AS the world-renowned Edinburgh Festival Fringe begins, one of Scotland’s most iconic independent arts venues has been momentarily saved.
In May it was announced that the building owners of award-winning Edinburgh arts venue and creative hub Summerhall were putting the property up for sale.
Home to more than 100 businesses and year-long programming of multi-disciplinary arts performances, Summerhall and has been a staple Fringe venue for 13 years.
READ MORE: David Pratt: Israel's own 'Abu Ghraib' is just another reason for its pariah status
On the eve of its sale, Summerhall Arts brokered a last-minute deal to lease the building for three years, which will allow management to consider the long-term future of the venue.
Whilst this is a glimmer of hope for independent venues, this year has already seen venues like The Jazz Bar, a much-loved Edinburgh establishment, flirt with permanent closure. There is a real possibility that the city will be left with a lack of grassroots, small and mid-size venues that are so vital to emerging, up-and-coming artists, mirroring the predicament that other cities face.
So how do we secure the survival our cultural institutions that are the lifeblood of creative communities? Create a dedicated arts venue fund from part of the proceeds of the newly proposed “tourist tax”.
In May, MSPs passed the Visitor Levy (Scotland) Bill, which will give local authorities the option to add the levy to overnight accommodation such as B&Bs, hotels and holiday lets. The levy charged would be based on a percentage of a room booking, rather than per person.
Each local authority can decide whether to introduce the levy, and what percentage the charge should be. The Scottish Government has stressed that councils should consult with local communities, businesses and tourism organisations.
Giving local authorities the autonomy to choose whether to utilise the Visitor Levy empowers local democracy and allows authorities to re-invest in services and facilities largely used by tourists and visitors. To me, this feels like a fair and gradual approach to introducing the levy.
Of course, with new policies come a raft of scaremongering headlines including the unfounded claim from hotelier Sir Rocco Forte suggesting that “SNP’s tourist tax will drive visitors to England”. In my opinion, if you can afford to splurge £925 a night on a hotel room at The Balmoral hotel during the Fringe, you can afford a 7-10% visitor levy attached to the hotel price. And for those opting for more budget-friendly accommodation, the cost of the visitor levy will be smaller.
READ MORE: Should children in Scotland be given the right to a healthy environment?
In spring 2022, I embraced the Covid-era Scottish staycation. I had never properly been to Skye and I wanted to make use of a potentially quieter period to visit the island. I was wrong. Even at the tail end of a global pandemic, and the start of the tourist season, it was mobbed.
I wasn’t deterred by the £5 cost to park the car near the Fairy Pools. After all, part of the allure of going to Skye was to experience the Fairy Pools. And to many North Americans who have never seen a real castle, part of the allure of Scotland is visiting historic cities like Edinburgh that have captivated tourists through film and media.
Do people really think that a few pounds a night on top of the hotel bill will stop tourists from going on their once-in-a-lifetime magical break to Scotland? Catch yersel on.
We have come to accept service charges on our coffee, eating out and almost every other service, so why not a tourist levy? Tourists are accustomed to paying a levy in many other European cities such as Milan, Barcelona, Amsterdam and Berlin, so why not our own tourist hotspots?
Earlier this year, Venice went one step further charging visitors a new €5 Venice Access Fee, charging day trippers an extra fee to enter the city in hopes to control visitor numbers.
Visitor levies and city tax are normal and well-worn ways to raise capital for re-investment. In my opinion, grassroots venues in Scottish towns and cities desperately need a shot in the arm in terms of investment. In 2023, more than 145 UK venues had to cease offering live music or closed trading altogether.
READ MORE: Humza Yousaf calls for English Defence League to be made terrorist organisation
In a report published in May, the Culture, Media and Sport Committee suggested that a proposed £1 levy on arena and stadium concert tickets, compounded with a VAT cut for grassroots venues, could raise up to £30m per annum. The support would go to venues that the Music Venue Trust found to operate on an average of 0.5% profit. The Scottish Greens joined in calls to introduce the levy.
That £30m per annum across the entirety of the UK is pocket money compared to the amount that the tourist levy could have generated in a single weekend if it had been introduced in time for Taylor Swift’s world-breaking Eras Tour to stop in Edinburgh.
The Labour leader of the City of Edinburgh Council claims the levy would have generated £600,000 if it had been in place for the Era’s tour, which saw more than 70,000 spectators a night at Murrayfield Stadium.
Why has it taken almost 25 years of devolved government to pass the Visitor Levy Bill? It feels like a no-brainer. We’ve missed a trick – to capitalise fully on the history, heritage, culture and traditions, that four million people visited to enjoy in 2023, staying for a cumulative 34.4m nights. We are a hot commodity. Tourists aren’t going to just stop coming.
The global allure of Scotland isn’t going to be lost overnight because a few extra quid has been added to the hotel bill. With 17 out of 32 local authorities backing the introduction of the levy, according to government consultation, nobody can argue that this is a policy being forced on authorities or simply a money grab.
This is a great opportunity for areas with higher levels of tourism such as Edinburgh, the Highlands and Islands and parts of Aberdeenshire to capitalise and reinvest in their tourism infrastructure and arts.
Whilst the idea of more local toilets open past 5pm would be welcome, I really want to see sustained and continued support for our beloved, culturally crucial, yet underfunded, shoestring-budget art venues.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel