LESLEY Riddoch is absolutely right that we cannot democratise Scotland’s land by buying it back acre by acre (Rural Stimulus Plan set to be another damp squib unless policies change, October 29). Communities who want to take control of their own destinies should not have to surmount the hurdles faced by the folk of Langholm.

The mention of Land Value Tax (LVT) in the article is apposite as this is the key to the dilemma. LVT would provide a powerful incentive for owners to dispose of surplus land parcels, rural and urban. Usable land held deliberately idle or under-used would become a financial liability rather than an asset. Speculative prices would collapse and an increase in the rate of disposals would surely follow.

In the current economic climate, with Covid restrictions having resulted in a huge economic downturn, an alternative and benign source of government revenue is urgently needed. Much of our existing tax structure falls on productivity, and when that falls, tax revenues fall too. Income tax revenue depends on people continuing to earn, yet earnings are currently much reduced and huge government subsidies are partially making up the shortfall. Taxing this subsidy “income” simply returns a proportion to the Exchequer and does nothing to make inroads into the accumulating government debt.

The same can be said of VAT, although that is largely beyond our control. Even in normal times it makes no sense to talk about encouraging business activity while simultaneously stifling it with a tax that amounts to a consumer surcharge. Non-domestic rates are similarly destructive when businesses are already teetering on the brink of collapse. Politicians are clearly aware of all this – hence the decision to suspend non-domestic rates and defer VAT for a range of industries.

The great economists agree that a tax on the economic rent of land is a non-distortive source of revenue, but currently the bulk of this is being pocketed by a small minority of disproportionately wealthy members of society. The ethical argument for capturing publicly-generated land values as public revenue is irrefutable, and land cannot be hidden or moved to a tax-haven.

Scotland’s devolved tax powers are sufficient to allow it at least to begin putting its own house in order regardless of what rUK does. In the present circumstances, punitive taxes on enterprise pose an existential threat to swathes of our economy, but there is an irresistible logic to the idea that those who claim to “own” the country should be responsible for its running costs. While the Scottish Government seeks to reconcile a huge deficit with a shrinking tax base, it should re-examine the case for LVT.

John Digney

Stirling

LESLEY Riddoch is right to highlight the timidity of SNP conferences, where we’re lucky if we can get even one resolution that’s worth having a debate about. The current grip on what resolutions are accepted for conference ensures a safety-first approach in not wanting to frighten potential voters but is driving away potential indy recruits by its drabness. We have a party of over 100,000 members each bringing their skills, experience and knowledge to the campaign for independence, but finding it difficult to get innovative ideas and policies in front of conference delegates. We should be tapping into our membership and looking for new ideas that can inspire voters to believe in the prospect of independence, policies that can drive forward our push for independence and help build a better nation. Let’s use our conference to promote the cause of independence.

Cllr Kenny MacLaren

Paisley

THE predicament in rural and particularly island communities is very well highlighted in Lesley Riddoch’s article (Rural stimulus plan set to be another damp squib unless policies change, October 29). It would help considerably if planning legislation was utilised requiring properties for holiday lets and also second homes to gain planning permission for a change of use to a tourism classification from a domestic classification. Perhaps this could also apply retrospectively where considered necessary. I agree with compulsory sales where properties are not being properly utilised for domestic purposes. This could also apply to unused land on which affordable homes or local authority houses could be constructed.

It would also help if property repair/improvement grants were available for people living and/or working locally. Grants should also be made available for people wanting to move back to these locations, especially for Gaelic speakers moving back to areas where the culture is under threat.

Jim Stamper

Bearsden

WHY is a Land Value Tax voted down? Is it to protect inherited or just wealthy privilege? If we had that, one result might be that owners of land that does not bring in much money, could be sold to community groups at a more reasonable price.

Ann Rayner

via thenational.scot