SNP trade unionists have submitted a motion to set up a feasibility study that could see the Scottish whisky industry deliver up to £1 billion pounds for the Scottish public purse.
The SNP Trade Union Group, the largest of the SNP affiliated organisations with 15,000 supporters, has submitted a Whisky Levy Feasibility motion for consideration at the SNP annual conference, which will take place online on the last weekend of November.
The proposal, first suggested by a former member of the First Minster’s council of economic advisers and then supported by other economists and commentators, believes that a water tax, similar to an industrial water rate in structure, could raise between £100 million and £1bn pounds for the Scottish public purse.
READ MORE: Whisky co-products to be used to recycle precious metals from old TVs
Bill Ramsay, vice convener of the SNP Trade Union Group, said: “The Johnson administration has turned the issue of public services finance into a full-blown crisis. Despite its best efforts, the Scottish Government does not ultimately control the purse strings. Those are in the hands of the UK Treasury in London.”
But he added: “The Scottish Government does have some room for financial manoeuvre. The proposal put forward some years ago by Professor John Kay and endorsed by others are of the view that using existing powers the Scottish Government may well be able to lever additional revenue from the Scotch whisky industry.
“Serious examination of this and other related initiatives need not wait until Scotland is independent with its own treasury”.
Donnie Blair, a former senior executive in the whisky industry, said the SNP “has a duty to at least examine the feasibility of these proposals – indeed the state of public finances demands it”.
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