THE Scottish Government should allow local councils a “more permissive” environment to raise revenue, SNP members agreed.
Edinburgh council leader Adam McVey moved the resolution “Local authority funding ring-fencing” on Monday at the SNP virtual conference.
The motion states that the conference recognises “the importance of full and transparent funding for new government initiatives and that for these policies to be fully funded, this must be in addition to the core budget of Scottish Councils”.
Noting that a “significant proportion” of council budgets are ring-fenced in line with Scottish Government priorities, the motion called for the implementation of the Christie report for local government.
READ MORE: COP26: Nicola Sturgeon says UK Government won't pay for youth conference
The Christie report, published in 2011, said that Scotland’s public services are in need of “urgent and sustained reform” to meet “unprecedented challenges”.
The motion continued: “Conference further calls on the Scottish Government to provide local authorities with the ability to have local flexibilities, with regards both to raising revenue and within their spending commitments in delivering national priorities, allowing them to better respond to local needs, and taking a tailored approach to deliver better services for the people of Scotland.”
The resolution, which passed overwhelmingly by 488 votes to 47, was proposed by McVey.
McVey said that although the programmes and funding delivered by the Scottish Government were “welcomed” there is still a “residual issue” with local government finance and called for the recommendations of the Christie commission to be implemented.
He said: “Finding an approach that is accountable, progressive, that delivers the funding our communities need will be difficult but by continuing the discussion and working together we can get to a firm position and set out a clear way ahead.”
McVey proposed the motion at the SNP virtual conference on Monday
McVey said that the Tourist Tax, paused due to the pandemic, could raise up to £14 million a year for Edinburgh, and that 90% of locals supported the policy.
He said: “Should it take so much effort and so many years to deliver policies like this?
“And my conclusion, Conference, is that no, we should build a more permissive environment so councils can take decisions for their economies and for their circumstances that are right for them.”
He continued: “I welcome continued constructive partnership with the Scottish Government to deliver for our communities, continuing to work closely together for our communities and by electing more SNP councillors next year we can do more for our communities right across Scotland.
READ MORE: SNP Conference: Short-term lets priority in 2022 council elections
“This motion isn’t aiming to change any of that collaboration, what it is doing is trying to lean into one of the thornier issues facing us, and that is local government finance.
“So we need to create the link between revenue and expenditure, to help improve accountability, to give council’s a more permissive environment where revenues can better reflect economies and better invest in communities.”
Lisa Clark, of the SNP Leith branch who drafted and seconded the motion, said: “All I can say is that as an ordinary member I see a party which is growing increasingly centralised in its approach to funding. I believe in local models where the closer politicians are to the people they serve, the more effective they can be in making the right decisions for their areas.”
She added that with more SNP led councils than ever before, “we should trust these councils to make more local decisions on raising and spending money in ways that are right for our communities”.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here