Chamber and committees

Amendment 42, in the name of Miles Briggs, has already been debated with amendment 3.

We move to the next group of amendments, which is on scheme details—purpose and proceeds.

Amendment 20, in the name of Sarah Boyack, is grouped with amendments 21, 9, 46, 22 to 25 and 10.

I remind members about the pre-emptions in this group.

I call Miles Briggs to wind up and press or seek to withdraw amendment 50.

The next item on our agenda is consideration of two instruments that are subject to negative procedure. There is no requirement for the committee to make any recommendations on such instruments.

No member has indicated that they wish to comment.

Does the committee agree that we do not wish to make any recommendations in relation to the instruments?

Members indicated agreement.

I see that no other members wish to speak to the amendments in this group, but I will speak to Sarah Boyack’s amendments.

With regard to amendment 21, on “leisure purposes”, Scottish Greens believe that the bill should, as part of its purpose, give councils scope to use the revenue for a range of purposes. One such example, which we strongly support, is housing. There is a significant connection between the visitor economy and the housing sector—for example, in the provision of accommodation for visitors that does not reduce access to housing for residents, and in recognising that the visitor economy itself requires accommodation for the many staff who work within it. The supply of affordable housing is already a foundation of a thriving visitor economy, which is why we strongly welcome the minister’s assurance that investment for housing and regeneration purposes is a legitimate use of revenue.

On amendment 20, which seeks to remove the word “substantially”, I am concerned that it would do the opposite of what is intended in terms of reducing complexity, and that it could narrow the scope of how the revenue could be used.

On amendment 22, on the consultation period, Scottish Greens have pushed for a visitor levy for many years and are proud to be in a Government that is finally making it happen. Although we understand the appetite to reduce the lead time as much as possible, we accept that the choice of 18 months finds a middle way. If the passage of the bill stays to time and councils are ready with their consultation processes, visitor levy schemes could be in operation as soon as spring 2026.

I ask Sarah Boyack to wind up and say whether she wishes to press or withdraw amendment 20.

Amendment 3, in the name of Pam Gosal, is grouped with amendments 5, 38, 39, 42, 11 and 16.

The question is, that amendment 3 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

The result of the division is: For 2, Against 4, Abstentions 1.

Amendment 3 disagreed to.

I call Neil Bibby to speak to amendment 40 and the other amendments in the group.

The question is, that amendment 4 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Amendment 4 agreed to.

Amendment 5 moved—[Pam Gosal].