A cross-party agreement sets out how £90m from Edinburgh’s new visitor levy will be spent, with funds shifted from a high-profile George Street rebuild to housing, policing and neighbourhood improvements.
Edinburgh council has decided to spread the income from its new visitor levy across a range of neighbourhood and city‑centre projects, rather than ploughing it into a single flagship scheme. Over the first three years the levy is expected to bring in roughly £90m; councillors agreed at a February meeting to reassign a significant chunk of that cash and pause plans for the major George Street remodel.
What changed – Total projected levy receipts for years one to three: about £90m. – Around £21m that had been earmarked for George Street has been freed up by pausing that element of the programme. – The revised package was negotiated between the SNP administration, Labour and the Liberal Democrats; Greens and Conservatives tabled alternatives and registered objections.
Where the money is heading The council has moved away from a single high‑profile streetscape spend and instead is directing funds into a broader mix of priorities: – An initial £5m ring‑fenced for housing measures. – Joint funding to recruit 45 new beat officers with Police Scotland.
– Upgrades to Princes Street, conservation and cultural regeneration projects — including work linked to the Causey scheme, Portobello Kilns and Leith Theatre. – Other smaller capital and neighbourhood projects across the city.
Why councillors shifted course Supporters argue the portfolio approach spreads benefits more evenly across wards and reduces the risk of tying too much to one project that might stall if visitor numbers dip. Opponents — notably the Greens and Conservatives — were concerned either that policing takes priority over preventive cultural work or that some housing commitments could fall outside what the levy is legally allowed to fund. The George Street pause prompted frustration from some members who had long championed that streetscape plan.
Risks and uncertainties Several variables will determine how successful this strategy is: – Visitor volumes and levy compliance: lower-than-expected receipts would constrain delivery. – Legal constraints: there’s ongoing debate about the limits on using levy income for housing and other non-tourism items. – Delivery risk: planning consents, procurement timelines and potential restoration surprises (especially on heritage sites) could push costs and schedules. – Operational risk: new officers may still be redeployed if policing priorities shift.
Who’s watching Local developers, cultural organisations and investor groups are cautious. Many welcome the distributed spending but want clearer timelines and line‑by‑line commitments before updating investment plans. Cultural and community groups hope the cash unlocks long‑delayed restoration and programming, while hospitality and retail operators are looking for improvements that boost footfall.
Short‑term outlook The council will phase disbursements and demand evidence of “additionality” — visible benefits beyond existing budgets — before releasing funds. Monitoring and a formal review of allocations are built into council procedures, giving councillors the chance to shift priorities later if projects underperform or fiscal headroom changes. Expect more debate in the coming months as legal advice, delivery plans and early project outcomes come into focus. That approach reduces concentration risk and gives flexibility — but it raises fresh questions about legal scope, delivery capacity and whether small wins will match the visibility of the original George Street vision.
