Tim Eagle
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“I do not approach immigration by seeking to divide communities or inflame tensions, as Reform appears to. I seek solutions even when they are difficult or unpopular in parts of this chamber. Victor Currie: Britain is a multiracial country, and people of all backgrounds call this their home.”
“Using thorium, the current stock of nuclear waste could be recycled into new reactors, which presents an opportunity to solve the waste problem once and for all. Does Tim Eagle recognise that we should be at the frontier of those developments and not simply a laggard? Tim Eagle: I absolutely recognise that.”
“We still have no timeline for the Nairn, Elgin or Keith bypasses. When concerns were raised about the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, we led the opposition. When concerns were raised about the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021, we fought the fight. When our fishing industry needed a voice, we were there for it.”
“When others were afraid to discuss welfare reform, we were prepared to have that conversation, not because it is easy but because responsible government requires difficult conversations. When Scotland’s ferries descended into chaos, it was us—the Scottish Conservatives—who continued to relentlessly pursue answers.”
“That is the point: there were good, skilled jobs, which allowed young people to stay in the area, so that they could have crofts and families and build houses.”
“I will try to keep to that, Presiding Officer. It has certainly been an interesting debate to listen to. My colleague Murdo Fraser talked about the word salad of the motion. I was not quite sure what I should zone in on, but I will start with the title, which is “Scotland Needs Reform”.”
The complete record
Every one of 444 lines we hold for Tim Eagle, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 9.
“Amendment 5 seeks to correct the reference to “other purposeful use” in section 3AZA of the 1993 act, which is inserted by section 8A of the bill, so that it applies to owner-occupied crofts. Amendment 15 is consequential on a stage 2 amendment in the name of Tim Eagle, which I was happy to support. The landlord’s deadline for responding to a grazings committee application is mentioned twice in section 18, and amendment 15 seeks to change the second reference from six weeks to eight weeks, in line with the change that was made at stage 2. My amendments 29 to 31 are also consequential.”
“Amendment 34 agreed to. Amendment 35 not moved. Section 8A—New crofts: power to determine applicant will become the owner-occupier crofter The Deputy Presiding Officer: Group 3 is on environmental and other purposeful uses. Amendment 5, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 43 to 46, 15, 16, 16A, 17 to 21, 47 and 29 to 31. Jim Fairlie: My amendments in the group seek to clarify the powers of the commission when it considers proposals by a grazings committee for the grazings to be used as woodlands or for an environmental purpose. They also seek to make technical modifications or changes that are consequential to other provisions in the bill.”
“For Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Ind) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Against Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) The Deputy Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 81, Against 25, Abstentions 0.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: There will be a division. Members should cast their vote now. I am terribly sorry—there will not be a division immediately. We have to suspend, because this is the first division of the stage 3 amendment stage. I suspend for around five minutes to allow members to access the digital voting system. 16:29 Meeting suspended. 16:35 On resuming— The Deputy Presiding Officer: We will proceed with the division on amendment 34. Members should cast their votes now.”
“Even for family assignation, it is right that the local crofting community should be able to have a say on proposed assignations to a person who already has three or more crofts. As Rhoda Grant has pointed out, that does not mean that the commission will not still grant the assignation, but there is no reason why it should not go through the process. Tim Eagle’s amendment 35 would deny the community that right. For that reason, I encourage Mr Eagle not to move the amendment; if he does, I encourage members to oppose it. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Rhoda Grant to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 34. Rhoda Grant: I will press amendment 34. I have nothing else to add. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 34 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No.”
“I have heard that at first hand, particularly on my tour of the crofting counties over the summer, when I sat down with crofters and asked what their biggest ask was. That was it, and that is what section 8 of the bill will provide. I agree with Rhoda Grant that there is no need for an extra check that family assignees are aware of their crofting duties. We should not be building an extra piece of process where there is no need for one to be put in. However, I cannot agree with Tim Eagle’s amendment 35, which would allow for fast-tracked family assignations to a crofter who already has three crofts or more. In some cases, a community might be happy for one person to acquire multiple crofts, but, in others, that would be an area of concern.”
