Lessons From Scotland: Evidence, Law, and What Must Happen Next

Fiona Campbell MBE, CEO, ASSC Scotland –  Talk at ISCF Conference 11/11/2025

Thank you for inviting me to speak. My name is Fiona Campbell and I am the Chief Executive of the Association of Scotland’s Self-Caterers. I am going to be direct and unapologetically clear, because the stakes are high for our sector, for communities, for rural economies, and for the credibility of government policymaking.

Scotland has been used as a laboratory for short-term let regulation. The intentions were stated as improving safety, transparency and community balance. However, the reality was policy overreach, damaging economic consequences, a growing black market, and now a well-developed legal basis for challenge under A1P1 of the European Convention on Human Rights and under Provision of Services Regulations. Those same legal risks apply to the direction Ireland is currently moving in.

The purpose of my remarks today is not to criticise for the sake of it, but to prevent Ireland repeating Scotland’s mistakes, and to make clear that industry will defend itself, its operators, and its lawful rights where necessary.

The Economic Reality

Let us begin with what the data actually shows.

Short-term lets are not a minor cottage industry. In Scotland, they generate approximately £864 million in gross value added and support around 29,300 jobs across accommodation, hospitality, cleaning, maintenance, trades, shops and visitor attractions. Independent economic analysis shows that a typical two-bedroom short-term let produces close to £50,000 in annual economic activity, compared to around £17,000 or £18,000 if that same property were used purely as residential housing. That is a meaningful differential which sustains rural villages and small towns that simply do not have the hotel capacity to support tourism on their own.

Ireland’s own data tell the same story. The Irish Self-Catering Federation’s analysis demonstrates large, localised impacts, particularly in rural and coastal areas. Along the Wild Atlantic Way alone, removing more than 6,500 self-catering properties from tourism would lead to an estimated €256.8 million in lost visitor spending. That is lost income for pubs, restaurants, cafés, surf schools, attractions, cleaning companies and tradespeople. These are not abstract numbers; they represent real livelihoods.0236159

Housing: What Evidence Actually Shows

We are all adults in this room, and everyone wants housing to be affordable and available. But the idea that short-term lets are a primary driver of the housing crisis is simply not supported by the data.

In Scotland, Secondary Lets represent around 0.8 per cent of the total housing stock. By contrast, vacant dwellings are around 3.4 per cent. Even in Edinburgh, where rhetoric has been loudest, rents continued to rise after short-term let capacity fell. The causal link that some policymakers have promoted does not exist in the evidence.

In Ireland, Failte Ireland data and the ISCF analysis show the overwhelming majority of self-catering units are in rural, coastal and island settings where there is limited hotel stock and where tourism demand is seasonal and essential. Removing that capacity will not fix housing shortages, because these are not high-density housing markets with spare transport, schools and employment capacity. They are fragile rural economies.

Regulation must be based on evidence, not political convenience. Short-term lets are not a substitute for real housing policy. If housing supply is broken, build housing. Do not dismantle tourism.

When Regulation Becomes Unworkable

One of the most damaging consequences of Scotland’s scheme has been the sharp rise in black-market activity.

When compliance becomes too expensive, too complex or too uncertain, people stop complying. In Scotland we have seen properties move off mainstream platforms and into unregistered, cash-based letting. We have seen operators who attempted to follow the rules and could not get clear answers from local authorities simply give up and trade quietly.

That is the worst of all worlds:
– no transparency
– no safety assurance
– no tax revenue
– and no ability to enforce

Bad regulation does not improve compliance. It destroys it.

Ireland will face the same outcome if it chooses overly burdensome planning requirements, blanket rules, or systems that treat cities and rural villages as if they are the same.

The Legal Position: A1P1 and Services Law

Now we turn to the part that should make some people in this room uncomfortable.

Senior counsel has provided a clear legal opinion examining Scotland’s scheme under Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and under European services regulation. The conclusion is unambiguous.

A1P1 protects the peaceful enjoyment of possessions. That does not only mean the physical property. It covers the economic value of an existing lawful business, including its goodwill, customer base, and its permission to trade. Scotland’s regime imposes a prior authorisation system with wide discretion, unclear criteria, inconsistent local rules, delays and in some cases de-facto bans. All of that constitutes an interference with possessions.

To be lawful, that interference must be clearly provided by law, must pursue a legitimate public purpose, and must be proportionate. The opinion clearly identifies serious concerns about clarity, foreseeability, proportionality, and compensation. If a business is effectively extinguished, compensation becomes relevant. There is a credible legal pathway to challenge and to claim financial loss.

In addition to the Convention rights, European services law requires that any authorisation scheme must be non-discriminatory, justified by an overriding public interest, proportionate, transparent, based on objective criteria, and subject to an appeals mechanism. Scotland’s experience raises red flags on every one of those requirements.

Now here is the part that should make Departments of Housing and Tourism, and indeed Failte Ireland, sit up straight:
Ireland’s emerging proposals share the same structural flaws. They are likely to fail the same legal tests. The route to challenge in Ireland would be immediate and well-founded.

This is not theoretical. Litigating this is entirely realistic, and the sector has both the evidence and the legal basis to do so.

Changing the Narrative

If government agencies want credible policy, they must stop repeating a slogan that the data do not support. Short-term lets are not the cause of the housing crisis. Saying it loudly or repeating it fixatedly does not make it true.

The narrative must shift to something honest and evidence-based:
– We will address the real causes of housing shortage
– We will regulate short-term lets proportionately
– We will distinguish between high-density cities and rural communities
– We will protect lawful micro-businesses, because they are part of the solution, not the problem

Without that correction in narrative, the policy will remain flawed, and litigation risk will remain high.

The Threat You Need to Hear Plainly

If policymakers press ahead with one-size-fits-all controls, punitive planning barriers, or licensing schemes that extinguish viable businesses without evidence or compensation, then they should expect to be challenged. The legal advice is clear. Scotland has opened the door. Ireland is walking toward the same wall.

I am saying this in a room that includes government departments and tourism authorities because it is far better to prevent an unlawful scheme than to defend one in court. But if necessary, the sector will defend itself.

The Solution

There is a constructive, workable path forward.

• First, regulation must be place-sensitive. High-density city centres with demonstrable housing pressure may justify stricter controls. Rural, island and coastal areas do not.
• Second, the system should be a simple national registration model, not a complex prior authorisation regime. Give every operator a digital registration number, require safety compliance, and share data between platforms and enforcement teams. It is transparent, affordable, and easy to police.
• Third, build actual housing. If the State wants more long-term homes, it must invest in social housing, unlock stalled planning, release public land and support development where people live and work.
• Fourth, introduce proportionate fees, transitional periods and compensation mechanisms where necessary. Pretending that thousands of micro-businesses can simply absorb the loss of their right to trade is economically naïve and legally dangerous.

And finally, give yourselves evidence. Require local authorities to conduct real impact assessments before imposing restrictions. Policy must be based on proof, not assumption.

Fiona Campbell MBE, CEO, ASSC Scotland

Linked Blog Post from ISCF as  Data on Housing Issues in Ireland, as presented to EU Housing Commissioner.

The Short Term Rental (STR) did not cause the housing crisis in Ireland and is not the solution according to ESRI Profiling Short-Term Let Usage Across Ireland.

Profiling Short-term Let Usage Across Ireland

Need More Information?

Contact us: Send an email to info@iscf.ie, and we’ll be happy to assist you.

ISCF Join Now