IT doesn’t need a statistician to point out the effects of council cuts in Scotland – anyone who has driven down a road, or put their rubbish out, or tried to use a library in the last five years knows what the budget cuts have done across the country. But the statistical breakdown of council budgets since 2013-14 is striking nonetheless – shocking even.
The figures are contained in a press release from Scottish Labour, but they come from a reliable, independent source: the Scottish Parliament Information Centre, or SPICe, which does all the research for Holyrood. According to SPICe, the reduction in council budgets since 2013-14 has cost residents in Edinburgh and Glasgow more than £200 a head. Residents in Aberdeen are £111 a head worse off, East Lothian £129, East Renfrewshire £133 and Stirling £148. Across all 32 local authorities, spending has been cut by an average of £137 per head over the last five years.
Cuts on that kind of scale can be absorbed in some ways (and councils have done their best) but they are still going to have an effect on most of us – when councils cut back on road maintenance or waste collections for example. We also know that it is the poorest and most vulnerable in society who rely on council services the most, therefore it is they who will suffer the most. In addition, the cuts come at the same time as many councils have started charging for services that were previously free and increasing the council tax. That £137 per head figure can only be a guide, but it is also only part of the picture.
As usual, there are different politically-driven explanations for how we have got to this point, but even if there has been a marginal increase in local government funding this year, no one could seriously argue against the contention that councils have been hit harder than most. According to the Accounts Commission, there has been a 7.6 per cent fall in Scottish Government funding for councils since 2010/11, which has caused the commission to raise concerns that some councils may run out of cash reserves within two or three years.
However, it is another set of figures from SPICe that perhaps points to the heart of the matter. The organisation has previously found that between 2010-11 and 2017-18 (if the spend on police and fire services in 2010-11 to 2012-14 is adjusted out), the local government revenue budget fell at a steeper rate (8.5 per cent) than the Scottish Government revenue budget (5.1 per cent). In other words, the Scottish Government has passed on deeper cuts to councils than the cuts it has faced itself.
For many, this will help confirm the Scottish Government’s centralising and controlling tendencies; for years the Government has also imposed cuts and financial restrictions on councils, perhaps in the knowledge that it would be councils, not government, that would get the blame from voters. For years for example, local authorities were unable to raise council tax because of the Government’s freeze. And even a positive measure such as the lifting of the public sector pay cap has a sting in the tail for councils – most council staff were not included in the measure leaving councils to try to come up with the money themselves.
As for any hope of change, the recent shift in local government following the 2017 elections that ended Labour’s traditional dominance may not necessarily be a good sign – are SNP councils going to stand up to the SNP government in the way that is needed?
Ultimately, if there is to be hope of improvement, the Government will have to show willing to increase local government funding further and reform council tax as a way of raising more money. Perhaps then councils will be able to do what at the moment looks impossible: deliver good quality public services while balancing the books.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here