Nicola Sturgeon’s speech last Tuesday setting out the Scottish government’s legislative programme for the year ahead confirmed what was already pretty clear. Scottish councils are set to be the first in the UK with the power to levy charges on visitors, with Edinburgh likely to lead the way.

        Tourist taxes are not new. The Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan has a longstanding policy of charging visitors a daily fee. France’s tax on overnight stays was introduced to assist thermal spa（温泉）towns to develop, and around half of French local authorities use it today.

        But such levies are on the rise. Moves by Barcelona and Venice to deal with the phenomenon of “over-tourism” through the use of charges have recently gained prominence. Japan and Greece are among the countries to have recently introduced tourist taxes.

        That the UK lags behind is due to our weak, by international standards, local government, as well as the opposition to taxes and regulation of our aggressively pro-market ruling party. Some UK cities have lobbied without success for the power to levy a charge on visitors. Such levies are no universal remedy as the amounts raised would be tiny compared with what has been taken away by central government since 2010. Still, it is to be hoped that the Scottish government’s bold move will prompt others to act. There is no reason why visitors to the UK, or domestic tourists on holiday in hotspots such as Cornwall, should be exempt from taxation—particularly when vital local services including waste collection, park maintenance and arts and culture spending are under unprecedented strain.

        On the contrary, compelling tourists to make a financial contribution to the places they visit beyond their personal consumption should be part of a wider cultural shift. Westerners with disposable incomes have often behaved as if they have a right to go wherever they choose with little regard for the consequences. Just as the environmental harm caused by aviation and other transport must come under far greater scrutiny, the social cost of tourism must also be confronted. This includes the impact of short-term lets on housing costs and quality of life for residents. Several European capitals, including Paris and Berlin, are leading a campaign for tougher regulation by the European Union. It also includes the impact of overcrowding, litter and the kinds of behaviour associated with noisy parties.

        There is no “one size fits all” solution to this problem. The existence of new revenue streams for some but not all councils is complicated, and businesses are often opposed, fearing higher costs will make them uncompetitive. But those places that want them must be given the chance to make tourist taxes work.

解析：B。根据题干中的Nicola Sturgeon’s speech可定位至第一段第一句。第一段开头指出，尼古拉·斯特金在上周二的演讲中阐述了苏格兰政府未来一年的立法计划，证实了一件已经相当明确的事情。接着下面一句解释了这件相当明确的事就是苏格兰议会将成为英国首批有权向游客征税的机构，爱丁堡可能会率先实行这一政策。由此可知，斯特金的演讲是证实了苏格兰将会对游客征税，B项与此内容相符，因此正确答案为B。

错项排除：文章开头只说到苏格兰政府未来一年的立法计划，并没有提到英国会调整其税收政策，A项扩大了立法主体的范围，故排除。原文中虽然提到tourism，但并没有讲英国会采取新措施促进旅游业，反而是要解决“过度旅游”的问题，故C项排除。D项利用第一段中出现的Edinburgh和Scottish进行干扰，而文中只提到爱丁堡率先实行旅游税，未提及其贡献是否最大，故排除D项。