THE SNP Trade Union Group (TUG) has called on the Scottish Government to review and reconsider the current green freeports strategy.
Inverness and Cromarty Firth green freeport and Forth green freeport were announced as Scotland’s two winning bids in January last year through the scheme agreed by the Scottish and UK governments – which offers special tax incentives and lower tariffs with the aim of stimulating economic growth.
And while the Forth green freeport’s outline business case is still yet to be approved, the Highlands scheme’s tax sites are set to go live on Monday (April 8).
But Simon Barrow, national secretary of SNP TUG, told The National that we need a “thorough review and reconsideration of Scotland’s ports strategy”.
READ MORE: What are green freeports? The National launches exclusive week-long series
“As a minimum, we believe that freeport contracts should include time-limits on the kind of deals currently being agreed,” he added.
Barrow said that SNP TUG – which is the party’s largest affiliate body with more than 12,000 members – is “extremely concerned” about Scotland’s “entanglement” with the UK Government’s freeports plan, which he described as a “tax-free and weak-regulation backdoor into the economy for those looking to extract wealth with minimal effort”.
A motion at SNP conference in 2021 highlighted concerns the scheme was a part of the “agenda to undermine devolution” and set out a list of six strict conditions that should be met if freeports were to be permitted in Scotland – including regulation, transparency and full trade union recognition.
“None of which have been addressed satisfactorily,” Barrow said.
“A mountain of evidence worldwide now suggests that freeports have a damaging net impact on local economies, workers’ rights and conditions, government revenue, health and safety, and the environment,” he added.
“That is aside from issues of fraud, criminality and corruption that lie deep within the history of freeports.”
The first freeports in the UK opened in the 1980s by Margaret Thatcher in an effort to combat deindustrialisation and a declining economy. It was only in 2012 that the Tory-led government decided not to renew their licences.
Studies have found that freeports can become hubs for criminal activity – including trade in counterfeit goods, drug trafficking, smuggling of untaxed goods or trade-based money laundering.
In 2020, the EU clamped down on 82 free ports or free zones after identifying that their special tariff and duty status had also aided the financing of terrorism and organised crime.
SNP TUG also highlighted concerns that the establishment of Scotland’s green freeports could “endanger” the possibility of an independent Scotland joining the EU, and damage the “prospects of gaining economic as well as political decision-making over our future”.
Trade minister Richard Lochhead told The National that there is “no evidence” that green freeports could damage an independent Scotland’s EU ambitions after Scottish Greens MSP Ross Greer highlighted similar concerns.
He added: “Many 'free zones' are in operation across European Union member states, including those similar in design to the green freeports.”
Scotland’s ‘green freeports’ are different from UK freeports in that they have a focus on contributing to the Scottish Government's net zero agenda.
“As SNP trade unionists, we stand by party policy,” Barrow said.
But he added: “At present the Scottish Government does not have the legal authority to guarantee any of the safeguards it has been talking about.”
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