Meeting of the Parliament 25 February 2016
I am glad that the debate has given us the chance to elaborate on the challenges and decisions that local government funding faces, because it is important that we get it right. To do that, we need to be clear on what the difficulties are, what has caused them, what needs to be done and who has the power to make a difference.
It is clear that the current settlement represents a financial challenge for local authorities, as we have all heard, but we must keep an eye on the bigger picture of keeping local government sustainable in the long term. To achieve that, councils across the country need to take the right decisions to deliver services as efficiently as possible. That is the least that taxpayers deserve; and, yes, there remains significant scope to make savings in local government.
It is important to get the balance right when funding for local government is allocated, because each commitment inevitably comes with a cost in the form of alternative spending foregone or taxes raised. Such trade-offs are central to responsible government, and I am pleased that the Scottish Government has agreed with the Scottish Conservatives that it would not be right to inflict higher taxes on the people of Scotland.
Taking more money from people’s pay packets might seem like an easier solution to financial challenges, but it is certainly not the right one. I emphasise that a decision to raise taxes and transfer funding to local government was in the Scottish Government’s power but that it took the same position as we did to protect taxpayers. It is therefore not good enough to pass the buck again and blame the changes in the finance settlement on the UK Government.
That admission of responsibility is particularly important because the funding from the Scottish Government makes up a huge part of local authorities’ budgets and is therefore central to their financial planning. When local authorities are so dependent on central Government funding, as well as subject to centralised targets, they need a Government that can accept accountability for the decisions that it makes.
However, councils are responsible for the long-term sustainability of local services, and it is clear that there is room to streamline those operations. The City of Edinburgh Council, for example, is spending millions on an unwanted scheme to enforce a 20mph limit across most of Edinburgh without there being any compelling reason to do so. I do not see what that will achieve for my constituents, let alone why their council tax should be spent on it; and we all know that that council’s track record on fiscal constraint is not that great when it comes to transport schemes.
That is just one of many such examples across Scotland—my colleague Murdo Fraser referred to an example in Kinross. If councils are to serve the public, they must respond to financial pressures by avoiding unnecessary expenditure and by making efficiencies in essential services, rather than seeking to take more from local residents through crude measures such as increasing parking fees.
It is only correct that we listen respectfully to all points of view and consider varied options if we are to get the system of local government funding and service delivery right for the people whom we represent. Achieving that requires open and honest admissions of where the responsibility lies.
It is not good enough for our constituents if local and central Government claims impotence in the face of someone else’s decisions. We must make proper, well-rounded assessments to arrive at the fairest deal for all involved, but all participants must be open about what they can contribute to meet the challenges. After all, it is elected representatives’ responsibility to tackle the challenges facing public services rather than pass the buck, and we should certainly not pass the burden on to hard-working members of the public.
15:04