Should councils have the power to tax cruise ships arriving in Scotland?
Businesses have weighed in on what impact a cruise ship levy would have as the Scottish Government's public consultation heads to closing date.
The Scottish Government has opened public consultations on whether to give local authorities the power to impose a cruise ship passenger levy across Scottish ports.
If approved, Scotland would be the first in the United Kingdom to have such a levy.
This has sparked debate in Greenock, especially among business owners that used to benefit from the footfall of tourists before the terminal was moved.
Mairi Coventry runs a knitting and souvenir shop off the high street in Greenock.
She told STV News: 'The cruise ship passengers really gave me a boost in the summer of 2019 when I just opened my shop.' STV News Shop owner Mairi Coventry says footfall has decreased in recent years
Mairi has put a map up her wall with pins on countries that people have come from all over the world to her shop, some as far as the northern tip of Russia.
'When they were using the container terminal for customers to come in, everybody walked on the main street.
'Now tourists come off a different area and they don't walk on the main street anymore and this has really hit businesses.'
Even though the levy may be the final nail on the coffin for her businesses, Mairi is in support of the levy.
Justina Mitchell who runs Café Mo'r suffered a similar fate. She too is in favour of the levy.
'If Inverclyde Council was getting the benefit from the money that was directly coming from these passengers and it was invested to keep people in the area, to keep people in Greenock, then yes.' STV News Tourists had their say on the cruise ship levy plans
Towering over Port Greenock was the Regal Princess, carrying over 4,000 passengers, but most by-passing Inverclyde and heading towards Glasgow, Loch Lomond and Edinburgh.
Passengers from the ship weren't happy about the news of a potential cruise ship levy.
'No, we are already paying enough,' said one from Australia.
'I wouldn't want to pay it, but if it happens, I'm ok with that,' said an American tourist.
Another Australian couple said: 'If it means it will increase our price of fares, then it will be a bit of a challenge.
'It will affect the tourist industry.' STV News Passengers outside the terminal in Greenock
'It will just increase our rates if we want to come back on a cruise ship,' said another American tourist.
Last year 1,000 cruise ships docked at Scottish ports, drawing in over one million passengers and injecting £130m into the economy.
Invergordon, Kirkwall, Edinburgh, Lerwick, and Greenock are the Scottish ports that receive the highest number of cruise ship visits.
Kirsty Hutchison, from Cruise Scotland, said: 'We believe a cruise levy would send the wrong signal at a time when the country is building a strong reputation as an attractive destination.''
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: 'We are aware that a cruise ship levy in Scotland would be the first such levy in the United Kingdom, and we will need to carefully consider market implications and the effect on local economies and communities of such a levy.'
Port of Cromarty Firth warned a Highlands cruise levy could have a damaging impact on the regional economy, potentially costing businesses millions of pounds in revenue and adversely affecting the communities that heavily rely on the money tourism brings.
Inverclyde Council said they have agreed to the levy in principle.
Council leader Stephen McCabe said: 'We can spend the money in making our town centre was clean and tidy for visitors coming, which will benefit both tourist and residents.
'We can also provide support to our local tourist group and local businesses to take advantage of the tourism sector.'
The consultation ends on May 30.
Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News
Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
North Wales Live
25 minutes ago
- North Wales Live
The American diner serving burgers bigger than Llandudno's Great Orme
Towering high above Llandudno, the Great Orme, occupies one of North Wales most spectacular sites and views. I was hoping to find a similar rugged, foreboding pinnacle on Gloddaeth Street in Llandudno, as someone had told me that Dinos, served mountains of meat, which were just as difficult to conquer? Dinos Llandudno is a big and brash American diner and takeaway, which offers deluxe burgers bigger than your head. So, if your eyes are bigger than your stomach, then this could be the place for you. Dinos ranks high in the Trip Advisor ratings, but surprisingly has no American stars and stripe's theme with the inside décor. Instead, it is simply decorated with basic turquoise and pink walls. Despite its central location, the venue was relatively quiet when we visited. Dinos is obviously burger barmy but the saliva-inducing menu has various other options from across the pond such as chicken wings, shakes and pizza. There are lots of turkey rashers and barbeque sauce on the menu as you might expect, with toppings drawing largely on American Ranch influences, with enough cheese to sink a ship. Every type of burger is listed here. From, simple American style burgers with gherkins and American mustard for £11, to a massive Welsh dragon burger, food challenge, which involves two x 16oz Welsh lamb burgers and enough chili sauce to blow your socks off for £34. There were about twenty-three burgers listed on the menu, with all kinds of strange names such 'Heart Attack' 'Angry Bird' 'King Kong' or the patriotic 'Snowdon Mountain' burger. There were charcoal cooked chicken burgers such as the 'Bob Marley' burger or Cajun spiced and even a tandoori version. Although, I still think they were missing a trick by not having a 'Great Orme' burger. When it comes to burgers, there are some who think, less is more, and even though I didn't see any 'Smash Burgers' on the list? I did notice that there were a couple of Welsh Lamb burgers, which didn't include any sauces or cheese, so that you could get the full taste of the meat. The pizza list was just as big with over twenty-four choices such as 'Cajun sizzler' 'Hot Mexico' or 'Spicy Italian', all fairly self-explanatory with their ingredients. Grilled meals included various versions of chicken and there were a few healthy salads on offer for people who were counting the calories. I decided to leave the diet until tomorrow and went for the 'King Burger', which was an 8oz cheese burger with Parmesan cheese and a Caesar dressing. We were told by the waitress that we could add a meal deal, which meant French fries or Potato Wedges with a can of pop for £5 extra or you could add a fresh milkshake and your choice of fries or wedges for £7 extra. I couldn't resist and it was good to have an attentive service from a waitress, who didn't judge us for our guilty food choices. The burger was a plump, well- shaped pillow and the seeded bun was sturdy enough not to fall apart in my hands. There were three extra crunchy onion rings placed on the top of a skewer, which was delicately holding the whole thing together. The burger was smoothed in cheese with a primal, charred exterior but was soft and succulent inside. My wife went for her cheese burger to be concealed in a wrap. The results were surprisingly different and delicious, with her version tasting a bit like a big juicy burger kebab. The burger was cut into half and squeezed into the wrap with some salad and a burger sauce. The fries were presented in a mini chip pan fryer and were very morish indeed. The milkshake section was also extra-large and included all the usual suspects along with flavours such as Kinder Bueno, Peanut Butter, Oreo and Nutella. I completed my American dream with a thick and delicious snickers version, which tasted like caramel, peanut butter and chocolate at the same time. Desserts included USA inspired things like New Yorker Cheesecake, Chocolate Fudge Cake or Cookie Dough ice cream. We also saw a fine-looking Chocolate Pizza, which I am sure the kids would enjoy. Talking of big kids, I was still slurping my thick milkshake, topped with a flake, long after the burger had been digested whilst my more sensible wife sipped her simple Americano. Dinos food is also available for takeaway via the just eat app, and there is just as much choice on there, including melting meatballs, dirty fries, and various chicken bites, nuggets and strips. We decided to walk off our burgers with a stroll along the prom and the pier and by vowing not to eat again for at least 24 hours. Dinos Llandudno offers an American dining experience that keeps customers coming back for more. How can you resist a big plate of delicious carbs and sugar? If you like American classics, such as sloppy burgers, loaded fries and pizzas bigger than a dustbin lid, then you certainly won't be disappointed eating at Dinos. The Facts King Burger £11.00 (Milkshake meal deal) £7 Flake 50p Cheese Burger wrap £11.00 Americano £3.00 Total £32.50 Opening Times: Monday\u00094pm–9:30 pm Tuesday\u0009Closed Wednesday\u00094pm–9:30 pm Thursday\u00094pm–9:30 pm Friday. 4pm–10 pm Saturday\u000912pm–10 pm Sunday\u00094pm–9:30 pm Atmosphere- Despite its central location, the venue was relatively quiet. Car Parking- Some limited street parking nearby. Disabled Access- Some steps into venue and toilet. Plenty of room inside. Service- Attentive service from a waitress who didn't judge us on our guilty food choices. Overall- The American diner serving burgers bigger than the Great Orme, Llandudno. Dinos Llandudno 5 Gloddaeth Street , Llandudno, LL30 2DD
