Council forced into second homes climbdown after ‘fiery' residents' revolt
A Scottish council could be forced into reversing its second home tax raid after a revolt from residents.
North Ayrshire Council is reviewing the impact of the policy on the island of Great Cumbrae after residents complained it would harm their economy, which is reliant on tourism.
The SNP-led authority imposed a 100pc council tax premium on second home owners last month, sparking an opposition movement among its 1,400 residents.
The majority of Scottish authorities introduced similar charges after being given the power to do so in 2024.
More than 200 authorities in England also launched a second homes raid this year – something The Telegraph is campaigning against.
There are 450 second homes on Cumbrae, a small island situated one mile – or a 10-minute ferry – from the Scottish mainland. Its close proximity to the mainland makes it an attractive destination.
One in three properties on Cumbrae are a second home while around a quarter of residents work in tourism-related jobs.
An impact assessment found the council tax raid would strip £500,000 off the island's annual GDP of £12.9m.
Cameron Inglis, the Conservative leader on North Ayrshire Council, said the reaction from residents had been 'fiery'.
He told The Telegraph: 'We are asking second home owners to pay double, get nothing in return, so that we can balance our budget gap.
'The whole thing has been pushed through so that supposedly rich people can plug a budget gap. The whole thing is a sham. It's smoke and mirrors.'
Mr Inglis added that ringfencing 10pc of the additional revenue for affordable housing was the equivalent to £110,000, which would pay for the construction of approximately 20 houses a year, built using council money and government grants.
He said: 'That's not 20 houses for the island. That's 20 houses across the whole county. It's a drop in the water when it comes to the number of houses we need.'
Alex Harvie, chairman of the Cumbrae Community Council, said the premium would force second home owners to sell up, reduce income for the island and could 'start a spiral of decline' as facilities fall into disrepair.
In an appeal to North Ayrshire Council to re-examine the impact on the island, he accused the authority of rushing through the policy before the completion of a three-month review period to allow it to respond to the initial impact assessment.
The council's initial impact assessment found 'concerns' with the economic impact on Great Cumbrae and cast doubt as to whether it would benefit housing availability. It conceded the island 'may not lend itself or be suitable for permanent island living'.
A consultation, of which around 60pc of the respondents were not second home owners, also found widespread opposition to the policy. Only 38pc were in favour of the premium while 59pc were against.
North Ayrshire has now been forced to review its original impact assessment following the pressure applied by the community council.
A public consultation has been opened with the council accepting representations from residents, visitors and businesses until May 20.
A spokesman for North Ayrshire Council said: 'Like other councils across Scotland who have already adopted this measure, we hope to see real long-term benefits to the availability of housing for people in communities across North Ayrshire, and for homes to be occupied for longer periods of time throughout the year.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Wagner Group announces withdrawal from Mali
The Wagner mercenary group announced on June 6 that it was withdrawing its presence from Mali, ending its fight with rebel groups. "Mission accomplished. Private Military Company Wagner returns home," the group, founded by the late Yevgeny Prigozhin, announced on social media. Wagner mercenaries have been fighting alongside Malian government forces since 2021, in attempts to fend off Islamic insurgents. The group said that it was ending its presence as "all regional capitals have returned to the control of the legitimate government," providing little rationale for the group's exit from the war-torn nation. Wagner mercenaries and Malian soldiers have reportedly suffered heavy losses in their engagements with Tuareg-led rebels. The Russian mercenary group, known for its deployment in Ukraine and short-lived rebellion against the Kremlin in 2023, has a strong presence across the African continent, backing Russian business interests and Moscow-friendly regimes. The mercenaries have been particularly active in Mali since late 2021 and has been of perpetrating war crimes and widespread looting. In December 2024, Human Rights Watch accused Wagner mercenaries and Malian government forces of deliberately killing 32 civilians. The so-called "Africa Corps," under the command of Russia's Defense Ministry, who fought alongside Wagner mercenaries, will continue to have an active presence in Mali. Mali broke diplomatic ties with Ukraine over its alleged support of Tuareg-led rebels without providing any evidence of direct cooperation. The step was taken after comments by Andrii Yusov, Ukraine's military intelligence (HUR) spokesperson, about the rebels receiving "useful information, and not just that, which allowed them to carry out a successful military operation against Russian war criminals." Ukraine's Foreign Ministry later denied the country's involved with rebel groups. Read also: Ukraine war latest: Russia hits Ukraine with large-scale attack days after Operation Spiderweb; Ukraine targets Russian air bases in 'preemptive strike' We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Activists protest possible Medicaid cuts outside KS Rep. Derek Schmidt's Topeka office
