more people see the benefits of much closer ties with the European Union - having felt the pain of Brexit. "Leaving the EU has delivered a sustained and worsening blow to the UK economy - one that is especially pronounced for the small and medium-sized enterprises that form the backbone of our commercial and industrial landscape who are living with the consequences every day. That has made us all poorer, depleted our economy and weakened our country with a thousand tiny cuts.' There is surely much food for thought in these comments, is there not Sir Keir?
BBC News
8 hours ago
- BBC News
Lifetime ISAs leave some with less money than they put in, MPs warn
Some people who pay into a Lifetime Individual Savings Account (LISA) may end up getting less money out than they put in, MPs have warned, as they call for the product to be under 40 can open a LISA to either help save towards retirement or buy a first home. You can put in up to £4,000 a year and the government will top it up by 25%.But the Treasury Committee said if LISA funds were withdrawn early due to unforeseen circumstances, charges mean people face losing 6.25% of their own savings. It also warned the "complex" product may not suit everyone, and it might have been mis-sold to people on certain government has said previously it is looking at reforming ISAs. You can hold a LISA in addition to any other type of individual savings account, such as a cash ISA or a stocks and shares ISA. These other options allow you to pay in up to £20,000 a year. Dual purpose LISAs were launched in 2017 under the then-Conservative then, 6% of eligible adults have opened one, with about 1.3 million accounts still open, according to the most recent figures. MPs on the Treasury Committee have been gathering evidence on whether the product is still fit for a new report, the committee said the LISA's dual purpose to help people save for both the short- and long-term "makes it more likely consumers will choose unsuitable investment strategies". "Cash LISAs may suit those saving for a first home but may not achieve the best outcome for those using it as a retirement savings product, as they are unable to invest in higher risk but potentially higher return products such as bonds and equities," the report said.'We used a Lifetime ISA to buy our first home'It noted a surge in withdrawal charges, with almost double the amount of people making an unauthorised withdrawal (99,650) compared to the number of people who used their LISA to buy a home (56,900) in committee said this should be considered a possible indication that the product was not working as also described the rules which penalise benefit claimants as "nonsensical".Currently any savings held in a LISA can affect eligibility for universal credit or housing benefit, whereas this is not the case for other personal or workplace pension schemes. If that is not changed, the committee said the LISA should be "clearly labelled as an inferior product" to those who may be eligible for such benefits. Best use of public money? The Office for Budget Responsibility predicts spending on bonuses paid on LISAs will cost the Treasury around £3bn over the next five committee questioned whether the LISA was "the best use of public money given the current strain on public finances" and also raised concerns that the product could be "subsidising the cost of a first home for wealthier people at a significant cost to the taxpayer". "We are still awaiting further data that may shed some light on who exactly the product is helping," said committee chair Dame Meg Hillier."What we already know, though, is that the Lifetime ISA needs to be reformed before it can genuinely be described as a market-leading savings product for both prospective homebuyers and those who want to start saving for their retirement at a young age." The BBC has contacted the Treasury for a response to the government has previously said it is "looking at options for reforms" when it comes to ISAs to encourage investing has said that while it is important to support people to save, it wants to get the balance right.
ITV News
18 hours ago
- ITV News
George Freeman, MP for Mid Norfolk, refers himself to watchdog over 'cash for questions' allegations
The Conservative MP for Mid Norfolk has referred himself to the parliamentary watchdog after he was accused of taking money to ask questions of government on behalf of a private company. The Times reported that George Freeman broke multiple rules set out in the MP's code of conduct, including lobbying on behalf of a private company. The report alleged that he was paid by firm that helped him write questions which were submitted to Labour ministers. The newspaper published what it said were leaked emails that showed exchanges in which Mr Freeman had asked the company's director what to ask about as he prepared written parliamentary questions related to space data and emissions tracking. He reportedly tabled the questions, which are a way for MPs to ask for more information on the policies and activities of government departments, to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero. He became a paid adviser with GHGSat, a monitoring service for greenhouse gas emissions, in April last year. The appointments watchdog Acoba advised him that in taking up the role, 'there are risks associated with your influence and network of contacts gained whilst in ministerial office'. 'In particular, this is a company that is interested in government policy and decisions relating to the civil space sector and emissions. 'You noted you have made it clear to the company that you will not lobby government on its behalf, and this will not form part of your role.' Mr Freeman told the Times: 'As a longstanding advocate of important new technologies, companies and industries, working cross-party through APPGs (All-Party Parliamentary Groups) and the select committee, I regularly ask experts for clarification on technical points and terminology, and deeply respect and try to assiduously follow the code of conduct for MPs and the need to act always in the public interest. 'Throughout my 15 years in parliament (and government), I have always understood the need to be transparent in the work I have done for and with commercial clients and charities and am always willing to answer any criticism. 'I don't believe I have done anything wrong but I am immediately referring myself to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards and will accept his judgment in due course.' Mr Freeman and GHGSat have been contacted for comment. A Conservative Party spokesperson said: 'George Freeman MP has referred himself to the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner. 'It would be inappropriate for the Conservative Party to comment further whilst the Commissioner's inquiries are ongoing.' The Lib Dems and Labour called for Tory leader Kemi Badenoch to suspend him. A Labour spokesperson said: 'Cash for questions was a hallmark of Tory sleaze in the 1990s, and three decades on the same issue has raised its head again. 'George Freeman has referred himself for investigation so now Kemi Badenoch must suspend him from the Tory whip.' Liberal Democrat Deputy Leader Daisy Cooper MP said: 'This looks like the same old sleaze and scandal people have come to expect from the Conservative Party. 'Kemi Badenoch should immediately suspend the whip from George Freeman while this is investigated. 'Failure to act would confirm that even after being booted out of government, the Conservatives are still hopelessly out of touch.' The MP for Mid Norfolk is currently on the science, innovation and technology committee and a trade envoy. He was responsible for the UK space agency in his previous role as a minister in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology under Rishi Sunak.