The Herald Scotland
29 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Trump approval rating tanks as Americans oppose GOP agenda
It's summer now, and the report card has arrived. Americans give Trump a failing grade on the budget, trade and immigration. That's tough to swallow for a politician who gauges everything on public perception. Trump, being Trump, is now pivoting to distractions, touting a military parade that flopped as an expensive boondoggle and then flipping from diplomacy with Iran to potentially ordering air strikes on that country. Take our poll: Should US go to war with Iran or support Israel from afar? | Opinion Americans disapprove of budget bill slashing Medicaid Let's start with Trump's budget, which Republican leaders in Congress call the "one big, beautiful bill" in honor of their continuing deference to whatever he wants and the dereliction of their duty to serve as a coequal branch of our government. The version that narrowly passed the House slashed federal safety net programs to boost tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. Some senators, seeking to make things even better for the rich at the expense of the poor, want bigger cuts to Medicaid, food stamps and other programs. Opinion: Trump lied about the LA protests so you wouldn't see what he's really doing A batch of recent polls shows Americans reject that: A June 11 Quinnipiac University poll found that 53% of American voters oppose the budget bill, while 27% approve it. Nearly half of the voters polled said funding for Medicaid should go up, not down, while 40% said it should stay the same and just 10% wanted it cut. A June 16 Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found that 50% of Americans think we spend too little on Medicaid, while 31% say we spend enough and just 18% say we spend too much. Forty-five percent of Americans think we should spend more on food and nutrition assistance, while 30% say we spend enough and 24% say we spend too much. A June 17 KFF Health Tracking Poll found that 64% of Americans hold an unfavorable view of Trump's budget bill, while 83% of them hold a favorable view of Medicaid. Republican support for the bill came in strong at 61% at first, but then dropped by 20 points when the Republicans polled heard details about how the legislation would force millions off their health care plans. Polling finds Americans disagree with Trump on immigration, economy, border security This much seems clear: The more Americans learn about Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the more they find it small-minded and ugly. That explains the artificial deadlines. Opinion newsletter: Sign up for our newsletter on people, power and policies in the time of Trump from columnist Chris Brennan. Get it delivered to your inbox. Trump and his Republican allies in Congress want to wrap this up by July 4. But Republican infighting - moderates who fear it goes too far, far-righters who complain it doesn't go far enough - will make for a contentious Congress for at least the next two weeks. While we wait, Trump is seeing his support on immigration - once his strongest issue - melt away in the summer of Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids. The Quinnipiac University poll found 54% of the registered voters surveyed opposed his approach to immigration, while 43% approve and 3% had no opinion. Trump campaigned in 2024 on reviving America's economy. But his trade wars, which have hit our country's international allies just as hard or harder than our geopolitical foes, are unpopular. Quinnipiac found that just 38% approve of Trump's trade policy, while 57% disapprove and 6% had no opinion. The AP-NORC poll found that 32% of Americans think we spend too much on border security, while 37% think we spend the right amount and 29% think we spend too little. Trump's approval rating continues to tank. Does it matter? In this time of divisiveness, a majority of Americans can agree on one thing: Trump is disappointing them as president. Just 38% of the votes surveyed by Quinnipiac approve of Trump's job performance, while 54% disapprove. Opinion: Threats against judges nearly doubled under Trump. Republicans blame the victim. That tracks with a Pew Research Center poll released June 17, which found that 41% of those polled approve of Trump's performance while 58% disapprove. Pew noted that Trump has lost ground in his approval rating since he was sworn into office again on Jan. 20. Don't expect Trump to spend too much time worrying about what Americans tell pollsters. He has a long history of touting polls when they hold good news for him and dismissing them when they don't. He also suggested just before the 2024 election that releasing poll results he didn't like "should be illegal." Here's what you can expect: more distractions from Trump as the Republicans fights it out on which version of his budget bill passes or fails in Congress. If they listened to Americans, they would kill the bill and start from scratch. Follow USA TODAY columnist Chris Brennan on X, formerly known as Twitter: @ByChrisBrennan. Sign up for his weekly newsletter, Translating Politics, here.