“My amendment 35 would delete that. There are two reasons for deleting the condition. First, there is a concern that, if it remains in the bill, the process of transferring crofts could be slowed down in certain circumstances, whereas the original idea was to speed things up. Secondly—this is the main reason for lodging the amendment—crofters have been in touch with me to say that, with regard to the stipulation that the proposed assignee should not have three or more crofts, three is an arbitrary number and fails to consider regional diversity in croft ownership, particularly in some of our island areas. Therefore, I propose that the condition should be deleted to speed things up and recognise regional difference. Jim Fairlie: I am very happy to support Rhoda Grant’s amendment 34. Crofters want a genuinely fast-tracked process.”
“Amendment 35 is my only amendment to the bill, so I will just speak briefly to it. Section 8 of the bill, which deals with assignations to family members, will amend the 1993 act. The bill, as amended at stage 2, will insert two new subsections in section 8 of the act. The 1993 act prevents a crofter from assigning their croft unless consent is received by the commission. It requires the crofter to apply for consent and specifies what the commission must do if the croft in question is unregistered. The bill as amended outlines what action must be taken if the commission is satisfied that certain conditions have been met in relation to an unregistered croft. One of those conditions is that “the proposed assignee is not entered in the Register of Crofts as the tenant or owner-occupier crofter of three or more crofts”.”
“A national exemption of that kind would reduce the flexibility by requiring all authorities, regardless of local context, to apply it.”
“Likewise, that would reduce the flexibility that the 2024 act gives local authorities to decide whether such exemptions are appropriate for their area, and it would impose national exemptions without the benefit of full consultation or an assessment of the impacts. The industry does not support amendment 25, as it would, in effect, introduce occupancy-based distinctions that were removed at stage 2, when the per person, per night model was removed. Amendment 26, in the name of Tim Eagle, would require ministers to make regulations to exempt the use of overnight accommodation where the visitor is attending a medical appointment. The 2024 legislation is deliberately designed to give councils the flexibility to shape visitor levy schemes in a way that best addresses local needs and circumstances, including any local exemptions.”
“In addition, introducing national exclusions would remove discretion from local authorities to charge a levy in respect of any such excluded accommodation. Amendment 6 would require local authorities and accommodation providers to assess whether a camping site is ancillary to the income of the main business activity. It is unclear what “ancillary” means in that context. Local authorities and providers would be required to interpret business models and income structures, which could lead to disputes and inconsistency across local authority areas. Amendment 25, in the name of Stephen Kerr, would require ministers to make regulations to establish national exemptions for single-room bed and breakfast accommodation, accommodation that forms part of the provider’s principal residence and single-occupancy self-catering premises.”
“Ivan McKee: The Scottish Government will oppose all the amendments in the group. Amendments 5 and 6, in the name of Murdo Fraser, seek to adjust the definition of “overnight accommodation” in the Visitor Levy (Scotland) Act 2024 to exclude from the scope of the visitor levy certain forms of camping or caravan parks. Amendment 5 would remove camping sites and caravan parks, and amendment 6 would remove “camping sites where the provision of camping sites is ancillary to the income of the main business activity.” Decisions on which accommodation types should fall within the act were taken following extensive engagement with stakeholders, but there has been no such engagement on the amendments.”
“I thought that that was all well and good, apart from the fact that the City of Edinburgh Council has already put in place a visitor levy and it is my understanding that it did not put in place an exemption for healthcare. It is entirely possible that, under the 2025 “NHS Scotland Operational Improvement Plan”, which the Government put in place to bring down waiting lists, somebody from the north-east or the Highlands and Islands will come down to the central belt to get treatment. If they require to stay in a hotel, they will have to pay the visitor levy. It is perfectly reasonable that we should have a national exemption for national health service appointments for those in rural areas; otherwise, we are doing them an injustice. I hope that everybody in the chamber can get behind that.”
