"Oh but it discourages tourism!" Good. Now take on the 2nd home owners and Airbnb landlords and let communities enjoy their homes without English families gawking at them and complaining about the dual language signage and 20mph speed limits
this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2024
11 points (92.3% liked)
UK Politics
3143 readers
126 users here now
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both [email protected] and [email protected] .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
[email protected] appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Seems reasonable to me.
If your area of the country is desirable for tourists, why not make a small levy to help maintenance?
They'll use money from this tourism tax.... to advertise for more tourism. Granted, not all of it. But I don't really get it. I figured the point was because they needed extra funds to cover increased service costs because of tourism. Being able to use it for tourism advertisements doesn't make sense if that's the case though.
That's just what the ringfenced funds can be used for if the local authority decides to implement it.
Personally I have zero issues with this - most places in tourist hot spots do this and it just gets bundled in with the cost of staying there when you book accommodation anyway.
So a family of four going for 10 nights will have to pay £50 in tax. Isn't the point to want to encourage people visiting? Doesn't tourism generate income for the area? £1.25 per person per night, including children, may still not be much money but I would go somewhere else out of principle. If I went for 10 nights I'd likely spend ~£500 spending money and let's assume another ~£500 in hotel costs. In actual fact it would likely be double all that. That's £1000 to £2000 not being spent because I'd rather go somewhere else than pay £50 on top of that out of principle. This feels akin to when a shitty tech company decides they are doing really well but they could do better by just adding a fee for no reason, only for their customer base to tell them where to go. Didn't Unity do something like that. Don't think it worked out very well for them.
Hotels don't contribute to local services for the people who are expected to lavish your family hand and foot whilst you complain that you think you heard people switching to Welsh as you entered the pub
I get the feeling you are angry about more than just me and my comment. That said, in response to your first point; the tax from tourism contributes to local services. If you lose more tax revenue than you gain from the £1.25 pppd, you lose more money in total. Regarding you're comment on my expectation of people lavishing my family hand and foot and hearing people switching to Welsh, I'm sorry but I can only respond with WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU ON ABOUT? Your issues have nothing to do with me and I wish you the best of luck.