The Herald Scotland
29 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
How Trump cuts to universities could trickle down to college sports
USA TODAY Sports contacted more than 25 universities and college leadership organizations to ask them about concerns that athletics could be affected at least indirectly by this federal funding uncertainty. Almost all of them dodged the question by not responding at all, or by providing vague, undetailed answers, or by saying they didn't want to talk about it on the record. "I'm not surprised that nobody wants to talk, particularly at red-state public universities," said Robert Kelchen, a professor in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at the University of Tennessee. "It's such a touchy topic right now." At the same time, many of the same colleges are bracing for another coming financial earthquake after a federal judge recently approved the House vs. NCAA legal settlement. This allowed colleges to start paying their athletes directly for the first time ever, creating a massive new cost of up to $20.5 million per school per year starting July 1, according to the NCAA. Trouble and tension in major college sports Add it all together and tensions have started simmering during a titanic moment in history for higher education and college sports. Expenses are going up in athletic departments while the other side of campus remains anxious about Trump cuts to higher education, such as grants for medical and scientific research. "There's never been a time in college sports where so many issues have hit at once - both with the squeeze on institutional support and now this brand-new way of doing business in college sports," said Amy Perko, CEO of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics. USA TODAY Sports examined how it might affect athletics, why it's a sensitive topic and what some schools are doing about it. How the federal uncertainty trickles down Trump's attempted funding cutbacks at American universities aren't directly related to college sports. They instead largely involve funding for research at these universities, including from the National Institutes of Health, which faces $18 billion in cuts under the Trump administration. But as part of their universities, most athletic departments depend on university financial support to pay the bills. And when universities face funding shortfalls, they have to make decisions about what to cut and where. That's where that institutional support for athletics could get squeezed. Out of 232 Division I public schools tracked by USA TODAY Sports in fiscal year 2023, only 12 athletic departments reported receiving no institutional support from their schools, including from student fees or university transfers. That includes big football schools such as Ohio State, Penn State, Texas and LSU. On the other end of the spectrum, 75 Division I public schools received at least $20 million in university support from their schools in fiscal year 2023, including from student fees. Sixteen received direct institutional support from their schools of more than $20 million, not counting student fees, led by Houston ($39.7 million), California ($36.7 million), Cincinnati ($35.5 million) and Connecticut ($30.2 million). "As a matter of basic math, less money from any source will constrain any university's ability to make discretionary decisions about how to allocate their finite resources," said Roger Pielke, emeritus professor at the University of Colorado. "Something then has to give - either more revenues are needed or some activities must be cut back. If athletics demands more funding (such as for paying athletes) that compounds the issues." A number of examples have emerged. At the University of Washington In March, the provost at the University of Washington sent out a message outlining the financial risks the university was facing, including state budget shortfalls and the "unprecedented and rapid policy changes at the federal level." The provost mentioned possible cutbacks including "pausing non-essential staff hiring," limiting faculty hiring and reducing food purchases and other discretionary spending. "These measures apply to all units that report to the President and Provost, including Athletics," university spokesman Victor Balta confirmed to USA TODAY Sports. How that applied to athletics isn't clear. The university didn't get into detail about that when asked about it. But the athletic department received $10 million direct institutional support in fiscal 2024. Now the House settlement is also pressuring the Huskies, too, just like all the other schools in major college sports. The Huskies are projecting a $19 million deficit in athletics for fiscal year 2026. Loans will help cover the gap, including $10 million from the Big Ten Conference in the form of a revenue-sharing advance and more from an "internal loan of institutional funds," Balta said. "Rising expenses and back damages related to the House settlement are factors, as are expenses associated with transitioning to the Big Ten Conference," Balta said. "UW Athletics did execute required budget reductions and revenue enhancements in their approved FY26 operating budget - they were not held harmless in this exercise related to overall budget concerns." At Michigan State This is happening to different degrees at other universities, too, each dealing with it in different ways. At Michigan State, for example, President Kevin Guskiewicz sent a message to faculty and staff fin May, noting financial challenges that included navigating "federal policies and directives that undercut our ability to advance our land-grant mission and continue essential research projects that make life better." A subsequent memo went to university leaders calling for a 9% base reduction in university-wide general funds over the next two years. Asked if that included MSU athletics, university spokeswoman Amber McCann replied, "The reductions are to general funds across the university." Additional details were not provided. MSU athletics received less than $650,000 in direct institutional support in fiscal 2024 and $3.6 million in indirect institutional support in the form of costs covered by the university but not charged to athletics. MSU athletics also