“I do not intend to speak for very long. At stage 2, I brought to the committee a concern and a national exemption on health grounds. My theory is that, in the Highlands and Islands—and, in fact, across the north-east—it is very common for people to have to travel for healthcare. They might travel from Moray down to Aberdeen or from the Western Isles to Raigmore hospital, and, as it stands, people travelling for a health appointment because they cannot get one near their own home will be required to pay the visitor levy. I do not think that that is fair or right. The minister will say to me that councils have the ability to put in place an exemption so that such people do not have to pay.”
“However, members can write to the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee on such matters, and I note that there are members of that committee in the room as we speak. Edinburgh Accommodation Allowance 4.”
“There are members on the Conservative benches who want to be able to ask questions. I understand that occasional mistakes can happen, but the sheer number of not lodged questions from the governing party concerns me. It blocks other members from questioning. Would the corporate body support the Parliament if it decided that not lodged questions should be reballoted on Thursdays to MSPs who will bother to submit a question? Maggie Chapman: I think that we all share that frustration when such opportunities are lost. However, although I note that that frustration exists, there can be a whole range of reasons why questions end up not being lodged. The running of portfolio and general questions falls under the practice and procedures of the Parliament in relation to its business, so it is not directly a matter for the corporate body.”
“There is no specific cost of administering the draw for a question that is subsequently not lodged and, as there is no question lodged, no resource is required to process it. If a question is not lodged, the chamber desk marks it as such and emails the member, recommending that they inform the Presiding Officer of the reasons for not lodging. That is the only resource implication for not lodged questions. Tim Eagle: I did not think that there would be much of a cost, but the wasted parliamentary time is another matter. Since January last year, there have been 55 not lodged questions, 38 of which were from the Scottish National Party, with one former First Minister failing to lodge a question multiple times after voluntarily entering their name into the draw.”
“To ask the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body what the estimated annual staff resource cost is to the SPCB of administering the random selection and processing system for oral questions that result in a “not lodged” status. (S6O-05646) Maggie Chapman (Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body): Administering the electronic random draw for portfolio and general questions that subsequently result in a not lodged status does not generate a specific cost to the corporate body. The allocation of portfolio and general questions is done electronically by random draw each Monday after the midday deadline. Members whose names have been selected must lodge a question by midday on the Wednesday. If no question is received by that deadline, it is registered as not lodged.”
“Gillian Martin: I do not know whether Tim Eagle was listening to anything I was saying, rather than frothing at the mouth. I said that, given the urgency of the problem, we will supplement the £4.6 million that we have been allocated with a further £5.4 million and we will launch that £10 million Scottish emergency oil heating fund on 1 April. It is the middle of March now and we are working hard to deliver that through Advice Direct Scotland. We found out about the £4.6 million only yesterday and have done quite a lot within 24 hours. Advice Direct Scotland and trusted partners that also helped us with the fuel insecurity fund are working at pace to get the scheme open.”
“Isn’t it crazy? People across Scotland are suffering with heating oil prices and we are here talking about independence. This is just the Scottish National Party going mad, isn’t it? It is absolutely crazy. [Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Let us hear one another. Tim Eagle: Let me get to my constituents, who are deeply troubled. It is great that we have extra money coming in from the Scottish Government, and I applaud that, but we need it now. When are we going to get the details of how people can apply? People say that the weather in March comes in like a lion and goes out like a lamb but, this year, I am worried that it will be in like a lamb and out like a lion. My constituents will need the money as soon as possible. Can the cabinet secretary set out when we will get the detail?”