TOPEKA (KSNT) — Kansans are speaking out against lawmakers who are voting to cut Medicaid. The GOP-led One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed the US House by a razor thin margin. 215 House members voted to pass it, while 214 voted against it. Local Kansas activists are calling out Rep. Derek Schmidt, a Republican who voted to pass the bill. A group of protesters gathered outside of Schmidt's office in Topeka Thursday afternoon and expressed concerns about cuts to Medicaid. 'Today is life or death,' protester Dillon Warren said. 'We voted someone in there that we shouldn't have. He doesn't support us.' The Congressional Budget Office estimates that if the bill passes, at least 7 million people will lose Medicaid coverage. For that reason, many Kansas voters are making their voices heard. Chiefs and Royals stadium bill deadline approaching as Kansas and Missouri fight for the teams 'We need Medicaid for medical equipment,' protester Rick Macias said. 'These chairs are $200,000 if not more. So, it's very important that Medicaid sticks around.' 27 News reached out to Schmidt, who was unavailable for comment. A spokesperson for the congressman provided 27 News with a written statement. 'Congressman Schmidt is a strong supporter of Medicaid for people the program is designed to help: those who are disabled, in nursing homes, pregnant, raising small children, or otherwise in need. Unfortunately, some states have abused the program by providing benefits to illegal aliens, millions of healthy young adults who choose not to work, or people who are not eligible to receive taxpayer-funded benefits from the program. That is the main reason why Medicaid spending has exploded by more than 50 percent since just 2019: an unsustainable rate of growth that puts benefits for Americans who need them most at risk. By addressing this abuse of the program, Congressman Schmidt is protecting both the traditional Medicaid recipients who rely on benefits and the taxpayers who pay the bills.' Spokesman for Rep. Derek Schmidt For more Capitol Bureau news, click here. Keep up with the latest breaking news in northeast Kansas by downloading our mobile app and by signing up for our news email alerts. Sign up for our Storm Track Weather app by clicking here. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Government struggles to cut foreign aid spent on asylum hotels
The government is struggling to cut the amount of foreign aid it spends on hotel bills for asylum seekers in the UK, the BBC has learnt. New figures released quietly by ministers in recent days show the Home Office plans to spend £2.2bn of overseas development assistance (ODA) this financial year - that is only marginally less than the £2.3bn it spent in 2024/25. The money is largely used to cover the accommodation costs of thousands of asylum seekers who have recently arrived in the UK. The Home Office said it was committed to ending asylum hotels and was speeding up asylum decisions to save taxpayers' money. The figures were published on the Home Office website with no accompanying notification to media. Foreign aid is supposed to be spent alleviating poverty by providing humanitarian and development assistance overseas. But under international rules, governments can spend some of their foreign aid budgets at home to support asylum seekers during the first year after their arrival. According to the most recent Home Office figures, there are about 32,000 asylum seekers in hotels in the UK. Labour promised in its manifesto to "end asylum hotels, saving the taxpayer billions of pounds". Contracts signed by the Conservative government in 2019 were expected to see £4.5bn of public cash paid to three companies to accommodate asylum seekers over a 10-year period. But a report by spending watchdog the National Audit Office (NAO) in May said that number was expected to be £15.3bn. Asylum accommodation costs set to triple, says watchdog Asylum hotel companies vow to hand back some profits On June 3, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper told the Home Affairs Committee she was "concerned about the level of money" being spent on asylum seekers' accommodation and added: "We need to end asylum hotels altogether." The Home Office said it was trying to bear down on the numbers by reducing the time asylum seekers can appeal against decisions. It is also planning to introduce tighter financial eligibility checks to ensure only those without means are housed. But Whitehall officials and international charities have said the Home Office has no incentive to reduce ODA spending because the money does not come out of its budgets. The scale of government aid spending on asylum hotels has meant huge cuts in UK support for humanitarian and development priorities across the world. Those cuts have been exacerbated by the government's reductions to the overall ODA budget. In February, Sir Keir Starmer said he would cut aid spending from 0.5% of gross national income to 0.3% by 2027 - a fall in absolute terms of about £14bn to some £9bn. Such was the scale of aid spending on asylum hotels in recent years that the previous Conservative government gave the Foreign Office an extra £2bn to shore up its humanitarian commitments overseas. But Labour has refused to match that commitment. Gideon Rabinowitz, director of policy at the Bond network of development organisations, said: "Cutting the UK aid budget while using it to prop up Home Office costs is a reckless repeat of decisions taken by the previous Conservative government. "Diverting £2.2bn of UK aid to cover asylum accommodation in the UK is unsustainable, poor value for money, and comes at the expense of vital development and humanitarian programmes tackling the root causes of poverty, conflict and displacement. "It is essential that we support refugees and asylum seekers in the UK, but the government should not be robbing Peter to pay Paul." Sarah Champion, chair of the International Development Committee, said the government was introducing "savage cuts" to its ODA spending, risking the UK's development priorities and international reputation, while "Home Office raids on the aid budget" had barely reduced. "Aid is meant to help the poorest and most vulnerable across the world: to alleviate poverty, improve life chances and reduce the risk of conflict," she said. "Allowing the Home Office to spend it in the UK makes this task even harder." "The government must get a grip on spending aid in the UK," she said. "The Spending Review needs to finally draw a line under this perverse use of taxpayer money designed to keep everyone safe and prosperous in their own homes, not funding inappropriate, expensive accommodation here." Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said: "Labour promised in their manifesto to end the use of asylum hotels for illegal immigrants. But the truth is there are now thousands more illegal migrants being housed in hotels under Labour. "Now these documents reveal that Labour are using foreign aid to pay for asylum hotel accommodation – yet another promise broken." A Home Office spokesperson said: "We inherited an asylum system under exceptional pressure, and continue to take action, restoring order, and reduce costs. This will ultimately reduce the amount of Official Development Assistance spent to support asylum seekers and refugees in the UK. "We are immediately speeding up decisions and increasing returns so that we can end the use of hotels and save the taxpayer £4bn by 2026." Is the government meeting its pledges on illegal immigration and asylum?