reported an annual operating deficit of $16.7 million for fiscal 2024. But even at the small number of schools that provide little or no institutional support for athletics, disharmony can increase across campus if athletic departments are insulated from university budget cuts. Take Nebraska, for example. Is athletics 'sharing the pain?' The University of Nebraska Board of Regents on June 19 approved a 5% tuition increase amid financial challenges that included less state funding than they asked for and an estimated federal funding reduction of nearly $12 million. The new budget included $18 million in cuts and no funding for pay increases for university staff. But over in the athletic department, football coach Matt Rhule is set to get a $1 million pay increase this year, then another $1 million more in 2026, according to the terms of his contract. Athletic director Troy Dannen is set for a $100,000 annual raise. The athletic department didn't respond to an inquiry about it. "There is a feeling that the athletic department should be sharing the pain," said Jordan Gonzales, president of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln Staff Senate. Nebraska is one of the relatively few schools in the nation that reported receiving no university support for athletics in fiscal 2023. Even so, any immunity from university austerity measures adds to the perception that athletic departments are becoming increasingly detached from their universities as they move to become more like professional sports. "When the university asks its core academic support staff to tighten their belts and absorb budget cuts while the athletic department appears to operate under a separate set of financial rules, it fosters a sense of two separate universities - one that's facing austerity and another that is investing in and entering into multimillion deals and contracts," Gonzales said. Why it's a sensitive subject As the Trump administration targets certain colleges such as Harvard for funding cuts, others are wary of becoming the next target. When resources shrink on campus, discord also intensifies about university priorities and who is or isn't taking on a fair share of the burden. Some colleges might not even want to talk about any cutbacks in sports because now is the time they want to appear flush with cash to pay athletes. Among those that didn't respond to inquiries about federal funding cuts affecting athletics were UCLA, Virginia, Stanford, Minnesota, Houston, Northwestern, Harvard and the National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics. "I think people are laying low," said Ruth Johnston, vice president of consulting at the National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO). "I think people are wanting to wait and see a little bit." In the meantime, the pressure mounts for Division I athletic departments to spend money on players, all the way up to the initial cap of $20.5 million. Not doing so would mean falling behind the competition. "They need more money right now," said James Nussbaum, a former Northwestern football player and in-house counsel at Indiana University now at the firm Church Church Hittle + Antrim. "It's those schools in the middle that are going to be really interesting to watch as they try to figure out if they want to continue to fund athletics at the level they have been as it becomes more and more clear that they're not going to be able to compete with those top-tier schools, just from a resource standpoint." Where will the money come from? Some athletic departments are getting students to help pay the bills. Some are getting more from their universities. Some might pursue other sources: ? The Board of Governors for the State University System of Florida on June 18 granted permission for state universities to give a $22.5 million annual lifeline to athletics through at least June 2028. ? At the University of Michigan, athletic director Warde Manuel sent a letter to supporters after the House settlement was approved, saying his department faced a projected deficit of $27 million for the 2025-26 academic year, including $20.5 million for paying players. The letter asked for support and mentioned a planned 10% reduction in staff, in addition to other cost-cutting moves. Spokesman Dave Ablauf said the university also has offered the department a loan of up to $15 million. ? Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry recently signed a bill to increase taxes on sports gambling, helping raise more than $20 million to be divided among 11 state universities for athletics, including LSU. Incidentally, LSU athletics is not subject to university cutbacks there because it is considered "auxiliary" to the university, according to the Louisiana Illuminator in April. LSU didn't respond to a follow-up question about that from USA TODAY Sports. ? At the University of Colorado Boulder, the school approved an increase of the student athletic fee from $28.50 to $90 per semester, the first change to this fee since 1994. Funding from it was to support women's sports scholarships and non-revenue sports. ? At Virginia Tech, student athletic fees are set to go up by $295 annually, up to $732. ? At Wichita State, the university proposed a 3.5% tuition increase, citing the challenging financial landscape for higher education, as well as the House settlement. ? At the University of Kansas, Chancellor Douglas Girod told the Lawrence Journal-World that KU athletics possibly could pay the university a reduced tuition rate for its athletes. ? Private investment in athletics is on the way. Elevate, a sports strategy and marketing company, recently announced the launch of the Collegiate Investment Initiative to provide colleges with "capital and strategic resources to develop revenue-generating projects." What those schools must provide in return for that is not yet clear. Johnston of NACUBO said "everything is going to be affected" by federal funding cuts at the top, in addition to the big new cost for athletic departments. New sources of funding are needed in the absence of cutbacks. "It's not gonna go back to normal," Johnston said. "I think we' re in an inflection point." Contributing: Steve Berkowitz Follow reporter Brent Schrotenboer @Schrotenboer. Email: bschrotenb@