“To ask the Scottish Government what additional support it will provide to local authorities to address ageing infrastructure, including bridges. (S6O- 05597)”
“There were widespread questions from a lot of communities about why that happened, because surely those units were taking some of the demand off the acute A and E settings. What I am trying to say in all of this is that A and E departments are critically important in life-and- death situations for people across Scotland, and particularly in rural areas such as those in my neck of the woods in Moray and across the north-east, and I want them to work well for staff and for patients. At the moment, we have a lot of patients in corridor care, and that is not good enough. We need the Government to deliver, and, in the next session of Parliament, we will have to make that change. 17:35”
“Given all the money that is being spent, NHS Grampian must get more beds in Aberdeen royal infirmary and in Dr Gray’s hospital. That is of critical importance if we are to reduce waiting times. We also need to think again about community hospitals. If it is true that we cannot get care packages in place and that, despite the desire for care in the community, that approach is not working, we will have to find another solution that gets people out of acute beds and into community settings, which will allow a better throughput in our major hospitals. I want to address the issue of minor injuries. After the Covid pandemic, almost suddenly, and without much consultation, NHS Grampian shut down its minor injuries units across the north-east of Scotland.”
“I am not here to lay blame, but at the heart of our NHS are people who are often in very vulnerable circumstances, and they look to the Government to make effective change. What they are saying to me is that they are not seeing that change. I know that community hospitals have shut. I was on the integration joint board in Moray when some were shut down in that area, and I disagreed with the move then. A few weeks ago in the chamber, I asked the cabinet secretary when we were going to get more beds in Grampian, because a lack of beds has an impact on the ability to get patients through accident and emergency. If we can get more people out of A and E and into beds, we can stop ambulances stacking outside. However, he did not really answer that question, so I am asking it again today.”
“However, I recognise that, every day, staff on the ground are doing incredible work. The main reason why I wanted to speak in the debate and was keen to support the motion is because it feels like, every day, I am having more and more conversations with constituents— particularly in Grampian, but also across the Highlands and Islands—about ambulance waiting times and ambulances stacking outside hospitals. I believe that NHS Grampian is still among the worst in Scotland in that regard. The briefing that we were given by the Royal College of Emergency Medicine told us that the issue is caused not by demand but by problems with flow through the hospital—again, that has been mentioned in the debate.”
“I declare an interest, in that my wife is a practising GP with the national health service. I thank Jackie Baillie for bringing this important debate to the chamber. We had a bit of back and forth with Labour’s business manager about the content of the motion, but that was not about what the motion said; it was about how we can ensure that we deliver the best for our staff, as well as the patients. As I always do when talking about the NHS, I start by acknowledging that, as has been said already, there are some amazing staff doing incredible jobs. In particular, I pay tribute to the staff in Dr Gray’s hospital and Aberdeen royal infirmary in my region. The NHS is a sprawling organisation, and things go wrong sometimes. It is important that, when things go wrong, managers are on top of that and try to get things right.”
“The subject should be absolutely at the forefront of the mind of the next Government, whoever its members are. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call the Minister for Children, Young People and The Promise, Natalie Don-Innes, to respond to the debate for up to seven minutes. 13:23”
“I remember that one of my first conversations with Roz McCall was on this subject, and we have had several conversations since then. I am not an expert. I have been to events that were organised by Pregnant Then Screwed, which is doing fantastic work. If I am lucky enough to come back after the election, I will continue to support everything that it does, everything that Roz McCall does and everything that anybody else does on this. All that I wanted to say today, and the reason that I wanted to speak, is that I have lived and breathed the subject myself. We still live and breathe it, even though my children are older. My wife and I are still battling with part-time and full- time hours to work out who is at home when the children get home from school, for example.”
“I was privileged to chair the children and young people’s services committee in Moray Council when the early learning and childcare extension came in. I give credit to the Government for that, because it was a really good thing to do. We in Moray Council tried our best to make sure that local authority providers as well as private providers had the capacity to deliver across the area. Unfortunately, however, it did not work. Although great stuff is now going on in Moray, there are pockets across most of our communities—particularly in the most remote rural patches—where provision is not happening. That causes complexities and leads to significant financial difficulties, on which Meghan Gallacher touched at length.”
