MSPs say it's time for city to put visitors' tax plan to bed

AN influential Holyrood committee has come out against controversial proposals to introduce a "bed tax" for visitors to Edinburgh.

The decision of the Scottish Parliament's economy, energy and tourism committee is a major blow for council leaders, who only last month publicly lauded the idea, and said the extra money would be "very useful" for the city.

Economic development leader Tom Buchanan admitted the news was "disappointing", but today said a consultation with the tourism sector will continue as planned.

The scheme would involve adding a charge of about two per cent to hotel bills, to raise extra cash for major tourism initiatives. The cash would be ringfenced to help pay for festivals, events and marketing ventures – a principle commonplace in Europe and America.

But the group of eight MSPs, chaired by Lib Dem leadership candidate Tavish Scott, declared: "As a committee, we are not supportive of any initiative to introduce a 'bed tax' or 'transient visitor levy' in Edinburgh or any other part of Scotland to fund events or other tourism projects."

A majority of members from the Edinburgh Principal Hotels Association (EPHA), which represents some of the main hotels in the Capital, are also against the plans, but there is a strong split of opinion.

Conservative Lothians MSP Gavin Brown, a member of the Parliament committee, said today: "We should be doing all that we can to help the tourism industry and not hammer it with extra taxes.

"I am glad that my position gained the support of the other members on the committee, who supported it without a single dissenter.

"It is clear that the bed tax was not thought through and was merely a quick fix to plug the council's financial holes, and it was always difficult to grasp the notion that putting up prices will improve the competitiveness of Edinburgh's tourism industry.

"The Liberal Democrat and SNP administration at the council should take heed of this report, especially given that the convener of the committee is a Lib Dem and the deputy convener is an SNP MSP."

The council would not need permission from the Government to introduce the levy, but for the project to work it is likely to need more support from tourism chiefs.

The consultation is being led by the Edinburgh Tourism Action Group, and includes guest house owners as well as more vocal hoteliers. A report is expected in the autumn.

Cllr Buchanan said today: "The transient visitor levy is used as a means of generating income to deal with the impact of tourism across the world. It's disappointing that the Parliament's tourism Committee have reached a conclusion on this issue before the outcome of the consultation and study is known.

"We must be at the forefront of the drive to increase Scottish tourism by 50 per cent by 2015. I expect strong support from the city's MSPs to ensure that our tourism offering is given the opportunity to grow."

Research has found that the bed tax, which has been hugely successful in Vancouver, could generate an extra £3.2 million a year to supplement any national funding.

However, there is growing opposition from leading industry figures amid concern about damage to Edinburgh's reputation.

Simon Williams, head of the EPHA, said the committee's decision "concurs" with the organisation's official position.

Tourism chiefs told to stop the in-fighting
POLITICIANS on Holyrood's tourism committee have called for less "in-fighting" between the public bodies charged with promoting Scotland to visitors.

The warning from MSPs comes just a week after the Evening News revealed a war of words between city leaders and VisitScotland after council funding for the tourism body was cut.

Council chiefs slashed £125,000 off the £625,617 annual grant it gives to VisitScotland, reflecting a shift in direction from the local authority which wants to increase its own tourism promotion of the Capital. The Parliament committee members said: "We are concerned that there is still too much evidence of institutional reluctance to change and, on occasion, in-fighting between public bodies, all to the disadvantage of improving support to the tourism industry."