You're about to be taxed for going to work
The SNP's workplace parking levy couldn't have come at a worse time.
As symbols of SNP fiscal policy go, it’s hard to beat the workplace parking levy.
Introduced by Nicola Sturgeon’s government, and set to come into force from March, this commuter tax does not see the SNP administration directly levy charges on motorists. Instead, it permits councils to impose costs on employers and employers to pass them on to their employees. By taxing at two removes, the world’s most inconspicuous social democrat lets others take responsibility for her policies.
This pass-the-buck policymaking is also in evidence in the SNP’s latest Holyrood budget. Kate Forbes is not proposing to raise local taxes personally, she is merely cutting £137m in real terms from councils’ budgets then giving them unlimited power to raise council tax. You don’t need a PhD in economics to figure out what is going on here. The Finance Secretary is robbing Peter and telling him to recoup it from Paul.
The workplace parking levy is also a remarkably dextrous tax, managing to penalise motorists, workers, bosses, retailers, restaurants and almost everyone involved in the business of wealth-generation. The closest scheme of its kind is that in place in Nottingham, where the city council charges £428 per parking space per year for every employer with more than ten spaces.
Opponents of a Scottish version of this fee have dubbed it ‘a poll tax on wheels’ and, much like the community charge, it is being introduced under-thought, under-planned and under-prepared for. It hasn’t been timed to coincide with cheaper rail fares to encourage more commuters to leave the gas-guzzler at home. In fact, ticket prices have just been hiked by 3.8 per cent. Those who drive part of the way to work then complete their journey by train are in for a double-whammy.
This tax will hit at the very heart of travel and working lives in Scotland. Two-thirds of us travelled to work by car or van before the pandemic hit and 2019 saw not only the greatest distance travelled by road since records began but also a record high in vehicle registrations, which now number three million. While car usage rose in the final year pre-pandemic, passenger numbers fell on both trains and buses. This bodes ill for the Scottish Government's pledge to reduce private vehicle journeys by one-fifth before the end of the decade. Scotland is a car-driving nation, not simply by choice but by necessity, whether because of the nature of the jobs people do or the high cost and low quality of public transport alternatives.
The context of Covid is pivotal. The commuter tax comes at the worst possible time not only for workplaces and their staff, some of whom will already be reluctant to return to the office because of the virus, but for town and city centres and the firms that rely on these places being busy. According to the Centre for Cities, which monitors the recovery of high streets in the wake of the pandemic, 46 per cent of visitors to Glasgow’s central shopping hub live outwith the city limits and are responsible for 61 per cent of spending. A tax that keeps more people at home will drive down footfall and deliver another financial blow to businesses that benefit from a bustling city centre: the cafes, restaurants, shops and pubs. After the past two years, one more blow might be enough to close some of them for good.
The commuter tax is back in the news not merely because it is almost upon us, nor because Glasgow and Edinburgh councils have both confirmed they will be imposing it, but because of a statement delivered at Holyrood last week by transport minister Graeme Dey. Setting out the government's ambition 'to drive down our car use', including through 'pricing and the cost of motoring', the minister pointedly stated that 'at this stage, we cannot and should not rule anything out'. Some fear this leaves the door open for road tolls or a London-style congestion charge.
While few would dispute the importance of getting a grip on the climate crisis, the commuter tax comes as families are already confronted by a cost of living pile-up of rising energy bills, fuel prices, and council taxes, as well as inflation forcing up prices at the supermarket and the Bank of England's decision to raise interest rates putting the squeeze on mortgage-payers. Add in the looming legal requirement for every household in Scotland to install interlinked fire alarms and 2022 looks set to be a brutal year for family finances.
Oscar Wilde defined a cynic as ‘a man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing’ but we might say that an idealist is one who knows the virtue of everything and the cost of nothing. Grand moral visions unmoored from their practical application can quickly become destructive and so it is with this government’s climate agenda.
It would be for the common good if we lessened or eliminated our reliance on fossil fuels but doing so abruptly, without alternative jobs and training in place for workers, could devastate the lives and living standards of thousands of people. It would give a fair wind to our fight against climate change if many more cycled or took the bus to work rather than the car, but persuasion rather than punishment can achieve this without taking money out of the pockets of low-paid workers and already-stretched families.
There isn’t much point in complaining about the misery inflicted by these kinds of policies. The misery is the point. In his statement to Holyrood, Graeme Dey told MSPs: '[W]e... need to recognise the unfairness of the status quo where the car is king and car use is made too easy at the expense of other fairer options'. The government, he confirmed, would be commissioning research to find new ways to 'discourage car use'. Ministers have embraced behavioural economics but prefer a clunking fist to a nudge.
I have never been one for populist fist-shaking about there being one rule for them and another for the rest of us, or for grumbling that politicians should be personally inconvenienced to make them understand the impact of their policies on the public.
But events of late have made me question my instincts, because policymakers do seem too distant from those on the blunt end of their decisions. Because there is a lot of talk about the need for fundamental changes to life, work, economies, habits — everything except the operation of government.
So, my suggestion to ministers and parliamentarians who say we must reduce our car usage to cut emissions is this: you first. If we really are all in this together, if politicians cannot exempt themselves from the policy cultures they are busy fashioning for the rest of us, then the days of taxpayer-funded vehicles must come to an end.
Ministers from the First Minister on down should relinquish their cars and their drivers. The same for council leaders and functionaries. Some will gasp that a Cabinet Secretary or a provost can hardly be expected to arrive to an important meeting or a civic opening on the No. 78 bus, but the climate emergency is too urgent to allow ministerial or municipal vanity to get in the way of doing the right thing.
While we’re at it, we should reassess whether allowing MSPs and councillors to claim for mileage in their allowances is consistent with Scotland’s target of reaching net zero by 2045. As things stand, MSPs can claim 45p for every mile driven up to 10,000 miles and 25p per mile thereafter. If everyone must make sacrifices for the sake of our climate, Holyrood and local government travel allowances should be limited to public transport, with necessary exemptions for those who represent large rural areas.
There is still time for the Scottish Government and council leaders to agree a further pausing of the workplace parking levy. We are slowly emerging from an economy-stalling pandemic. We should not be throwing the handbrake on a desperately needed recovery.
Originally published in the Scottish Daily Mail on January 17, 2022.
….and these clowns bray on about Freedom all day long . Scotland has become the most totalitarian nation in the UK indeed perhaps Europe . Next month we are required to install interconnected fire alarms ie by a law issued by the SG . This law does not apply in England . Ironically the SG insists on this because of what happened at Grenfell Tower .How this translates into the need to hard wire three alarms into a three roomed bungalow in Bishopbriggs at a cost of say £500 I’ll never know . Perhaps it’s just virtue signalling , to show that they care , that they are progressive or just to show we’re the the “best wee country in the world “…..in any case we can’t afford her much longer .
Another backwards-looking tax stealthily applied by this bankrupt administration. If these taxes do indeed create funding to improve public transport then all to the good, I remain sceptical and would look forward to being proved wrong. I do fear that this is a virtue-signalling (protect the environment) tax coming at what will be a fragile period of recovery for many city locations and will be consigned to the 'nonsensical but well intentioned taxes' that punitively burden the wrong people but are becoming a hallmark of this talentless administration. Did the minimum alcohol pricing levy work? Will Holyrood MSPs be challenged on their mileage claims to their place of work?