Chamber and committees

A good example of what Fulton MacGregor is getting at would be people in the Western Isles who depend on hospital appointments in Glasgow. There could be some kind of discussion, relationship and collaboration between the two local authorities on that situation.

I will bring in Willie Coffey on the financial memorandum.

I was going to ask whether that would be a good idea or a recipe for confusion that would give people a sense of uneven treatment, but I guess that it is for councils to think about those issues as part of their consultations.

Exceptions.

Good morning, and welcome to the public part of the committee’s fifth meeting in 2025. I remind all members and witnesses to ensure that their devices are in silent mode. We have had apologies from Meghan Gallacher.

We begin our public proceedings with agenda item 2, having already considered item 1 in private. The first public item on our agenda is a decision on whether to take items 8 and 9 in private. Do we agree to do that?

Members indicated agreement.

10:08

Lots of different tiers—let us focus on that.

The original act included a percentage, and now we are bringing in a fixed or tiered flat rate. After the act was enforced, there were concerns about the percentage rate. We have heard in previous evidence sessions that the percentage rate could be challenging for smaller providers. Could you explain what you unearthed in that regard?

Charging a percentage rate is a progressive approach. If that approach could have worked everywhere, it would have been great for everyone, because it is a fairer way of administering the levy. What were some of the issues that led you to realise that there was a need for variety? I know that we are aiming for flexibility and simplicity, but were there some technical issues in the background that made the percentage approach unworkable?

That was helpful. Thank you.

I want to explore the issue of whether different approaches—a percentage system and a tiered flat-rate system—could be used in the same area. Will the bill allow a council to run two different visitor levy approaches for accommodation in the same area? Could one business end up being subject to a percentage system and a flat-rate system?

As you say, the bill will introduce a flat-rate option, which, as you mentioned in your opening statement, can be designed in different ways. It can be a fixed amount or a range of fixed amounts; there is also the percentage levy. What is the minimum level of simplicity that should be expected, so that the flat rate does not become lots of tiers and exceptions that are harder to implement than a percentage levy?

Our next item is evidence on the Visitor Levy (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill from the Minister for Public Finance, Ivan McKee MSP, who is accompanied by his officials Fiona Campbell, leader of the visitor levy and cruise ship levy team; David Storrie, head of local taxation policy; and Kayleigh Blair, Michal Polaski and Susan Robb, solicitors. Two of them are not here. Are they online? They might not have arrived yet—they might be coming for the Scottish statutory instrument item.

I welcome you all to the meeting. During this evidence session, we will take the opportunity to ask about the three following items of subordinate legislation relating to the existing Visitor Levy (Scotland) Act 2024: the draft Visitor Levy (Local Authority Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2026, the draft Visitor Levy (Reviews and Appeals) (Scotland) Regulations 2026 and the draft Visitor Levy (Scotland) Act 2024 Amendment Regulations 2026. Those three instruments have been laid under the affirmative procedure, which means that the Parliament must approve them before they can come into force.

Following this evidence session, the committee will be invited, at the next agenda item, to consider motions to approve the instruments. I remind everyone that the Scottish Government officials can speak under this item but not in the debate on the instruments that follows. There is no need for you to operate your microphones, as we will do that for you.

I invite the minister to make a brief opening statement.

Thank you for that statement and the points that you made. We will move to questions, and I will open with a theme about balancing flexibility and simplicity.

At our previous evidence session, local authorities talked about their desire for flexibility and industry talked about its desire for simplicity. According to the evidence that we have taken and what you have said, the Scottish Government is trying to balance the call for flexibility from local government and the need for simplicity expressed by businesses and customers. I would be interested to hear a couple of concrete examples of what councils will be able to do under the bill that they cannot do now, and how you will ensure that those choices do not turn into a confusing patchwork for businesses and visitors, which is what people were talking about the last time around.