“They do not need me so much any more, but they were following me to the toilet every day—to wherever I went. Suddenly, we needed to know, “Where am I going with this child?” I had not thought about it. It might have been naivety on the part of my wife and me, but not until that point did we realise— suddenly—the importance of childcare. That is why I agree with a lot of the points that were made by Gillian Mackay, Meghan Gallacher and Davy Russell. Childcare is so important. We no longer live in an age in which one parent can stay at home all the time. By the way, it is important that, if a family wants to do that, the Government should try to facilitate it, because looking after children is incredibly important. However, childcare is incredibly important, too.”
“I, too, congratulate Roz McCall on securing the debate. It is interesting to hear, from across the chamber, about situations that I found myself in years ago. I am lucky in having three children, the youngest of whom is now 10, so the immediate, early years of childcare have gone; I am now just a waiter to my youngest, who, as he watches TV in the morning, looks at me and asks what sort of continental breakfast I will provide. [Laughter.] That is what he wants. However, I remember those early days. I do not think that my wife and I really thought about it. We decided to have children, looked out a pram, a cot and everything else, then suddenly thought, “Hang on a minute, what do we do with this child when we go to work?” That child needed us.”
“The decision to equalise and increase the state pension age for men and women was clearly not an easy decision to make, but it was a necessary one for the future of the state pension. The Scottish Conservatives will continue to stand up for pensioners, ensuring that the important protections, such as the triple lock, remain in place, and continuing to call out the Labour Government on its decision to remove the winter fuel payment. 17:05”
“I will touch on the powers of the Scottish Parliament and something that Bill Kidd said at the end of his speech. I think that he was seeking independence in order to pay compensation. My understanding is that that sections 24, 26 and 28 of the Scotland Act 2016 give the Scottish Parliament a variety of powers that SNP ministers could have used to support the WASPI women if they had chosen to do so. I understand that the former Department for Work and Pensions minister, Guy Opperman, told the SNP in 2018 that, if the SNP took its own decisions in the Scottish Parliament to compensate, the UK Government would “not object to that in any way.”—[Official Report, House of Commons, 8 February 2018; Vol 635, c 1697.] I do not think that hiding behind a rule that something is reserved is fair in this Parliament.”
“The motion calls on the UK Government to pay out a compensation package, which would likely come with an estimated cost of around £10.3 billion, as I understand it. Back in 2022, when Sir Keir Starmer was leader of the Opposition, he called for fair and fast compensation for WASPI women, but now that he is Prime Minister, that is no longer the case. Arguably, Labour could have been upfront about that choice in 2024; instead, the matter was dragged out for more than a year before Labour confirmed that it had no intention of paying compensation. Based on all that I have read, I have the greatest respect, understanding and sympathy for WASPI women, and I am not prepared to stand here and insult them by saying that my party would have taken a different position: we also did not introduce compensation during our time in government.”
“I say from the outset that I have never spoken in a WASPI debate before or had any involvement, but I have seen, listened to and heard the voice of many campaigners over the years, particularly when I was on Moray Council from 2017 until 2021. I have been reading some of the history of the debate. I will not go over old ground, as many of the facts and details have been well established through numerous debates, legal disputes and reviews. If I understand it correctly, the decision to begin the process of equalising the state pension age for men and women dates back to 1995, which Bill Kidd alluded to. That is more than 30 years ago. That decision has been supported by every UK Government since then and, I believe, was originally supported by the Scottish National Party.”
“If the minister needs his hand held with mistakes on other matters, such as non-domestic rates or the budget, he should come to us. We will be there to help him at any point. Last year, 1,000 people signed my open letter to the minister. All they said that they wanted were certainty, fairness and common sense, and that is what we will continue to ask for. I am glad that the bill is here today. 15:38”
“I remain of the view that the Highlands and Islands are fundamentally different from large cities such as Edinburgh. Our economies are seasonal, fragile and highly dependent on repeat visitors and community good will. A one-size-fits- all approach does not always work. That is why the proposed legislation is welcome. It improves flexibility and addresses some of the concerns that we have raised from the outset. We never wanted the levy but, if it exists, it must be workable. Despite my opposition to the visitor levy, I am thankful that the minister listened to the Scottish Conservatives. Murdo Fraser said that we were there to hold Ivan McKee’s hand. We held his hand and enabled him to bring the legislation back to Parliament.”
