Hansard

I am pleased to speak on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives on the order. From the outset, it is right that we acknowledge that the 2024-25 local government settlement has been decided in the context of a number of challenging fiscal circumstances. Inflation might have fallen significantly since the heights that were seen in 2023, but we are still dealing with its global effects. The illegal war in Ukraine continues to affect energy prices, and disruption to trade in the Red Sea risks further disruption to European economies.

Despite that, analysis by the Scottish Parliament information centre makes it clear that the Scottish Government’s overall budget has increased this year in real terms. However, any hopes that that would mean councils receiving relief from years of underfunding did not last long. COSLA described this year’s financial settlement as

“leaving councils at real and significant financial risk for the coming year”.

In practical terms, the budget means that councils are planning yet more cuts to local services. To take just one example, West Dunbartonshire Council, in my region, is having to close an £8.3 million budget gap. Potential cost-saving measures include increasing fees for school breakfast clubs and reducing financial assistance for school uniform costs. Such decisions are not easy for councils to take, but they have become too common in recent years.

The Scottish National Party often complains about how the UK Government treats the devolved Scottish Government, but if members want to see an example of a disrespectful relationship between two tiers of government, they need look no further than the Scottish Government’s approach to local councils. Let us take, for example, the continued controversy around the SNP’s council tax freeze, which was announced without councils even being consulted. The SNP repeatedly promised that the policy would be fully funded, but we now know that that is not the case. Despite COSLA having asked for £310 million to fund the freeze, the 2024-25 budget offers just £147 million. The irony is that that botched policy announcement came just a few short months after the SNP Scottish Government announced the Verity house agreement, which promised a renewed relationship with local government—one that would involve “improved engagement” on budget issues.

Councils have said that a change in the relationship is desperately needed. They want to have a more long-term relationship that is focused on outcomes. The Verity house agreement gave them hope that such a relationship was coming. However, from having spoken to nearly every local authority in Scotland, it is clear to me that the Verity house agreement is falling short.

Here are some of the things that councils have said directly to me in meetings about the SNP’s relationship with local government on the Verity house agreement:

“The agreement is not worth the paper it is written on”. [Interruption.]

“We have a degree of optimism but a huge amount of scepticism”.

“Like a zombie still has life but bleeding to death by Scottish Government requirements, including teachers numbers and the National Care Service”. [Interruption.]

“The role of local government is not valued”.

“Talk is cheap, but actions are now required”.

“The Scottish Government is not delivering their side of the agreement”.

“The relationship is broken ... there is a lack of trust, a lack of transparency from the Scottish Government”. [Interruption.]

“We are not buttoned up the back”. [Interruption.]

“This is the worst settlement we have seen”.

Given those damning verdicts, it is perhaps not surprising that, two weeks ago, council leaders wrote to the Scottish Government to declare a “fundamental position of dispute”.

Before I conclude, I would like to make it clear that we will not—