Air Passenger Duty (Abolition)
To ask the Scottish Government what independent assessment has been carried out into the impact of abolishing air passenger duty (S4T-01363).
We will reduce the burden of air passenger duty in Scotland by 50 per cent, with the reduction beginning when a Scottish replacement tax is introduced in April 2018 and delivered in full by the end of the next session of the Scottish Parliament, which is expected to be in 2021. We will also abolish the tax entirely when resources allow.
We launched a public consultation on a Scottish replacement tax on Monday 14 March. The consultation seeks views on how the replacement tax should be structured and operated to help boost Scotland’s international connectivity and generate sustainable growth. In recognition of the important environmental issues that need to be considered, a consultation has also been launched on the initial findings and proposed scope and methodology of the strategic environmental assessment that we are undertaking.
My question was what independent assessment had been carried out. In 2013, my colleague Willie Rennie asked the same question and asked for the evidence. In the official written answer at that time, which I have, the Scottish Government referred us to the easyJet corporate website, to a report that had been commissioned by four airlines. Did I miss the news—is the Scottish Government now just a wholly owned subsidiary of the aviation industry?
If Alison McInnes had listened to my initial answer, she would know that I mentioned that we have gone out to consultation. In addition, we have a stakeholder group, which includes, for example, environmental groups and others. Of course, the industry will have an interest in the issue. In addition to the reports that she mentioned, there is the York Aviation report. Those reports are in the public domain, but it is important that we take on everyone’s views. We have sought to do that by establishing the stakeholder group, which will also consider responses to the initial findings of the strategic environmental assessment, and the further responses from consultees—that is, from anyone in the country who wants to respond. That is the responsible way to proceed and it will give us an idea of the feelings of those who would be most affected by the change.
The York Aviation report was also commissioned by the aviation industry—you could not make it up. Look at the stakeholder forum that the minister has referred to—I counted 15 airlines and airport representatives and just one environmental voice. Is that really the best balance that the minister can get?
No, there is more than one environmental voice. As well as Stop Climate Chaos Scotland, we have links with Scottish Environmental LINK, which also responded. We are taking the point very seriously. However, the proposal will have a profound effect on airlines and airports, and it is only natural that we want to take their views on how best to proceed. We have also undertaken a separate environmental assessment on the likely emissions.
We are moving forward in a responsible way. I do not hear from Alison McInnes a single word of support for a measure that will greatly increase economic activity in Scotland and provide benefits for passengers and for small businesses, tourist attractions and the general economy across the country. It is a positive move, and it would be nice if Alison McInnes could occasionally be positive about some of the things that the Scottish Government does.
Stop Climate Chaos Scotland has said that a cut in APD would lead to 60,000 more tonnes of CO2, which is on top of emission targets being missed for four years running and a 10 per cent cut in the climate change budget. Passenger numbers are already at record levels. Is a £250 million aviation tax break not the final nail in the coffin of the Scottish National Party’s green credentials?
The reference to £250 million is as accurate as some of the other statements that Alison McInnes has made. It is completely wrong.
What would have been the purpose of consulting and involving in the stakeholder group only those with whom we agreed? That is why Stop Climate Chaos is there.
We have to meet the emissions impact targets across the whole range of Government activity. It is also possible to introduce the replacement tax in a way that will have the effect of reducing emissions, not least by encouraging, if that is what is chosen to be done, long-haul routes at the expense of short-haul routes. That way, some of the most environmentally damaging short-haul routes can be cut out. This is a positive move, and it is being received very positively. We will of course take on board the views of all interest groups, including those with an environmental interest. That is why they are involved in the stakeholder group, and that is the right way to proceed.
Given that Aberdeen airport is in my constituency and that the managing director of Aberdeen airport has been very open about the economic benefits that would be brought not just to the airport but to the wider north-east economy as a consequence of a reduction in air passenger duty, does the minister share my horror that a north-east representative in the shape of Alison McInnes is talking down the impact that the proposal could have on the economy of the region that she is supposed to represent?
Mark McDonald makes a good point. It would be interesting to hear a conversation between Alison McInnes and Carol Benzie, the chief executive of the airport, in which Alison McInnes tries to talk against something that, according to one study, would have led to around 0.7 million additional passengers passing through Scotland’s airports in 2015, rising to 0.9 million by 2020, as well as the direct, indirect and induced impact of a 50 per cent reduction in operational impact, and nearly 4,000 additional jobs and £200 million per annum in gross value added by 2020. Those are the beneficial effects of the measure.
As well as the Government having to address the issues of people who have concerns about the matter, it would be interesting to hear Alison McInnes—I do not know whether she is arguing for APD staying as it is or for increasing it even further, bearing in mind that it is already the most expensive tax of its type in the world—address the concerns of people who support the move.
I welcome the Government’s consultation, including on the impact on the environment. Will the Scottish Government talk to the Dutch Government? In 2008-09, the Dutch Government applied APD to accrue €280 million but scrapped it after 18 months because it was losing €1.3 billion and many jobs in the hospitality and tourism industry.
We are very conscious of that example, and we would, of course, be more than happy to receive a submission from Chic Brodie on that particular point, which we have noted.
I think that, in the previous United Kingdom Parliament, the UK Government afforded Northern Ireland the opportunity to reduce APD to zero for transatlantic flights. That is interesting. I also think that the Liberal Democrats supported that. The question is why the Liberal Democrats would support that for other parts of the United Kingdom but not for Scotland.
I entirely agree with Chic Brodie that other places, including the Republic of Ireland, have found it very beneficial to avoid doing what the UK seems to have wanted to do in relation to Scotland, which is to give the country the highest tax of its type in the world and therefore an inhibition on economic activity.
High-speed Broadband (Access)
To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to ensure that every household in Scotland will have access to high-speed broadband. (S4T-01360)
Our goal is to ensure that everyone has access to high-speed broadband. Our investment through the digital Scotland superfast broadband programme will deliver at least 95 per cent fibre broadband coverage by 2017. Through community broadband Scotland and a second phase of investment, we will ensure that the remaining 5 per cent have access to superfast broadband as early as possible. If the Scottish National Party is re-elected in May, an SNP Government will ensure that superfast broadband is delivered to 100 per cent of premises across Scotland over the next session.
I have recollections of the Scottish Government making a similar promise prior to the 2011 general election. The Deputy First Minister has now taken to writing to BT to complain about the lack of progress in the Highlands and Islands, although I have been telling him about that for a very long time. I have also invited him to visit innovative projects in my region, which he has not found time to do. What proportion of the people in the Highlands and Islands will have access to high-speed broadband by 2017?
I am happy to provide those figures to Rhoda Grant. She will be aware that nearly 7,000 homes a week are being put on to broadband. She will also be aware of the innovative schemes that the Deputy First Minister has overseen in some of the small isles, for example, to make sure that other methods of ensuring that people have access to broadband are taken forward.
The target to ensure that every single person can access superfast broadband is very ambitious, not least when we consider some of the households that Rhoda Grant is talking about, which can be very remote and very expensive to connect. The Scottish Government’s commitment is to ensure that everybody benefits—it is a universal obligation whereby everybody gets access. Perhaps it would be better if Rhoda Grant were able to support that.
I not only support that, I have fought for it for years. It is disappointing that we have made so little progress.
When I met the Deputy First Minister, he promised to let me know which houses would be covered by the first phase of the roll-out in the Highlands and Islands. I am still waiting for that information, as are my constituents. Why is he reacting now? Could that be because he is just afraid that, during the election, he will be judged on his record of a lack of progress on broadband?
I do not accept that there has been a lack of progress. We have already met our interim target of 85 per cent coverage six months ahead of schedule, and we are working very closely with BT, which was mentioned, to ensure that 95 per cent coverage is achieved on schedule.
As I said, excellent progress has been made. On average, the programme is connecting 7,000 new homes and businesses every week. In fact, we are making such good progress that that has allowed us, if we are elected in May, to commit to extending superfast digital broadband not to 95 per cent, but to 100 per cent of premises across Scotland over the next session. That shows the Government’s ambition, and that should draw support from the rest of the chamber.
I am much more optimistic than Rhoda Grant and have a better insight into the immense technical difficulty we have seen in laying cables—not least submarine cables—to many of our islands. Will the cabinet secretary explain some of the benefits of delivering high-speed broadband across the Highlands and Islands and say whether that will boost the economy?
Mike MacKenzie and Rhoda Grant are right to point out that connectivity is extremely important for rural areas, not just for employment opportunities, but also for educational and health opportunities. That is why we are developing an action plan on mobile connections for rural areas in collaboration with industry. That plan will contain a package of measures designed to set the right conditions to encourage investment in under-served areas.
The potential benefits are transformative for some of the premises and individuals that will be connected. That is why the Scottish Government is putting in the resources to ensure that that happens for everybody in Scotland.
Although remote and hard-to-reach areas remain of great concern, will the cabinet secretary take the opportunity to comment on the many town centres in some of Scotland’s most populated areas that have been bypassed by high-speed broadband because they have direct exchange lines? It seems that BT expects to have Government support to overcome that, but does the cabinet secretary think that the company should be doing that on a commercial basis?
There are particular issues in town and city centres, including here in Edinburgh, in Rose Street, for example, where state-aid rules do not allow BT to do the kind of things that we are working with the company to do in other areas. I accept that there are issues sometimes. We are working with BT in relation to gain share funding—I am not sure whether Alex Johnstone is familiar with that funding, but essentially it is the benefits that have been accrued from the programme so far—to ensure that we roll the programme out to those areas where that has proved difficult. Sometimes it will remain difficult because of state-aid rules. There has been some misunderstanding about that.
This morning I visited a cabinet that is being developed in northern Edinburgh, which will provide people with the ability to access broadband. I should say that that is all it does—people will still have to subscribe to a broadband provider in order to use that facility.
As I said in response to Mike MacKenzie and Rhoda Grant, it is our intention to have 100 per cent of premises across Scotland served by broadband over the course of the next session. That must include dealing with some of the difficulties mentioned by Alex Johnstone.
Reference was made to the subsea cabling work undertaken by BT, although it is not the only company that is undertaking cabling. Will the cabinet secretary speak to the Deputy First Minister and the Minister for Energy, Enterprise and Tourism about pressing SSE and other utilities companies to consider laying fibre when they undertake cabling work, so that we do not miss that opportunity?
Liam McArthur makes an interesting point. I will take up those issues with the Deputy First Minister and the energy minister. When we are involved with large, and sometimes very expensive, infrastructure works, it is often the case that we can achieve more than one thing at a time. For example, the ability to lay fibre along the Borders railway was something that we looked at very closely and managed to move along. I am happy to raise those issues on Liam McArthur’s behalf.
Will the cabinet secretary expand on which other companies, such as mobile phone companies, will provide superfast broadband? Are you in discussions with them to share masts? Are you in discussions with local authorities who will buy into those plans?
Those discussions are under way. Perhaps even more important, we are in discussion with Ofcom to ensure that the Scottish Government’s new access to Ofcom is used for the benefit of mobile users across the country. Dennis Robertson raises the issue of mast sharing, which is something that we are trying to encourage. We are also looking at some of the other industry demands in relation to the way in which the planning system deals with applications for mobile masts. That is a controversial area.
The issues that Dennis Robertson raises are under active consideration and we are starting to see a way forward to make further progress. I am more than happy to keep him up to date with the other companies involved and the way in which they are helping us to achieve that progress.
Previous
Business MotionNext
Energy Strategy