“In many rural areas, a modest fixed amount of £1 or £2 would be far more proportionate and predictable than a percentage-based charge that would penalise people booking longer stays or higher-quality accommodation. Secondly, there must be clarity on who pays. If policy makers believe that the levy should focus on international tourism, the legislation must allow, for example, island residents who are travelling for medical appointments or families who are forced to stay overnight because of cancelled ferries not to be caught by a blunt instrument that would affect them, too. Thirdly, the administrative burden must be minimal. It is not reasonable to expect busy small businesses to become unpaid tax collectors for the Government without clear systems, clarity on VAT treatment and proper cost recovery.”
“That is not marginal—that is business changing.” Clearly, businesses were very worried from the outset. The Association of Scotland’s Self-Caterers, which does an incredible job, has consistently highlighted the risk to small operators, particularly those that are close to the VAT threshold, and the disproportionate administrative burden. In the Highlands, the issue is not just about hotel chains. There are many farmers who are diversifying, island families with mortgages, and microbusinesses that are already having to cope with ferry disruption, labour shortages and rising costs. Those of us on the Conservative benches know that if a levy is to function, it must be flexible. First, councils must have the ability to set a flat rate per night.”
“The correspondence that I received from businesses on Mull, Skye and across the Highlands and Islands paints a worrying picture. One long-established island business told me: “We cannot rely on loyalty to the Scottish brand when families themselves are struggling with the cost of living.” Another business said: “2025 was the slowest year for bookings we have ever experienced, with large gaps in summer availability for the second year running. That is before any levy has been introduced.” There has been great work by many regional campaigners, all of which I commend. The Skye and Lochalsh business impact survey got many responses, including one that said: “If the levy tips us over the VAT threshold, we could lose £15,000 to £20,000 a year.”
“First, I want to respond to Willie Rennie—ever the father of the house—giving us that guidance on bells and whistles. I have to throw a tantrum and tell him that I like bells and whistles and I want to put lots of things into this vital bill. However, I thank him for his advice. When the Visitor Levy (Scotland) Bill was introduced, we on the Conservative benches made it clear that we did not believe that introducing a visitor tax was the right approach for Scotland, and certainly not for fragile rural and island economies. However, once it became clear that that bill would proceed despite our efforts to advise the Parliament otherwise, our focus shifted to making the simple point that, if a levy was going to exist, it must be as flexible and workable as possible for the businesses that would be expected to collect it.”
“NHS Grampian is cutting its budget at a time when I have constituents coming to me with breast cancer or eye problems who cannot get into hospital. We should not be seeing cuts in those budgets. We should be seeing services being delivered, with more beds at Dr Gray’s and the hospital in Aberdeen. We need that so that our constituents, whom we care for and want to serve, can actually get the services that the NHS delivers. This Government has to step up to the plate and put more money into local services, particularly in rural Scotland. 13:14”
“COSLA states: “The budget reality is that this a cash reduction in core capital funding”. That is not going to help with the bridges that I and Alex Burnett want to protect across rural Scotland. A lot of councillors are trying their best and doing great work across the country, but it is very difficult. I say to the people of Scotland, “Don’t blame your councils—blame this SNP Government”. Ministers are the ones who have destroyed council funding because they are not up to the challenge of taking on the difficult things. I will finish with a comment on NHS Grampian. A couple of days ago, it put out a press release that I found really frustrating. It says that it is an “incredible achievement” that NHS Grampian has managed to make budget cuts. I do not think that that is an incredible achievement.”
