Chamber and committees

You have said that, sometimes, the complainer can be the same, with complaints in the four areas or challenges that you have talked about. How often does that happen? Do you get a lot of repeat complainers rather than different—I would not say “new”—complainers?

Good morning, panel. In the past seven years, complaints regarding the services of the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman have doubled. The SPSO has largely put that down to the backlog, which is in the process of being cleared. What steps does the ombudsman plan to take to lower the volume of complaints? That question is for you, Rosemary.

Could I come back in, please, convener?

Good morning, panel. Councillor Macgregor, you have just spoken about how the funding might assist certain infrastructure, cleaning services, bin services and so on. I asked questions last week and the week before about the revenue, which could end up being used to plug a hole in council budgets. That is a very grey area. Do you think that the revenue should be ring fenced for tourism-related spending only? How do you see that working?

Thank you. Do you think that some local authorities, especially if there are questions regarding a flat rate or a percentage rate, may charge businesses using different mechanisms? If there are microbusinesses that have one or two locations—somewhere in the Highlands and somewhere else in Edinburgh, for example—they would need help with their administration and accountancy, and even with their website. We have heard from witnesses that they would need to ask for some help.

In your opening statement, minister, you spoke about how it is important to strike the balance between having national consistency and local authority flexibility. In evidence to the committee, some witnesses said that they would prefer a percentage rate and some said that they would prefer a flat rate. However, the industry appears to be of the view that it would like to adopt a flat rate to make it simpler to collect the levy. Do you think that the bill should be amended to allow local authorities to introduce a flat rate if they decided that that was the most appropriate route?

You mentioned consistency. We heard from witnesses who have looked at international models where both flat rates and percentage rates are applied. Irrespective of the type of rate, would it be Government or local authorities that would set it?

How do you see that approach working in grey areas? In the past couple of weeks, we have spoken about bins, roads and potholes. One assumes that they are the day-to-day responsibility of councils, which are experiencing cuts. Tourism and the visitor economy use such facilities, too. How will the balance be struck to ensure that day-to-day work is funded not from the levy but from the budget, as it should be?

My next question is about having a national cap. Although local authorities are not generally keen on having a national cap, the tourism sector has called for a cap to be set nationally if the percentage rate remains the only option for local authorities. What is the Government’s response to those views?

Minister, you said in your opening statement that it is important that the levy is spent in the local authority areas where it is collected. I raised concerns, last week and with the witnesses in today’s earlier evidence session, about whether the revenue from the visitor levy would be used to plug holes in council budgets. That is a grey area. How do you respond to concerns that, in essence, tourists and businesses are paying the price for the Scottish Government’s inability to give our councils a fair funding deal for years? Do you agree that the revenue should be ring fenced for tourism-related spending? How do you foresee that working in practice? In particular, how does it fit with the spirit of the Verity house agreement?