Meeting of the Parliament 04 February 2026
We have provided a real-terms increase to local government and we have made sure that that funding is flexible. If Craig Hoy is suggesting that there should be some unspecified additional funding for local government, he should say how much and where it is coming from. Until he does that, he will not be taken seriously on the issue.
I appreciate that there is an election on the horizon, and that the Conservatives are flailing about using whatever desperate tactics they can to try not to end up in fourth or fifth place, but, although they appear happy to abandon any dignity, I ask that they correct the record for the inaccuracies that they have brought to the chamber today.
The consultation that Mr Hoy referred to closed last week and is part of a jointly agreed programme of engagement between the Scottish Government and COSLA to inform discussion and build consensus. Importantly, the consultation was underpinned by robust evidence, with independent analysis from the Institute for Fiscal Studies, which I know Craig Hoy is keen to quote from. That analysis and our consultation did not recommend a single solution; instead, it modelled a number of illustrative options and examined their potential impacts and how affordability could be protected.
All the options that were modelled were designed to be revenue neutral at a national level, meaning that they would not increase the overall amount of council tax that is raised across Scotland. The Government is clear that any reform must be fair.
The motion also raises concerns about funding, without ever saying how much more the Tories think should go to councils or how they would pay for it, given their call for £1 billion of tax cuts. We know that it is just back-of-a-fag-packet stuff.
The fact is that the local government finance settlement has increased by £5.5 billion between 2013-14 and 2026-27. That is a 54.6 per cent increase, or 7.3 per cent in real terms, delivered in the face of years of Tory austerity. As recently as 16 January, SPICe confirmed that the past three budgets have all included real-terms increases in the local government revenue settlement, and I mentioned the Accounts Commission earlier.
I want to distinguish clearly between the wider council tax reform and the targeted policy that was announced in the Scottish budget to introduce new council tax bands for the very highest-value homes that are worth more than £1 million, which some have called a mansion tax. I hope that Labour will support that principle, given the similarity to proposals from the Labour UK Government. The measure, which will affect fewer than 1 per cent of properties, seeks to address fairness at the top end of the system. Some multimillion-pound homes currently face bills that are not materially different from those for far more modest properties. If the Tories want to defend that, good luck to them.
I am happy to move amendment S6M-20654.2, to leave out from “with concern” to end and insert:
“that each local authority sets its own council tax rates; recognises the importance of building political consensus through the current consultation to deliver fair reform to local government taxation, and welcomes that a ‘Mansion Tax' will be brought forward in 2028 that will add two additional council tax bands, to be applied to properties valued at over £1 million.”
Motions, questions or amendments mentioned by their reference code.