“Alex Burnett made the key point that council tax is going up because, for a long time, the SNP prevented councils from doing anything to council tax but did not make up the shortfall in funding, and because it has also not funded revenue over the years. We have seen massive increases in costs in education. Additional support needs and social, emotional and behavioural needs are through the roof, as are needs in other areas such as social care, but none of that has been funded. In addition, we are taking away services that have previously been provided. Why are swimming pools under threat? We need them. School crossing patrols are also under threat, and that is all because we are funding what this Government wants and not what we should be doing on the ground. To me, that is simply not good enough.”
“It says: “COSLA Leaders have agreed this is a very poor settlement which fails to address the dire financial situation of Local Government in Scotland.” It is dire; it has been dire every year. On another page, the document points out just how dire it is. While the SNP Government has put more and more money into benefits, it has slashed local government. Karen Adam: Will the member take an intervention? Tim Eagle: I am not allowing Karen Adam an intervention. She would not take an intervention from any of us. The 2026-27 budget is another dire one that will force all council administrations, whichever party leads them, to make cuts and put up council tax.”
“However, for the two weeks after I was elected to the council, I was plagued by the chief executive and the deputy chief executives telling me just how dire it was in the council. They said that there was no money, that we could not do anything positive and that all we could do was make cuts. I spent the next five years learning why, and the reason is discussed in the COSLA document that I am holding up. I know that we are not meant to use props in the chamber, but I want to quote from the document, which is called “What does the 2026-27 Budget mean for Councils?” It is worth pointing out that the president of COSLA is an SNP councillor, that almost half of the councils in Scotland are run by the SNP and that the document has been agreed by all council leaders in Scotland.”
“I thank Alex Burnett for bringing this crucial debate to the chamber. I must admit that I am still a little bit dizzy from Karen Adam’s speech. My word— that was some amount of political spin from a former councillor. How on earth she thinks that she can say that in the chamber is beyond me. I agree with some of the points that Davy Russell made about concentrating on key things. Seagulls are a very important subject, though, especially in my community in Moray, and we have to talk about them. I could not believe it when, on Thursday 4 May 2017, I was elected to Moray Council. I stood in the seat of Buckie, a strong SNP area, and I thought that I was never going to win, but I was elected, and I was happy. I was serving as a football coach in the community, I worked in the church and I was on the community council.”
“That brings me to my question to the cabinet secretary—it has always been my question regarding the need for the Government to step in. We want the proposals stopped, and we want OSG and the Government to come to the table with the local councils and stakeholders and have a real conversation together. Here is my question: will the cabinet secretary agree to ask officials for a short written review looking at the need, the numbers and the strength of local feeling, and on the back of that review, will she meet with key stakeholders in Moray so that we can finally agree a position moving forward, rather than leaving us in limbo as we currently are? The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Mr Eagle. I was not aware of the bus timetabling issues, but I will try to ensure that the debate does not overrun unduly. 18:23”
“The responses from Crown Estate Scotland to FOI requests show that it did not progress beyond phase 1 on the project. As Douglas Ross said, we heard today that a report was put out on 6 February. I had not even seen that report, because the company had hidden it away, and it had the audacity not to even come forward to me with it, despite the fact that I had asked it to send me any information. The report seems to be suggesting that the company does not need to do a full EIA on the project, which—to be frank—I think it does. When communities turn out in such numbers, when detailed challenges are raised and when funding decisions have broken the £1 million mark, Government should step in early. It should test the case regularly and be willing to say “Stop” if the evidence does not stack up.”
“If that is correct, the central claim of an urgent need for a dedicated flow park becomes much weaker. Surely, at the very least, it demands a transparent, updated, independent needs assessment before any further public money is committed to the project. I know that a large number of freedom-of- information requests have already been put in to try to clarify the status of the Moray FLOW-Park proposal. I am conscious that the marine directorate has confirmed that there is no EIA scoping and screening, and that engagement—in its own words—is described as being only at an “early stage”. It is worth reiterating the point that no consultation was done prior to the money coming from the public purse and the project going forward.”