29/05/2026
Friday! Time to celebrate! ABA is back!
So why are we back?
Two main reasons:
The first is that despite the fact that almost three quarters of respondents (73%) to Argyll and Bute Council’s visitor levy consultation last year did not agree with or did not support a visitor levy, it looks like our profoundly wise Council will vote in June to have yet another consultation (with all associated costs) because the legislation has been changed.
So us dumb teuchters have to keep filling in the consultations unless and until we get the answer right? Got it.
Let’s be clear about the legislation change. When Kate Forbes MSP launched the national visitor levy consultation in 2019, the responses showed a preference for a fixed rate rather than a percentage charge by a ratio of almost two to one. Despite this, the Scottish Government chose to ignore that result, and went ahead with a percentage charge in the Visitor Levy (Scotland) Act legislation in 2024.
So this recent change in legislation to ‘allow’ Councils to opt for a fixed rate is fixing their own mistake – they are doing no one a ‘favour’.
The fact remains that the visitor levy was designed for Edinburgh – a capital city with 365-days-a-year tourism, a city with a population six times the size of all of Argyll and Bute, and with many international sporting, cultural and business events throughout the year bringing in millions of visitors. When Taylor Swift played Murrayfield stadium, it was to an audience almost as big as the entire population of Argyll and Bute, every night, for three nights. The same when Oasis played Murrayfield, every night. The visitor levy was never designed for more remote, rural parts of Scotland like Argyll and Bute, with a tourism season for only half the year at best, and with many small and micro tourism and related businesses barely breaking even. The only reason Argyll and Bute Council appears to be continuing to push for the visitor levy is a cash-grab to help address their self-inflicted budget deficit, while at the same time the senior executives line their own pockets at our expense.
The second reason we’re back has a potentially more sinister note.
On 21st May at Argyll and Bute Council’s Policy and Resources Committee, the Committee voted to recommend a new social media policy to the full Council. In one of the greatest acts of gaslighting in recent times, Council officers reassured us there was “nothing to see here” and it was all perfectly “reasonable” and “no additional burden” for elected Councillors.
So what’s new in the social media policy?
It means elected Councillors will now be held accountable by the Council for comments on their social media posts made by anyone – any third party who happens to post a comment. The new policy states:
“It is the responsibility of Councillors to ensure that they are familiar with, and that their actions comply with, its provisions. Any breach of the Code of Conduct for Councillors is referred to and dealt with by the Standards Commission. This can include responsibility for what others say on their councillor social media accounts. In summary, where a councillor is aware of abusive content on their social media page, and allows it to remain visible over time, this can be seen as tacit endorsement or facilitation, depending on the context.”
When questioned by an elected Councillor as to what is meant ‘specifically’ by terms such as ‘abusive content’ or ‘visible over time’, Council Officers stated this will be dealt with “on a case-by-case basis”. That means Council Officers will decide, based on their own opinions and personal bias, in a totally arbitrary manner, with the sanction that an elected Councillor will be reported to the Standards Commission if the Council Officer doesn’t like the content, which may not be written or endorsed by the elected Councillor themselves.
While senior Council Officers and Administration Councillors claim this is just ‘normal’, the true intent appears to be to threaten elected Councillors with the Standards Commission to have the real effect of putting a chill across all their social media communications. It appears to be to suppress and silence dissent.
Yes this policy is illegal as it appears to be in breach of Article 10 of the Human Rights Act (1998); Freedom of Expression. But Argyll and Bute Council Senior Officers appear not to care as they seem to think they can get away with anything (like the visitor levy!).
If you want to know which Councillors voted for this new policy at the Policy and Resources Committee on 21st May, they were as follows:
• Proposed by - Ross Moreland (Liberal Democrat) - Dunoon
• Seconded by - Willie Sinclair (Liberal Democrat) Cowall
• John Armour (SNP) - South Kintyre
• Gordon Blair (SNP) - Cowall
• Math Campbell-Sturgess - (SNP) - Helensburgh and Lomond South
• Audrey Forrest (SNP) - Dunoon
• Kieron Greene - (‘Independent’) - Oban North and Lorn
• Reeni Kennedy-Boyle (SNP) - Isle of Bute
• Jim Lynch (SNP) - Oban South and the Isles
• Luna Martin (SNP) - Oban North and Lorn
• Dougie McFadzean (SNP) - Kintyre and the Islands
• Dougie Philand (‘Independent’) - Mid Argyll
You might want to revisit this list in May 2027.
By the way, as we always say don’t take our word for it. Always do your own research. The video of the Policy and Resources Committee meeting held on 21st May 2026 can be found here:
https://argyll-bute.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/1090812
In conclusion, as the subject of the visitor levy is coming to the fore again in Argyll and Bute, and some of our elected Councillors may not agree with the levy, but feel potentially silenced by this new policy, we felt duty bound to re-enter the discussion.
So ABA is back. We can hear the cheering in Kilmory House!
ABA cannot and will not be gagged. Some individuals try to limit our communications by blocking us from certain groups (you know who you are), but we will persist in bringing the facts to the people of Argyll and Bute. The best way of ensuring you get the facts direct is to follow ABA on our page. Aye!
